Since you are not bringing up specific points let's look at some in relation to education:
A. Colleges legally should use race in admissions only when necessary.
B. Banning race-based affirmative action is a right of the community to choose and it has been done at some colleges.
C If it bears out that colleges Texas A&M, U of GA, U of Washington, U of Florida, U of Michigan, etc. have as much diversity then
D. it's not necessary if it's been proven successful elsewhere
I support affirmative action when it drops legacy preferences/support, reaching out to inform/support high achieving, low income students, adding socioeconomic demographics alongside performance metrics, better testing, clearer admission guidelines, more transparent communication, family education factors for first-generations and guaranteeing admission for top graduates across the state equitably to counter under-resourced schools. All of that can be done without playing the race card though.
I don't think that the top 10% of the majority "earned" their place, and that should be fought against. If affirmative action is the best tool for that then so be it. I just don't think it's being applied in a way that's completely effective and undoing inequality. I know that the playing field isn't even. I believe where you stand is while racial prejudice exist for to individuals both sides of the race card it's not racist if blacks do it because white's are in the majority and racism is about institutions? Is this your stance?
A. Colleges legally should use race in admissions only when necessary.
B. Banning race-based affirmative action is a right of the community to choose and it has been done at some colleges.
C If it bears out that colleges Texas A&M, U of GA, U of Washington, U of Florida, U of Michigan, etc. have as much diversity then
D. it's not necessary if it's been proven successful elsewhere
I support affirmative action when it drops legacy preferences/support, reaching out to inform/support high achieving, low income students, adding socioeconomic demographics alongside performance metrics, better testing, clearer admission guidelines, more transparent communication, family education factors for first-generations and guaranteeing admission for top graduates across the state equitably to counter under-resourced schools. All of that can be done without playing the race card though.
I don't think that the top 10% of the majority "earned" their place, and that should be fought against. If affirmative action is the best tool for that then so be it. I just don't think it's being applied in a way that's completely effective and undoing inequality. I know that the playing field isn't even. I believe where you stand is while racial prejudice exist for to individuals both sides of the race card it's not racist if blacks do it because white's are in the majority and racism is about institutions? Is this your stance?
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
