Multiculturalism, legal protections, and LGBT rights in resolving inequality

Multiculturalism approaches in the Farley text do you think is the best for resolving problems of majority-minority inequality in education? Why do you think it is the best approach? Provide details to demonstrate that you have read the Farley chapters thoroughly and understand them.

Multiculturalism is designed to prevent hegemony. A multicultural attitude ensures that a plurality of voices are heard, recognized, valued, and respected. There is no expectation that the dominant culture is better, and that minorities should conform to it. Instead, the dominant culture is willing to learn from minorities. This does not mean that anyone needs to sacrifice universal human rights; in fact, the multiculturalist view shows that no one culture is perfect. For resolving majority-minority inequality in education, it is critical to create opportunities for dialogue and empowerment instead of inculcating the same values and worldviews upon all students. A multicultural education benefits all students, while it also promotes social justice.

2. Explore the ways that the legal system might do a better job of protecting the rights of minorities and preventing them from becoming victims of unscrupulous business practices. Next, describe ways in which the legal system continues to work that has the effect of discrimination on the basis of race and class. What would it take to create a legal system that does not discriminate in business practices, race and class?

One of the biggest challenges of our time is creating a legal system that promotes social justice, one that cuts through any and all racism or sexism, and which ensures that structural inequities are abolished. As Farley points out in \"Protection of Legal Rights in the Court System,\" minorities and the disempowered poor often do not access the legal system. The barriers to accessing it are tremendous, including monetary and time constraints as well as lack of cultural capital -- the lack of information and knowledge that would empower people. It will take a more concerted effort to reach out to the disenfranchised and ensure that all people have equitable access to legal counsel. Perhaps more pro bono services need to be embedded into the system.

3. View LZ Granderson\'s presentation, The Myth of the Gay Agenda (http://www.ted.com/talks/lz_granderson_the_myth_of_the_gay_agenda). Next, visit the Human Rights Campaign (http://www.hrc.org/) website and choose one of the resources from the website to explore in more depth. Is the information in the Granderson\'s webcast and the Human Rights Campaign new to you? If so, what is new to you? How do you weave the information in Granderson\'s webcast and the reading into an understanding of LGBT issues? Does this information dispel some of the inconsistencies and stereotypes that seem to exist for LGBTs? Identify these issues and summarize those that you consider to be the most important

None of this information is new to me; I am aware of the anti-gay agenda (which is much more of a true \"agenda\" than a mythical \"gay agenda\" that conservatives have manufactured, as Granderson points out). I am also aware that there are diverse discourses in America: the conservative, hate-filled one that will oppose any attempt at creating social justice, and the liberal one that is often too tolerant of conservatives in an attempt to be nice to everyone. Granderson shows that LGBTQ rights are just human rights, in the same way that feminism is just human rights. No one is asking for special privileges. Granderson also points out that gays, lesbians, and trans people are just people beneath it all, and that stereotypes are unnecessary and harmful for all people. Finally, I believe conservatives have spun the rights issue until it no longer makes sense, claiming for example, that it is their \"right\" to discriminate based on their \"religious\" beliefs. No religion can be used as an excuse to discriminate.

4. Define affirmative action and describe the two views: reverse discrimination/racism and undoing discrimination/racism. How effective have affirmative action policies been for African-Americans? For women? (Use evidence from your text to answer this question). Based upon the information presented in the text, should affirmative action policies be abolished or continued? Why? Are there other alternatives to equal opportunity? Support your answer. I don\'t want biases, personal anecdotes, or simplistic thinking here. In order to earn full credit in this post, you will need to show thorough knowledge of the arguments made in the Farley text.

As Farley points out, affirmative action has been proven effective in specific situations, like increasing African-American enrollment numbers. Affirmative action is not enough; the university in these cases need to create a supportive environment for minority students as well as provide an open door for their admissions. I strongly believe affirmative action policies are necessary because discrimination is often unconscious and systemic. It is not just about admissions, it is about the entire organizational culture that can be hegemonic -- whether that hegemony is patriarchal and discriminatory against women or racist. Many people do not even realize how racism works at the structural level. Affirmative action does not need to be quota-based; it just needs to be a conscious consideration of promoting diversity to reduce hegemony in organizations, with the goal of equitable power distribution in the society.

5. View the lecture \"Virtue vs. Continence\" in the Content area. What do you think? Is it more laudable to be virtuous or continent? That is, is it better to be the moral saint or the moral hero?

The continent person is like a religious man who blindly obeys the moral precepts he has been taught, but does so without any genuine desire to help others or motivation to do good; he acts because he \"should\" act a certain way. The virtuous person would never even consider acting wrongly; it is not in that person\'s nature to do so. It is more laudable by far to be a virtuous person than merely a continent one, even though few people are fully virtuous at all times.

6. Aristotle\'s view is that happiness just is living virtuously. Why you agree? Do most of us just have it wrong about what happiness and the happy life really is?

Living virtuously does not automatically lead to happiness, although it would seem that it is difficult to be happy without living virtuously. Therefore, I would say that living virtuously is a critical part of happiness, a necessary criterion but not a sufficient one. I do believe most people do not know what happiness truly is, and that if they did cultivate more virtues like compassion and forgiveness then they would be happier. Material acquisition and shallow achievements in status do not make a person happy.

7. What is Consequentialism: Utilitarianism (John Stuart Mill)? Why do you find most convincing? Example of Consequentialism?

Consequentialism and utilitarianism are helpful because they allow for complex ethical decision-making in a heterogeneous environment. The precept \"the greatest good for the greatest number\" is often how decisions in large democratic societies must be made. Moreover, utilitarianism shows how many people realistically do make decisions, and allows people to make judgments not based on external authority but on immediate needs. For example, many people would be willing to run a red light if it was safe to do so, in order to rush their friend to the hospital.

8. What is Deontology (Immanuel Kant)? Why do you find most convincing? Example of Deontology?

Deontological ethics create universal ethical precepts, which can be useful. For example, it is never acceptable to torture a human being or to rape. Deontological ethics also help protect minority groups from the \"tyranny of the majority\" which can happen in a utilitarian framework. No matter what the circumstances or context, deontological ethics prevent ethical relativism or a rationalizing of bad behavior by saying the \"ends justify the means.\"

9. Virtue Ethics (Aristotle): Why do you find most convincing? Example of Virtue Ethics?

Why I find virtue ethics most convincing is the observation that some people do act more ethically than others, almost on instinct. Some people may just be \"better\" than others, have better judgment, more compassion, or other traits that lead to virtue. Also, virtue shows how a person can make a mistake but still be a good person. For example, I can exhibit the virtue of patience for the most part but lose my temper with a customer service representative.

10. Kant\'s view is based upon a particular view of the kind of thing that you and I are. If he is correct, then it is both thrilling and sobering to realize that one is such an entity. Spend some time reflecting on his view. What are your reactions?

Kant\'s view of human nature is that people are rational, or at least capable of rational thought, and free. It is both thrilling and sobering to realize that one is free to make one\'s own choices. It is thrilling because I can do whatever I want, whenever I want, technically speaking. However, there will be consequences to my actions so if I do not act thoughtfully and in accordance with ethical law, then the consequences could be dire.

11. Kant\'s view is diametrically opposed to utilitarianism. At least one of these views must be incorrect. What do you think? Which of these views is more plausible?