"white only" scholarship

This is a discussion on "white only" scholarship within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally posted by *ClownPimp* One of the purposes of government is to protect the rights of minorities. And one of ...

  1. #31
    5|-|1+|-|34|) ober's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,429
    Originally posted by *ClownPimp*
    One of the purposes of government is to protect the rights of minorities. And one of those rights is to not be discriminated against when looking for employment. So the government has a duty to force business owners to not discriminate in their hiring practices.
    That duty also includes ensuring that said businesses have qualified personnel. Forcing a company to hire someone that is less qualfied than someone else applying for a job is WRONG. Plain and simple.

  2. #32
    'AlHamdulillah
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    790
    hat duty also includes ensuring that said businesses have qualified personnel. Forcing a company to hire someone that is less qualfied than someone else applying for a job is WRONG. Plain and simple.
    exactly, you know what the problem is in America? It is that everyone expects to get their "fair share". The constitution gives the right to pursue happiness, not obtain it always.

    Everyone faces prejudice at sometime in their life, for example computer programmers, who are often the nerds of school, who are picked on etc., I don't see an affirmative action plan for nerds. If I don't hire minorities, it is my business. why should I hire from a minority group that everyone knows is getting crappy education, when over 80% of them cannot read by the time they get out of highschool, a group that although it represents 12% of the US population as a whole, commits 59% of the homicides, and represents around half of all welfare recipients. I would not be rascist, I would be logical, would you hire a white person who: could not read or write, was a convicted felon, and was a beggar? I don't think so.

    One of the purposes of government is to protect the rights of minorities. And one of those rights is to not be discriminated against when looking for employment. So the government has a duty to force business owners to not discriminate in their hiring practices.
    This is pretty easy to beat. If I have two people, woman A, women B, competing for a business administration position:

    Women A is a graduate of harvard university, obtained a 4.0 GPA, and worked with Alan Greenspan during the course of a year internship.

    Women B is a graduate of the University of Arkansas, obtained a 3.0GPA there, and has no internship/employment records.

    This is often what is on people's resumes in summation. Who am I going to choose, or even interview? Woman A, or woman B? It does not matter what race they are. However, by affirmative action rules, if I have a place that has only 30% blacks working, and Woman B is black, I have to HIRE HER over Woman A, or not hire at all. How does that make sense?
    Last edited by EvBladeRunnervE; 03-03-2004 at 11:51 AM.

  3. #33
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    552
    >How many all white colleges do you know of?

    who in their right minds would want to go to a "all white" (by design) college. It would not succeed.

    >Yet there are all minority schools.

    I dont know of a single school that rejects applicants simply becuase they are not of a particular minority race. Please give some examples.

    >Everyone faces prejudice at sometime in their life, for example computer programmers, who are often the nerds of school, who are picked on etc.

    Thats not prejudice.

    >why should I hire from a minority group that everyone knows is getting crappy education, when over 80% of them cannot read by the time they get out of highschool, a group that although it represents 12% of the US population as a whole, commits 59% of the homicides, and represents around half of all welfare recipients

    Now this is! Firstly, where the hell are you getting these stats from? Secondly, attitudes like this is why we still need AA today.

    No one is asking you to hire an illiterate person for a job that requires one to be able to read.

    > That duty also includes ensuring that said businesses have qualified personnel.

    >This is pretty easy to beat. If I have two people, woman A, women B, competing for a business administration position:...

    You are citing an extreme case. A much more likely senario is given two qualified applicants for a particular job, one minority and one not, a business would have to hire the minority if their workforce didnt meet a certain race distribution.
    C Code. C Code Run. Run Code Run... Please!

    "Love is like a blackhole, you fall into it... then you get ripped apart"

  4. #34
    5|-|1+|-|34|) ober's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,429
    >>A much more likely senario is given two qualified applicants for a particular job, one minority and one not, a business would have to hire the minority if their workforce didnt meet a certain race distribution.

    And you're trying to tell me that that isn't racist? C'mon! Given the two equals, a business should not be "forced" to pick one or the other. The decision should then move onto other characteristics of the individuals (attitude, presentability, etc.)

