Is affirmative action fair? Forum

[Lasers]

i actually remember watching an entire debate between frank wu and dinesh desouza on this topic. was quite interesting.

[TaipeiMort]

Who cares if it is fair. Nothing in life is fair. Take every legal advantage that comes your way. Is it fair that I have to pay a high interest rate for a law school loan going to a top school in order to subsidize failures at TJ or JMLS or Cooley? More than likely, it is helping you to get 10% of your class well below the LSAT curve in there to compete against you. Although, I think most URMs (when I say "URM" I mean AA because it is impossible to tell who is Hispanic) were at median at my school, a couple were clearly less intelligent, most were fun to be around and sociable, and none made law review the past 2 or 3 years (at my school they don't have affirmative action on law review). I don't anyone can claim they've benefited from "diversity," but I have definitely liked my URM classmates more than most.

[PDaddy]

OP, I highly doubt you were joking. Do not even think about doing something this stupid and dishonest. Especially if you have plans of being a lawyer and passing a bar at any point during your lifetime.

I don't plan on doing this, but because I am curious, how do they handle the native american thing? Do you have to be a certain percentage. Most white people, whether true or not, seem to be convinced that they are 1/16 or 1/32 native american. Does anybody vet this stuff?

...and their DOCUMENTED TRIBE MEMBERSHIP as noted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)? Can "'most' white people" present that?

Without tribe membership, the claims come up as empty trivia at best...outright lies at worst.

Btw, a very high percentage of both Hispanic and non-Hispanic American-born Blacks - NOT second or third generation Africans, Black British or Caribbean Blacks, mind you, but descendants of African-American slaves - have American Indian bloodlines. Hence, they would be at the front of that line as well.

Also, the preferred term is "American-Indian". The term "Native-American" is too vague.

[Tom Joad]

I think a weird thing about AA is that URMs don't get points added to their GPAs.

Get a boost in undergrad admissions, but then no boost in undergrad grade, then a boost in grad school admissions, but then no boost in grad school grades, then get a boost in hiring. It definitely seems inconsistent.

[PDaddy]

Just remember that only the people who need the boosts get them, but not all URM's need boost. Some URM's (more than most people might assume without looking at data) qualify on numbers as well as soft factors. Other URM's qualify on soft factors but have weak numbers.

[rmorris87]

There is a threat already dedicated to this. Move the convo there.

[Nova]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0&t=178724

[guano]

Just remember that only the people who need the boosts get them, but not all URM's need boost. Some URM's (more than most people might assume without looking at data) qualify on numbers as well as soft factors. Other URM's qualify on soft factors but have weak numbers.

You're on crack

[laxbrah420]

Wow I didn't mean to offend anyone. It was a joke and I was just trying to be funny.

Racist jokes are hilarious. You should try putting some in your personal statements to HYS, for all of these schools prefer candidates with a good sense of humor.

I found this post to be the most offensive in this thread. Racist jokes ARE funny, despite the fact that including them in an application is obviously stupid.

And everyone's confused in this thread. The fact that AA discussions are taboo does not make AA a good thing...you shouldn't be allowed to tag-along in here with your liberal bullshit.

(not even trolling --it's horseshit that people get to call him a racist and yet all AA convos are supposed to be proscribed. i find it way more insulting to intelligent discourse if affirmative action gets a free, can't criticize pass. my understanding was that it's taboo because the convos inevitably become retarded. please lock this thread. )

[Huey Freeman]

I think a weird thing about AA is that URMs don't get points added to their GPAs.

Get a boost in undergrad admissions, but then no boost in undergrad grade, then a boost in grad school admissions, but then no boost in grad school grades, then get a boost in hiring. It definitely seems inconsistent.

Well, from undergrad, you either go to grad school or go work (get hired). Similarly, from grad school, you either go to more school, or go work somewhere.

If there is a boost at both outcomes, then effectively, URM undergraduate/graduate grades *are* boosted. I mean, grades only exist to serve those purposes anyway, so why give a quantified boost (which people get upset about) when you can use admissions/hiring instead? I guess a grade boost in undergraduate grades would serve the purpose of preventing URMs from failing though (since that's the only other thing grades really do).

[PDaddy]

My first thought too.

Maggie Gyllenhall is "whupped"! Not aging well...

[PDaddy]

Just remember that only the people who need the boosts get them, but not all URM's need boost. Some URM's (more than most people might assume without looking at data) qualify on numbers as well as soft factors. Other URM's qualify on soft factors but have weak numbers.

You're on crack

Brilliant...just brilliant! How did you ever come up with that one? You must have an IQ of 200!

I am "on crack" [sic] only to people who believe that numbers are and should be the only determinant(s) of admissions decisions...that higher grades and scores necessarily make one candidate more qualified than another candidate...and that adcoms, despite a similar belief, continue to give boosts to and admit students they don't truly believe can cut the mustard.

