Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
Those favoring it argue it is unfair to have the same requirements for select minorities as for others. Those opposed believe it's unfair that the more qualified candidate loses an opportunity to a less qualified member of a preferred group.
Their logic is simple: discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color or sex is wrong. This position has made some progress, winning several significant court battles. it's been so successful that affirmative action proponents have abandoned their traditional line of reasoning that it makes up for past discrimination. Diversity is now a goal in its own right, but only of racial or ethnic group.
There are many arguments to be made against assuming that an individual's racial or ethnic group is the definitive characteristic for them; however, there is a stronger reason to oppose this diversity argument than its assumption that race makes character.
There is little difference in intellectual potential between ethnic groups. Those who favor affirmative action believe this demonstrates that discrimination is responsible for the differences in test scores and admissions. However, immigrant families of minority status in one generation have placed children in the best schools without affirmative action.
By using affirmative action to promote less qualified minorities to positions their achievements do not merit, we avoid dealing with the failure of not just the students, but of the education system. Using affirmative action, rather than assisting these selected groups, allows society to continue to fail to provide a proper education.
We can continue to not provide a proper education, lower standards and lie about it. it's cheap and easy. But it makes educators and society feel better while denying minority students a truly valuable education. Society is "solving" its problem by denying certain minority students a real education, and feeling good about itself by claiming that diversity and not education is the goal.
This hurts minority students by teaching them that they don't have to work hard. It also breeds contempt for the system. If they fail and are passed on anyway, they are essentially taught that education and integrity don't matter. No amount of self-esteem training will change this.
We create the appearance of a balanced and racially equal society without actually doing the work to achieve a truly integrated, merit-based society. If the minority students are not given the same education and held to the same standards, they become mere actors creating feel-good. Additionally, the standards of education are weakened for the entire community as well as respect for a society willing to tolerate it.
If conservatives imposed such a system on minorities, there would be uproar. That liberals, in the name of equality, are doing it allow the victims to happily participate in being cheated.
Affirmative action may feel and look good in the short-term, but it undermines the institutions and the people it was implemented to help.
If education is important, then we must address the lack of it, and bring all students up to the long acknowledged standards.
To alter the standards for one group, because it's too hard or inconvenient to actually teach them, undermines the system. It does a disservice to those individuals. For their sake and ours, affirmative action should be stopped.
Why it is misunderstood?
Affirmative action is the way through which we seek to attain equity in our institutions and our society. It is a goal to be sought not a spontaneous reality.
Affirmative action is probably the most misunderstood civil rights issue of our time. Opponents believe that it is misguided social engineering, which uses quotas and preferences to replace qualified white males with unqualified Ethnic minorities and women.
Many people also perceive affirmative action initiatives as a threat, something that would grant a job opportunity to a less qualified minority rather than to a white male. Affirmative action's real goal is to simply allow minorities to compete and show that they are qualified.
Doyle, Rebecca. "Affirmative action goals misunderstood by most, panelists say." Umich.edu.
1996. Umich.edu. 2 May 2005 http://www.umich.edu/~urecord/9596/Jan23_96/artcl16.htm.
Potucek, Rachel. "Affirmative action: Pros and cons." K-State Perspective. 2003. K-State
Perspective. 2 May 2005 http://www.mediarelations.ksu.edu/WEB/News/Webzine/0203/aapros&cons.html.
Radford, Mary. "Law." Law.gsu.edu. 2001. Law.gsu.edu. 2 May 2005 http://law.gsu.edu/mradford/spring01/law7195/assign.htm.
Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2005.
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2 May 2005 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action.
Executive Order 8802." EEOC. 1941. EEOC. 2 May 2005 http://www.eeoc.gov/abouteeoc/35th/thelaw/eo-8802.html.
Opinion on Affirmative Action." *****. *****. 2 May 2005 http://*****/student/Opinion_On_Affirmative_Action.html.
Parableman: Affirmative Action, Part I: Overview." Parableman. 2004. Parableman. 2 May 2005 http://mt.ektopos.com/parablemania/archives/000701.html.[continue]
"Affirmative Action And Why It" (2005, May 02) Retrieved December 2, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/affirmative-action-and-why-it-66273
"Affirmative Action And Why It" 02 May 2005. Web.2 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/affirmative-action-and-why-it-66273>
"Affirmative Action And Why It", 02 May 2005, Accessed.2 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/affirmative-action-and-why-it-66273
Affirmative Action Cornel West. It book "The Conscious Reader" By Caroline Affirmative Action has been a highly controversial topic in the United States ever since it initially emerged out of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960's. This issue is explored in depth in Cornell West's essay, "On Affirmative Action," which was initially published in George Currey's The Affirmative Action Debate in 1996. The principle reason why affirmative action has been
Actually, state agencies and institutions of higher learning have continued to rely upon the Supreme Court decisions and federal legislation to enforce the policies of affirmative action since 1978. While there are no definitive answers on whether affirmative action policies and programs are necessary, scholars and civic leaders have been engaged in hot debates to determine the implications of measures to dismantle affirmative action policies and programs. There are various
Affirmative Action has been an issue of great debate and controversy since its establishment. Because of the very fact that such legislation was deemed needed is indicative of the mass inequality existing in a country that was formed on the basis of the individual liberties and justice. Affirmative Action is a legal and social response to help eliminate the historical and social inequities of minorities and women and America. The
Affirmative Action At its most objective definition, affirmative action entails "positive steps taken to increase the representation of women and minorities in areas of employment, education, and business from which they have been historically excluded." Affirmative action acknowledges the presence of institutionalized and systematic forms of discrimination: which may not be apparent to members of the dominant or privileged culture. For example, white males will not even notice that no Blacks
367) According to Sander, none of these questions have been asked effectively and therefore we as a nation continue to believe that affirmative action is a necessary social development for the creation of a more representative society, where disenfranchisement must be answered by active plans, policies and laws. Few of us would enthusiastically support preferential admission policies if we did not believe they played a powerful, irreplaceable role in giving nonwhites
This is a particular problem at the nation's colleges and universities. This has become so much of an issue that law suits and verdicts have been handed down in some states. One of the most famous cases to date involved the University of Michigan's undergraduate and law school policies. These cases are Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger. In 1997, Jennifer Gratz, a white woman, sued the University of
Hence, it is important for the proper application of the AA idea that those who make the anti-discrimination and AA policies understand both sides of the story and both the discriminator's and the victim's perspectives. So, in essence those groups of people who disagree on certain ideas or approaches towards justice must try to adopt an unbiased approach to understanding the reason behind the existence of the differences and