    I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark and say you're a minority. Am I right?

    Have you ever been in debt from college while a less deserving (in terms of financial need) minority recieves scholarships that you could have gotten if they had been open to you? That's not affirmative action, but it's the same damn concept.

    STFU.

  5. #35
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    Echo Clownpimp.
    Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

  6. #36
    Registered User axon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    2,572
    echo ober




    some entropy with that sink? entropysink.com

    there are two cardinal sins from which all others spring: Impatience and Laziness. - franz kafka

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,708
    The decision should then move onto other characteristics of the individuals (attitude, presentability, etc.)
    Well, I thought you already said they're equal...if they really are equal, then you've already weighed all of the possible qualifications to determine that they're equal, and subsequently if you need to meet a race distribution then I could see, in this case, why it is somewhat reasonable to pick the minority person. Otherwise they're unequal, and they should be chosen by the superior qualifications.

    STFU

    hehe, jk

    EDIT:
    I just want to re-iterate (after re-reading your college scholarship example) that I really do think merit should be based on performance and qualifications, not race (either for or against any race)
    Last edited by Silvercord; 03-03-2004 at 04:03 PM.

  8. #38
    Its not rocket science vasanth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    1,683
    Originally posted by sean_mackrory
    I've got a couple of short points to make.

    First of all, another echo to ober, I was thinking the exact same words.

    Second, I never had slaves. I never forced segregation. I shouldn't be excluded from scholarships and college application benefits because I'm white. That's just more discrimination.

    Third, having been to Africa very recently, and having seen how the blacks live there, anyone who is expecting repayment for having been taken out is an idiot. Yes slavery was tough, but that was for the ancestors of today's African-Americans. Where they are now, they're way better off. If anything, you should only be asking for repayment on things that happen now.

    Four, about things that happen now. Don't expect legal immunity because you're black. As soon as a black celebrity is arrested for something like child molestation, the race card is played inevitably EVERY time.

    Hmmm.... isnt this a bit rude... And i agree with some of your points.. but if i am right.. wasnt the legal system biased against the blacks for some time....

    i might be worng...

  9. #39
    Disagreeably Disagreeable
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    711
    >>One of the purposes of government is to protect the rights of minorities.<<

    Actually it's not. The purpose of government is to prevent coercion. If I hold a gun to your head and say "Let me work for you, for at least $5.25 an hour, or I'll blow your brains out." that is a form of coercion and I have no right in doing that.

    Whether its me or the government, it's wrong.

    >>"one persons personal freedoms end where another's begins"<<

    This is absolutely correct; apparently you don't know what this quote means.

    We live in a capitalist society, not a socialist one. If I start a private business or institution, it is well within my rights to conduct that institution how I see fit.

    If people don't like the services or products I offer, then they do not conduct business with me. If potential employees do not like the terms I set forth in my business (rate of pay, rules of conduct, etc.) then they do not apply for employment. If, for any reason, I do not like a potential employee it is well within my right to not hire that employee.

    It is not within the government's right to tell me how to run my peaceful, private business/institution.

    >>The constitution gives the right to pursue happiness, not obtain it always.<<

    This is a very good point. I have the right to free speech, but I do not have the right to compel others to provide my forum. I have the right to earn a living, yet I do not hold the right to compel others to provide my living.
    Last edited by Hillbillie; 03-03-2004 at 04:32 PM.

  10. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    552
    >And you're trying to tell me that that isn't racist? C'mon! Given the two equals, a business should not be "forced" to pick one or the other. The decision should then move onto other characteristics of the individuals (attitude, presentability, etc.)

    As I stated in my first post to this thread i agree that it is a form of racism. But racial bias in procedure is much more preferrable than racial bias in outcome.

    >I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark and say you're a minority. Am I right?

    Yup.

    >Have you ever been in debt from college while a less deserving (in terms of financial need) minority recieves scholarships that you could have gotten if they had been open to you? That's not affirmative action, but it's the same damn concept.

