17th February 2003, 5:07 PM
ABF, the point of affirmitive action is to stamp out racism by essentially punishing morons for stupid thinking right? Well, while this is indeed something I fully agree with, I gotta say that this particular method seems a bit counterproductive.
Let me ask you this question. Do you understand Weltal's previous point when he stated that affirmitive action can in fact do the harm of making people think there's a difference? While I think it's stupid for people to blame affirmitive action for not getting a job, the fact is that when someone sees a person of a different race than what is considered the majority (oh, I'll rant about that in a second by the way), they will view them differently. They will view them as someone who they should consider hiring MORE than the majority member person. This is simply put racial discrimination. This is Weltall's point. All I want to know is do you see the logic here? It's not really "bad" discrimination, because they aren't getting fired because of it, but even the complimentary discrimination is still wrong.
Now, about this majority thing. Why is it that white males are considered "majority" anyway? Stating majority and minority in my opinion is a line of seperation. It's saying that in fact they are a group, which shouldn't be assumed at ALL, because people of each "group" may not know or care about each other at all. Why group them together as though they are either downtrodden or plotting against or whatever? It's just nuts and it's offensive. Ugh, sorry it's just this sort of thing really is offensive.
Anyway, while the good of affirmitive action is that "minorities" (ugh) are not being "punished" for who they are, it comes at the cost of perpetuating discriminating THOUGHTS. While, on the other hand, if it was not the case, while such discrimination could still occur (hey now, they COULD still sue if they can proove it was due to genes they were fired), the thoughts of people could actually be allowed to move on without a stubborn law continuously reminding people of old stupidities.
Oh, and Darunia I'm happy to hear that you are in fact not a racist. To be honest you have made some very racist comments in the past though. I certainly hope you won't be using such slurs any more. No need to refer to an entire country or group of genetically linked people when all you are angry at is the individual. Don't insult all of Mexico (sheesh, the fact is that when you do that, you are ONLY insulting people still in Mexico, who most assuredly aren't illegal immigrants) when you only mean to insult people who aren't even in Mexico any more.
Let me ask you this question. Do you understand Weltal's previous point when he stated that affirmitive action can in fact do the harm of making people think there's a difference? While I think it's stupid for people to blame affirmitive action for not getting a job, the fact is that when someone sees a person of a different race than what is considered the majority (oh, I'll rant about that in a second by the way), they will view them differently. They will view them as someone who they should consider hiring MORE than the majority member person. This is simply put racial discrimination. This is Weltall's point. All I want to know is do you see the logic here? It's not really "bad" discrimination, because they aren't getting fired because of it, but even the complimentary discrimination is still wrong.
Now, about this majority thing. Why is it that white males are considered "majority" anyway? Stating majority and minority in my opinion is a line of seperation. It's saying that in fact they are a group, which shouldn't be assumed at ALL, because people of each "group" may not know or care about each other at all. Why group them together as though they are either downtrodden or plotting against or whatever? It's just nuts and it's offensive. Ugh, sorry it's just this sort of thing really is offensive.
Anyway, while the good of affirmitive action is that "minorities" (ugh) are not being "punished" for who they are, it comes at the cost of perpetuating discriminating THOUGHTS. While, on the other hand, if it was not the case, while such discrimination could still occur (hey now, they COULD still sue if they can proove it was due to genes they were fired), the thoughts of people could actually be allowed to move on without a stubborn law continuously reminding people of old stupidities.
Oh, and Darunia I'm happy to hear that you are in fact not a racist. To be honest you have made some very racist comments in the past though. I certainly hope you won't be using such slurs any more. No need to refer to an entire country or group of genetically linked people when all you are angry at is the individual. Don't insult all of Mexico (sheesh, the fact is that when you do that, you are ONLY insulting people still in Mexico, who most assuredly aren't illegal immigrants) when you only mean to insult people who aren't even in Mexico any more.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)