Affirmative Action is systematic institutionalized racism and sexism

Did post #33 happen after this USSC decision? Yes, it did, therefore, it is completely unrelated to my inquiry.

 

Sheesh, reading comprehension, legacy admissions were covered well before the current Supreme Court decision in Should the US Supreme Court end race-based affirmative action in university admissions? thread. There is no conspiracy.

Aren't you a ball of confusion. You need to rethink your screen name. I never said anything about income, it's about representation. Some people do not have a problem lowering the admission standards for legacies or rich kids whose parents gave big donations (deans list) but bring up POC, they don't get a pass. It should be merit!
I believe the wording is discrimination based on race.

Woohoo, Asian Americans are the master race and the other races are garbage. I'm starting to like what I hear.

Having rich parents or being a legacy is not something you achieve, does not take discipline or hard work, just ask W and he became president....twice.

 

you're confused-if you have parents willing to fund the education of several poor kids who could not attend the school without your family's aid, you do bring something valuable to the table. If you want to whine about W, do you feel the same way about Al Gore or Hillary Clinton or Teddy Kennedy etc or little mafia princess Pelosi? Or my old college buddy Sheldon Whitehouse? The Democrat party if full of rich kids who used their family's wealth and connection to suck from the public trough

 

Against my better judgement, I read that thread in it's entirety, and I have some observations.

1- That thread was in response to this case as well, so it only reinforces my statements that nobody was even talking about the whole legacy thing until this case arose.
2- YOU were the only person to bring it up.
3- In your first post on the topic, it was clear that at least one source of your obsession was the fact that you think it benefited two Republican POTUSes that you despise, to the point of accusing, without evidence, one of them of outright cheating.
4- It still doesn't change the fact that AA is a racist policy.
5- Racist policies are a direct violation of the Constitution's Equal Protection clause, the very same thing that brought about Obergefell, a ruling I also agree with for much the same reasoning.

Face it, your position is racist, and you are seeking racial diversity for diversity's sake, regardless of whether or not student's are being outright discriminated against, an illegal racist policy that you support with all your heart. I do not care about diversity, and if that means that no blacks get into Harvard, or that only blacks get into Harvard, as long as admissions are based on merit of some kind, including the ability to play Lacrosse well, I'm okay with it.

I went to West Point with diversity admits, and we knew who was who based on their performance. They took a slot that should have gone to someone more qualified, and there were certainly no shortage of candidates (only about 10% get in) that should have been admitted, but because they were too pale, they were not. It's a shame and I'm glad it's over. Except we all know this whole discussion is nothing but mental masturbation, as the colleges will find convenient excuses to essentially continue admitting people based on race, but under some flimsy cover.

 

Baha-lol

 

The right has complained about AA for years and I comment about the hypocrisy involved when brought up. The thread was started last year before the ruling.

Point 3 is a bit off the wall. Your hyperbole of my “obsession” was the fact it benefited 2 GOP POTUSes I “despise”? Well legacy did benefit W which I illustrated, but I am unaware it benefited Trump. BTW I used allegedly (per family member) about the Orange Sociopath (with bone spurs) cheating on SATs.

Right wingers have a peculiar definition of racism. Usually racism is thought of as prejudice against a race. A negative connotation, but the right uses it when helping a race, not part of the definition. Also racial diversity is another positive held negative by the right. It seems they prefer the opposite. You are fine if Blacks can only get into Harvard on merit, but say nothing about the 43% of whites that get into Harvard without jumping through the merit hoop? That is okay.

Equal protection means you cannot discriminate on the basis of race, sex, orientation, religion….
This was the last post on the subject from the other thread:
Okay one last time, if you don’t feel that non-legacy and non-athletes have been “wronged” by a university prioritizing the athletic and legacy admissions, then why would you feel whites/Asians are “wronged” by admitting an under served minority, just another category the university feels it needs? Unless, of course, all you can see is race and you don't like what you see. Nov 30, 2022

 

So the rich should be let in with the merit bar lowered but the Blacks bring nothing to university life and they should not be put on track as future leaders. Is that what you are saying?

 

its a private school. people have to pay for it to exist. schools ought to be able to make decisions based on good reasons, bad reasons, or no reasons at all but not illegal reasons

 

you labor under the delusion that blacks don't get preference for legacy or athletics.

 

a really good analysis of the supreme court decision
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...D5LfIVlLBs6lMC-gdsvBmOD5hqEZ1oU5x_K2NdPngjX8s