    Well, no. Minority only scholarships are created by private organizations. AA is enforced by the federal government. There are scholarships for all kinds of things: being disabled, knowing how to fly a plane, being the child of a member of a certain organization, being an avid square dancer, etc. Minority only scholarships are no different.

    >STFU.
    calm down d00d.

    >Actually it's not.

    Actually it is. Why do you think we have the Bill of Rights?

    >If I start a private business or institution, it is well within my rights to conduct that institution how I see fit.

    Yes, but you dont--and shouldnt have the right to discriminate.

    >It is not within the government's right to tell me how to run my peaceful, private business/institution.

    It is if Congress says it is =P
    Last edited by *ClownPimp*; 03-03-2004 at 05:14 PM.
    C Code. C Code Run. Run Code Run... Please!

    "Love is like a blackhole, you fall into it... then you get ripped apart"

  11. #41
    l'Anziano DavidP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Plano, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,738
    See, I would just blame the British.
    That has to be the greatest quote in this thread so far.

    j/k

    maybe we should blame the French instead...
    Last edited by DavidP; 03-03-2004 at 05:45 PM.
    My Website

    "Circular logic is good because it is."

  12. #42
    Disagreeably Disagreeable
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    711
    >>Why do you think we have the Bill of Rights?<<

    I'm sorry; I suppose I mislead you. Of course the Government should protect rights of minorities. But they should protect the rights of everyone else also...and equally I might add.

    (BTW, Madison--the chief author of the Bill of Rights--believed adding the Bill of Rights was redundant; he thought every right the BoR affords to Americans were already embedded into the Constitution. Just some food for thought.)

    >>and shouldnt have the right to discriminate.<<

    Are you kidding me? People forget that not all discrimination is bad. Discrimination is why we have women bathrooms and men bathrooms. It's why we catch many criminals; witnesses are able to say "It was a white short dude." or "It was a tall black dude."

    We Americans have the right to discriminate.

    If I have a business, and you come to me asking for work, I have the right to not hire you because you're a minority. (I wouldn't ever do that, mind you; I'd assess your employment based on merit alone, but I'm trying to prove a point here.) Besides, you wouldn't even be at my doorstep in the first place if it wasn't FOR ME OWNING THE BUSINESS.

    You're crazy if you don't think I should be able to hire who I please based on what I please. You also insult me as a business owner myself.

    When the Government forces me to hire someone, it implies that it has a higher claim on my business than I do. Are you saying that the Government owns my business more than I do?

    >>It is if Congress says it is =P<<

    I assume you're joking; in that case, funny. However, if you're serious, Congress once upheld the assertion that slaves were not citizens, had no rights, and were the rightful posessions of slaveowners.

  13. #43
    'AlHamdulillah
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    790
    cloudpimp :
    Now this is! Firstly, where the hell are you getting these stats from? Secondly, attitudes like this is why we still need AA today.
    where did I get it? the US statistical Abstracts by the US Census bureau, of course I guess they are rascists...
    http://www.census.gov/statab/www/

    EDIT: PS I was slightly wrong, it is close to 42.8% for homicide
    Last edited by EvBladeRunnervE; 03-03-2004 at 07:24 PM.

  14. #44
    Toaster Zach L.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    2,686
    why should I hire from a minority group that everyone knows is getting crappy education
    Congratulations on finding the root of the problem.

  15. #45
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    552
    > People forget that not all discrimination is bad.

    I mean discrimination in the sense of choosing or not choosing someone because of their race.

    >the US statistical Abstracts by the US Census bureau, of course I guess they are rascists

    I didnt say that the statistics were discrimination, I said your statement was discrimination ("why should I hire from a minority group that everyone knows is getting crappy education....")

    >If I have a business, and you come to me asking for work, I have the right to not hire you because you're a minority.

    Again, businesses do not and should not have that right. You need to look back 100 or so years and see what practices like this did to minority groups, specifically blacks.
    C Code. C Code Run. Run Code Run... Please!

    "Love is like a blackhole, you fall into it... then you get ripped apart"

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Another "integer only" problem
    By RedZippo in forum C Programming
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-03-2004, 11:36 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21