Walter Williams asks us What’s discrimination? He gives some rather silly examples buy they are relevant to the point he is making.
Common sense suggests that not all discrimination should be eliminated, so the question is, what kind of discrimination should be permitted? I’m guessing the answer depends on one’s values for freedom of association, keeping in mind freedom of association implies freedom not to associate.
Only a conservative…
You obviously took no time to read the link nor did you put much effort into thinking through what was being said.
No, I read the link…
Only a conservative…could present such a hard and undeniable truth.
“Only a conservative:”
LOL…and a black conservative at that.
Swing and a miss…strike one to SFL.
Wait…strike one for what?!
I’m not even “swinging” on this one! WTF?
Someone wrote a nice comment on that link…I’ll re-post it:
“Everyone discriminates in minor everyday matters. Where does it stop being minor?”
“Discrimination stops being minor when it violates the Equal Rights of others -OR- Equal Protection Under the Law.
To date, I am not aware of any circumstance where (private) discrimination has violated anyone’s Equal Rights – no one has a “right” to a particular job, to shop at a particular store, to receive consideration for particular contracts, to get a particular job promotion, to live in a particular apartment, and etceteras.
There have (and are), however, numerous circumstances where discrimination has been institutionalized by Law and, thus, violated/violates Equal Protection – Jim Crowe, segregation, affirmative action, non-affirative action (yeah right!) racial quotas for school enrollment, and etceteras.”
There have (and are), however, numerous circumstances where discrimination has been institutionalized by Law and, thus, violated/violates Equal Protection
That was the point the author was tying to make. The examples were excellant!
6.
If your “only a conservative” comment wasn’t a swing, then Mike Kilo is a card carrying memeber of the Rainbow Coalition.
You got strike one because it is likely that the man writing the article knows a thing or two about discrimination in ways that it is unlikely you can comprehend.
I think it’s a silly article with no real point.
And I say “only a conservative” because only a conservative would write an essay on why discrimination is a good thing…
…besides, he’s mostly talking about private discrimination, like which wine brand he chooses over the other or which woman to choose for a wife.
It sounds to me like a real simple-minded essay because his thesis seems to be: “Everyone discriminates in minor everyday matters. Where does it stop being minor?â€
The easy, obvious answer to that is: “Discrimination stops being minor when it violates the Equal Rights of others -OR- Equal Protection under the Law.”
———————————————
“There have (and are), however, numerous circumstances where discrimination has been institutionalized by Law and, thus, violated/violates Equal Protection”
Yeah, like it says: Jim Crow, segregation, etc…
And your point, Peejz, is?
as well as affirmative action etc..
Many would argue that Affrim. Action is “good” discrimination.
Obviously, many people agree with me as it is “the law of the land” and has withstood numerous court challenges…
Many would argue that Affrim. Action is “good”discrimination.
And no, SFL, it is not the law of the land….take another look at the court rulings…The University of Michigan comes to mind.
Peejz, Yes or No.
Is Affirmative Action still used in the United States?
Yes or No.
You declared that AA is the law of the land and it is not. It is a selective law. There are cases where it is legal and cases where it is not. Hence you have politicians calling for it to become the law in all cases. UofM can use AA in the admissions process to law school, but not for admission to the undergraduate level. So therefore, it is not the law of the land!
it’s not rocket science!
Peejz, I’ll take your answer to be YES. You admit: AA is still used all over the US in various forms.
Thanks for proving me correct. (!)
As usual, you stumble over the COTUS. You claim AA to be the law of the land, which would mean that it is used in all cases and not selectively. AA is used in various forms but is out-lawed in others. Therefore it is not the law of the land. Otherwise UofM would still be using it in undergrad admissions.
My question to you was whether or not it is used in the US.
the answer is YES.
Get over it and accept it.
No, you are again back tracking..you said it was the law of the land. It is not the law of the land.
She got you there, SF. You did say it was the law of the land. Now you’re shifting your terms.
Affirmative action is nothing more than liberal racism.
same thing…. you blacks are tooo stoopid to do anything for yourselves.. you need us..here are some kools and a few bullshit jobs…VOTE FOR US!!!!
No shifting here…#14 was the question.
I’m not asking her opinion on it being the law of the land; I’m asking her if it is law at all in the US.
the answer, again, is yes.
Another question:
Does the US government practice AA?
But #12 was the statement.
But #14 was the Question to be answered, not the statement.
the answer is of course, YES. Racism is performed in the US… liberals LOVE it! Without racism, there are no votes!
you asked 14 to bolster your statement in 12. AA is not the law of the land as it has been deemed unconstitional in some cases while contitutional in others. It is a selective process.
The US Government uses AA to this day.
I guess I can amend my statement to say that AA is the FEDERAL law of the land.
SFL said: “And I say “only a conservative”because only a conservative would write an essay on why discrimination is a good thing:”
Only a conservative would argue that discimination is a good thing? You just spent 8 posts argue with Peejz that discrinination is a good thing, namely Affirmitive Action.
Methinks your posts reek of hypocricy.
29 And that was the point that Walter Williams was trying to make. Society can’t, nor should it, try to rid itself of discrimination. There will always be good forms and bad forms, but don’t pretend to be someone that doesn’t discriminate. We do it everyday of our lifes…
#29…private discrimination is obviously not a “bad” thing. Choosing one wine over an other is a private choice.
The point I got out of the article was the author was trying to blur the lines between private discrimination and the kind that violates the law, like Jim Crow, etc. Saying “Oh, discrimination isn’t a big deal; after all, I discriminate when I choose one wine over the other”
LEGAL “discrimination” like AA isn’t an issue here.
—————————————
Perhaps I should have said: “And I say “only a conservative”because only a conservative would write an essay attempting to blur the lines between “good” and “bad” discrimination”
31 Actually, he was pointing out to college kids that no matter what they say, they discriminate. Be it large or small, they discriminate. AA is very much an issue here. AA is a form of discrimination. It is considered good discrimination when it benefits you, but bad when it doesn’t. At the end of the day, it is discrimination.