Originally Posted by
AG_jr
Ok, now that the week is over, I'll put my two cents in. My first response, DD, is to your comment on govt. rights. I call B.S. As bob has said, the government was put in place for one reason and one reason alone, to protect OUR rights. The government should fear the people, not the other way around. That is the whole purpose the miranda rights were put into place, so that the government couldn't just go around arresting people at random and committing unlawful searches and seizures. The second we give the government rights, is the second that we lose ours. Personally, I believe the government has put WAAAYYY too much responsibility upon itself. And affirmative action is one of those things.
Well, as I said, most of you won't agree with me, but if people decide they are going to have a govt. to protect their rights (whatever that it is), then that govt. has the right to exert some type of control to protect the rights of others of which one of those could be to not be discriminated against. It never fails to amuse me how many times people complain about govt. taking advantage of their "rights" only to complain when the govt. doesn't get involved in another issue of their lives when they feel govt. should. However, I think you're misunderasting what I'm saying as far as govt. rights. When I say the govt. has the right, I'm referring to the govt. as the representative of all the people who you, as a company owner, would be benefitting from allowing you to own your business. But, to really explain what I mean, I would need more time and space to write it down more clearly. Unfortunately, having a 4 year old kid, a 13 year old kid and a 29 year old kid/wife doesn't afford me the leisure to delve too much into these discussions as they demand much attention.
I am on the opposite side or your point of view, because I have seen things happen just the opposite. Why is it that I, a white male, who had a 31 on his ACT, a 3.5 gpa, and 15 hours of college credit, should get less scolarship money just because I am white?(and that DID happen) Why is it that the man across from my cubicle was hired because of the company's "equal opportunity" regulations, even though this guy is a complete bafoon? (I have been told by co-workers that since I started my internship, I have learned and done more than he has since he got there almost a year ago). Not only that, the company won't fire him, because he helps them meet their "minority quota".
I'm not saying that affirmative action doesn't cause problems. But let me ask you this about your scholarship money. Was that just at Tech or could you have gone to another school and gotten more money? Did you get money at all? As far as the man across from your cubicle, let me first say that unless you hear it from the HR department (and you won't), don't trust your coworkers statements on why one person was hired or fired or in their assessments of job performances. Where did you hear the fact that he's not being fired because he meets a minority quota? Once again, don't always assume your coworkers are an accurate source of information. However, if that is the case, then that's not a deficiency of affirmative action but instead of the manager(s) of this guy and the HR. I can assure you that affirmative action was never an obstacle to my sister who was the HR director at one of the largest hospitals in New Orleans before Katrina. But she did her job and had everything documented so that when those fired tried to make an issue of it, they stood no chance. She never lost a case or had the hospital have to settle on any issues.
Enough ranting...let's look at it this way. Let's say John Doe, a 35 year-old white male, applies for a job. Let's also say that Bob Smith, a 35 year-old black male, applies for the SAME job. Both men graduated from the same school, with the same degree and GPA. Why should Bob get the job over John, just because Bob is black? And yes, affirmative action DOES hinder improvement of racial relations. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Dr. King's civil right's movement was all about NOT judging people based on the color of their skin. That is EXACTLY what affirmative action does! It gives special consideration to others, just because of their ethnicity! Even BILL COSBY believes it is detremental to society, because it makes minorities dependant upon special favors.
As I said before, I'm not a firm stickler on the fact that one person should be given a job over another based solely on racial or sexual factors if all other things are equal. The person that one feels will work best in the environment of the company should get the nod. Since you asked me to correct you, I will. Dr. King's civil right movement was NOT all about NOT judging people based on the color of their skin. It was all about equal treatment for all peoples regardless of the color of their skin. Now, I know that most on here will say that affirmative action is contrary to that, but in my opinion, it isn't. The fact is we still have a significant amount of discrimination against minorities going on in this country, and something is needed to insure that they can be brought to a level position with others. The problem here is that I think there are many who are convinced they are being discriminated against by affirmative action instead of accepting the fact that they just weren't the most qualified for a job. I guarantee you that no one knows the qualifications of his competitors for any certain position. Affirmative action doesn't hinder improvement of racial relations. People hinder improvement of racial relations. I'm convinced the person who is going to blame and hate the black man for affirmative action is going to find some other reason to hate him.
Furthermore, affirmative action is contradictory to capitalism. The reason capitalism is so successful is that it has EXTREMELY limited govt. control. If a company wants to only hire white people, that is its prerogative. It is probably not in its best interest for two reasons though. First, you limit your talent spectrum. Second, you limit your customer base. But, if the company wishes to do so, that should be THEIR choice. That is the beauty of capitalism. Once you regulate it too much, and start giving your rights up to the government, you begin sliding down a slippery slope to communism.
I've never really claimed to be a capitalist. You should have been around the old board for our Chrisianity being communistic thread. As far as limiting your talent spectrum and customer base, I think it's dependent on the purpose of the business. However, if white people are the only ones with the ability to form a business, then I guess one's customer base won't be affected adversely will it, and without affirmative action, you can guarantee that hardly any, if any, minorities will be loaned the money to start businesses. They have troubles now as it is. I think there are others who would argue your point of EXTREMELY limited govt. control in the business life-in other words, I bet they don't think the govt. is EXTREMELY limited in its control. Once again, we come to the argument of rights and who has them. I'm not so sure anyone has any particular rights, but that goes into a different argument.
Affirmative Action is just a euphamism for:
REVERSE DISCRIMINATION.
In some instances, I can see that argument.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
