Is tolerance intolerant?

[Angrboda]

The issue is that schools are allowed to look at students "holistically," i.e. to arbitrate acceptance without depending solely on grades.  Community service, leadership capacity, diversity, and so on.  What they aren't required to do, so far as I know, is to define any of those non-academic contributing factors or establish any reasonable metric for them.  So far as I can tell, it pretty much means that schools can select whoever they want, so long as they aren't stupid enough to say "We're not going to accept you because we already have way too many Asian students."

That's fine, benny, but even if true, that's not an argument against affirmative action unless you're arguing that admissions (or job hiring) should only be based on quantitatively measurable metrics. When you do that, you're not making an argument against affirmative action but simply asserting a preference you have, and one that would mean ignoring any qualitative traits a candidate might possess, or how doing so might negatively impact perfectly justifiable societal goals. You're not arguing against affirmative action per se, but rather that you think other things are preferrable to it. So far, and I still haven't read a lot of your response, your argument is largely ipse dixit and ignores very real factors in maintaining racial disparity (such as prenatal inequity, which your "pay to play" suggestion earlier sounds abhorrent at best, unethical, and likely to simply further racial disparity and inequity than reduce it [primarily by making intelligence contingent upon black mothers giving something back in exchange for correcting social inequities, in addition to making children pay for their mothers' choices]).