Grig and Janus1 - the angle that i’m getting from you would be akin to saying “well, afro-americans from the deep south are Baptists. As they are Baptists, then the fact that they are Afro-American is immaterial because of their religion”.
No, because you said afro-americans, referring to a race. Judaism is not a race. Reread your statement, it is in no way the same.
Ok, so Judaism is not a race, however nearly all Jews are. They’re called Hebrews, and Judaism is as intertwined in them as their genetic code, and from a metaphysical standpoint, possibly more.
@cystic:
Ok, so Judaism is not a race, however nearly all Jews are. They’re called Hebrews, and Judaism is as intertwined in them as their genetic code, and from a metaphysical standpoint, possibly more.
OK, I can agree with you on this, but is it not possible to become a Jew even though you have not been born Jewish? That should have been my original argument, that Jews don’t count for affirmative action because it is possible to change that. Probably not for those who were born into it, but it is possible. Skin color you can’t change. (unless you’re Michael Jackson) :lol:
Hebrews are not a race either, they are simply an ethnic group. There is a difference. Furthermore, like Grigory said, you can become a Jew, or renounce your Judaism, NatFedMike has.
Hebrews are not a race either, they are simply an ethnic group. There is a difference. Furthermore, like Grigory said, you can become a Jew, or renounce your Judaism, NatFedMike has.
Judaims is not a race, you are right about that. You cannot leave Judaism once you are in, no matter what you try to do to renounce it. Converting into Judaism takes at least a year or two if not longer and is a very hard and rigorous process. I’m sure that it took at least that long for Michael Jackson to change his skin colour.
Michael Jackson shouldnt be counted into any racial, or ethnic group. As Robin Williams said, you have to pick a race first. And also, you can leave Judaism. Its not anything in your blood, if you renounce your judaism, you are no longer a jew, as simple as that. If you renounce your amishness (you get the point), you are no longer amish. Judaism is a culture along those lines, but you can leave them.
“You cannot leave Judaism once you are in, no matter what you try to do to renounce it.”
hahah well guess what Emu i did :P
Anyways…… back on topic
Does a poor white man get Affirmative Action? Does a rich “ethnic” man Affirmative Action?
Affirmative action, hmmm, nice idea: with a quick law we fix a misrepresentation in societies. Shame it doesnt work that way, because for society to benefit, the principle ‘the best people in the right positions’ cannot be put out of action.
I think what we are lacking is some trust. if some ethnicity is misrepresented we should be confident that this is only because a fair selection process has come to the conclusion this is the best people for the right job at the moment. So the real question is: how can we be confident?
We wont fix this problem with affirmative action laws, but by putting loads of money into schools, so that all students are educated to a roughly equal standard. and by this i dont mean the lowest common denominater. if access the the best schools is fair and open, and all students are in a position to show their best. that is the best way to bring social justice and realise equal opportunities.
in my mind at least.
Laters,
Hans
I’m sorry to inform you Hanso that money won’t by itself fix the problem.
Look at D.C. It spends more money per student than anywhere in the country and has a poor record. It takes more than money to teach kids.
It takes good parents, good teachers, and a student who wants to learn to fix the problem!!!
Location: UK;Germany
Hmmm… care to explain? :)
spends more money per student than anywhere in the country and has a poor record. It takes more than money to teach kids.
Very true. Taxpayers spend more than $6,000 a year per student, more than virtually any other country, including Japan. With what result? Poor test scores, high dropout rate, kids incapable of filling out employment applications. Something has to be done, and I don’t think AA is the answer.
Also, another probably with AA is that it sets the standard of “people of color” to be diverse. Am I the only one who sees something wrong here?
Sorry, that was me. :wink:
so in other words, instead of trying to fix a problem we’ve created (underqualified minorities) we just fix the problem itself by educating everyone equally? What a great idea! Too bad it’ll never happen. :roll:
I apologize in advance for attempting to shift the focus of this conversation. What is everyone’s take on Title 9? Should women be offered the same opportunities that men have in college sports if by doing so they, in some cases, restrict a man’s opportunity?
I think not; why should womens’ athletic opportunities be held in equal regard as mens’ if interest in the two by the respective athletes is not?
Again, sorry, but the two ideas (Affirmative Action and Title 9) share some similarities.
I’ll have to read more into the issue myself before I give my postiive answer. :)
For instance, can you give a few example of “women offered the same opportunities that men have in college sports?”
Don’t we already have much of that going on?
Moses,
the UK, Germany explains itself this way. I am originally from germany, but i live in the Uk now to go to University. but i still go back in the holidays to see parents. so that why the two of them.
Waraxis,
i agree with you that money alone wont fix the problem. i was just focusing on what the state can do to provide the best environment for kids to develop themselves. how to sort parents out not to mess their kids up is a very difficult question, and the one that actually defines a kid most likely future. so thenthe question is, what is a fit parent and should everyone have kids? (like drug addicts etc)
Laters,
Hanso
the UK, Germany explains itself this way. I am originally from germany, but i live in the Uk now to go to University. but i still go back in the holidays to see parents. so that why the two of them.
Ah… thanks for clearing things up. :)
@The:
I apologize in advance for attempting to shift the focus of this conversation. What is everyone’s take on Title 9? Should women be offered the same opportunities that men have in college sports if by doing so they, in some cases, restrict a man’s opportunity?
I think not; why should womens’ athletic opportunities be held in equal regard as mens’ if interest in the two by the respective athletes is not?
Again, sorry, but the two ideas (Affirmative Action and Title 9) share some similarities.
I agree. Title 9 is wrong. I believe anyone should have a chance to do whatever they want as long as it doesn’t restrict anyone else’s ability to do what they want to do.
can anyone (objectively) describe title 9?
It is basically providing for women to have equal athletic opportunities and funding as men at universities. The problem is, this generally detracts from mens sports. The question being, like affirmative action, is detracting from one group in pursuit of equality justified?
It is basically providing for women to have equal athletic opportunities and funding as men at universities. The problem is, this generally detracts from mens sports.
Sports have traditionally been dominated by men. If women want to make a little headway in sports, then let them. However this should be proportional to popularity. I also have some trouble by understanding what “equal athletic opportunities” means (women’s football shouldn’t recieve equal funding as men’s football, simply because it isn’t as popular [or generates as much revenue]). Does this mean a women can try out for a men’s team? Fine by me :)
