0
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court seems skeptical of race-conscious college admissions
Posted on 10/31/22 at 7:47 pm to LSULaw2009
Posted on 10/31/22 at 7:47 pm to LSULaw2009
quote:
Even in situations where it's done in favor of a historically underprivileged race.
The key word there is HISTORICAL.
Now that we've had 55+ years of Affirmative Action and several generations of whites (and, in particular, white men) being blatantly and racistly discriminated against, it can be argued (hell, PROVEN) that it is white males (and, in particular, poor white males) that have been HISTORICALLY discriminated against. Certainly, it is poor white males that are the most recent historically discriminated against. Biden's Solicitor General all but admitted that in arguments today.
This post was edited on 10/31/22 at 7:53 pm
Posted on 10/31/22 at 7:51 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
SCOTUS will not be issuing a decision a mere week after oral argument. FFS
Like the abortion case, this decision will be one of the last handed down next summer.
This post was edited on 10/31/22 at 7:54 pm
Posted on 10/31/22 at 8:07 pm to MMauler
The media will still use it to generate fear they couldn’t wait a week to do these hearings?
Posted on 10/31/22 at 8:42 pm to Indefatigable
quote:Just a heads up. Leftists consider meritocracy to be racist oppression. (yes, I know what that infers)
Meritocracy. Period. For everything.
Posted on 10/31/22 at 8:46 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
why can it not also consider race/ethnicity as one of many factors?
It should make race the only factor.
The Ivy league should join the SWAC.
Posted on 10/31/22 at 8:53 pm to jatilen
Oh no we can’t have systemic racism that we want.
Posted on 10/31/22 at 8:56 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
If the institution can consider those variables, why can it not also consider race/ethnicity as one of many factors?
Because that’s racism. How are you this dumb on these topics? You tried to write out a smart response just to ask what’s wrong with racism.
Posted on 10/31/22 at 9:02 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
That is a statutory matter. Personally, I oppose the notion of public accommodation laws and protected classes.
Could I exclude gays in your little fantasy land?
Posted on 10/31/22 at 11:11 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
again, I am ambivalent on this point. I do not see a clear answer in the civil rights act of 1964, and I can really see both sides of the argument.
So… being white can be used to break ties under your scenario….good to know
Posted on 10/31/22 at 11:17 pm to jatilen
quote:
recused from the Harvard dispute due to her recent role as a member of the school’s board of overseers.
I'm giving credit to her here. I didn't expect her to do that. I know it won't last long though and I bet she'll get a lot of pressure from Democrats to never recuse herself again
Posted on 10/31/22 at 11:25 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
I try to use words according to their actual definitions, rather than according to misuse by others.
How do you feel about this statement from the OP:
quote:
The conservative-majority Supreme Court
Posted on 10/31/22 at 11:28 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
That is a statutory matter. Personally, ...
Somewhere between your first sentence of your first response in this thread and this, your second response in this thread, you apparently had a stroke.
Posted on 10/31/22 at 11:34 pm to Flats
quote:
Somewhere between your first sentence of your first response in this thread and this, your second response in this thread, you apparently had a stroke.
Great troll. Rex reincarnated.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 12:05 am to AggieHank86
quote:
If an elite institution has an admissions process that generates a composite score (based upon 10 entirely-objective criteria) and a minimum score of (say) 80 for admission, what is the institution to do if it has 1000 available slots but 1700 applicants who scored above 80?
Presumably, that score of 80 is considered adequate for success at the institution. Must the institution change its standards and just take the top 1000 scores?
Sounds good in theory. I reality they're lowering the threshold for some based solely on race.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 8:52 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Sounds good in theory. I reality they're lowering the threshold for some based solely on race.
It sounds good in theory? So an employer can say “a GED is our minimum requirement. Once all those people are in a potential hiring pool we will consider other factors like race”. You think that would fly?
Posted on 11/1/22 at 8:55 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Personally, I oppose the notion of public accommodation laws and protected classes.
For things funded by tax dollars? Wow. I’m with you for private business but even I draw the line at government entities.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 10:52 am to jatilen
I just came across an article that notes this exchange:
Harvard Atty:
“we might provide preference to a particular race to round out a diverse class much the same way we might provide preference to an oboe player if we need one”.
CJ John Roberts:
“This country didn’t fight a civil war over oboe players. We did fight a civil war to ensure no discrimination based on race”.
Boom!
Harvard Atty:
“we might provide preference to a particular race to round out a diverse class much the same way we might provide preference to an oboe player if we need one”.
CJ John Roberts:
“This country didn’t fight a civil war over oboe players. We did fight a civil war to ensure no discrimination based on race”.
Boom!
This post was edited on 11/1/22 at 10:53 am
Posted on 11/1/22 at 4:23 pm to Flats
quote:
It sounds good in theory? So an employer can say “a GED is our minimum requirement. Once all those people are in a potential hiring pool we will consider other factors like race”. You think that would fly?
No. I'm arguing the exact opposite.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 4:31 pm to jatilen
If Harvard loses, what will stop them from quietly/secretly using race for admissions? eg, there is a tie for the last spot between a white, a black, an asian and a latino...who wins?
Posted on 11/1/22 at 5:48 pm to Chicken
quote:
If Harvard loses, what will stop them from quietly/secretly using race for admissions? eg, there is a tie for the last spot between a white, a black, an asian and a latino...who wins?
If Harvard loses, I believe the effect would be that they can no longer ask race on college applications.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News