FOLLY!

[Darmody]

Shouldn't affirmative action be solely based on the financial situation of the student and not race? If he/she comes from a lower income family, then he/she did not have the resources, regardless of race, to receive the same opportunities. But, an URM (black/hispanic) that comes from a higher income family had the same resources and opportunities as a non URM, so they shouldn't benefit from AA. If an Asian student came from a lower income family, he/she did not have the same opportunities, but then will be looked unfavorably even more during admissions due to their race. Not fair? Life isn't fair? Then maybe we should try to fix the issue. Just my perspective.

[PDaddy]

There are hundreds of old threads on this topic and nothing new or revolutionary will be posted here. LOCK IT DOWN I SAY!

Lets talk about something else, like the season-2 finale of "Suits". Meghan Markle is hotter than fish grease!

[guano]

Just remember that only the people who need the boosts get them, but not all URM's need boost. Some URM's (more than most people might assume without looking at data) qualify on numbers as well as soft factors. Other URM's qualify on soft factors but have weak numbers.

You're on crack

Brilliant...just brilliant! How did you ever come up with that one? You must have an IQ of 200!

I am "on crack" [sic] only to people who believe that numbers are and should be the only determinant(s) of admissions decisions...that higher grades and scores necessarily make one candidate more qualified than another candidate...and that adcoms, despite a similar belief, continue to give boosts to and admit students they don't truly believe can cut the mustard.

FOLLY!

If explain the fallacy in your logic/reasoning, but, if it isn't patently obvious, your brain is too minuscule to comprehend, or, more likely, you don't want the truth because it doesn't confirm to your comprehension of how the world works.

[laxbrah420]

Just to be the responsible member that I am, I'd like to inform any future posters in this thread that affirmative action discussions are not allowed on this website, with the exception of the mega affirmative action thread (seems dumb, but, whatever, that's the rule! I don't make them). I can't block threads as a backseat moderator, but in an act of solidarity with indigo-mods, I'd like to state that anybody who says anything as derpy as Darmody just did will be backseat banned for 2 weeks, no exceptions. Anybody who proceeds to interact to a backseat banned member is also banned (length at discretion of Birdnals). So this is a serious warning. Stop derping. SCOTUS will teach us about AA in a few days, then we can derp in a different thread.

[guano]

Shouldn't affirmative action be solely based on the financial situation of the student and not race? If he/she comes from a lower income family, then he/she did not have the resources, regardless of race, to receive the same opportunities. But, an URM (black/hispanic) that comes from a higher income family had the same resources and opportunities as a non URM, so they shouldn't benefit from AA. If an Asian student came from a lower income family, he/she did not have the same opportunities, but then will be looked unfavorably even more during admissions due to their race. Not fair? Life isn't fair? Then maybe we should try to fix the issue. Just my perspective.

Thing is, it's not about background, but about proportionality. Quite simply, the proportion of URMs in law school is significantly lower than their proportion in the population

To answe the actual question, no, it's not fair, but it is neccesary (to achieve certain goals, the merits of which are an entirely different debate)

[laxbrah420]

Shouldn't affirmative action be solely based on the financial situation of the student and not race? If he/she comes from a lower income family, then he/she did not have the resources, regardless of race, to receive the same opportunities. But, an URM (black/hispanic) that comes from a higher income family had the same resources and opportunities as a non URM, so they shouldn't benefit from AA. If an Asian student came from a lower income family, he/she did not have the same opportunities, but then will be looked unfavorably even more during admissions due to their race. Not fair? Life isn't fair? Then maybe we should try to fix the issue. Just my perspective.

Thing is, it's not about background, but about proportionality. Quite simply, the proportion of URMs in law school is significantly lower than their proportion in the population

To answe the actual question, no, it's not fair, but it is neccesary (to achieve certain goals, the merits of which are an entirely different debate)

banned.
You can appeal to the backseat mods under "I was already typing" estoppel bullshit, but you should have gotten an update about my post.

[guano]

Shouldn't affirmative action be solely based on the financial situation of the student and not race? If he/she comes from a lower income family, then he/she did not have the resources, regardless of race, to receive the same opportunities. But, an URM (black/hispanic) that comes from a higher income family had the same resources and opportunities as a non URM, so they shouldn't benefit from AA. If an Asian student came from a lower income family, he/she did not have the same opportunities, but then will be looked unfavorably even more during admissions due to their race. Not fair? Life isn't fair? Then maybe we should try to fix the issue. Just my perspective.

Thing is, it's not about background, but about proportionality. Quite simply, the proportion of URMs in law school is significantly lower than their proportion in the population

To answe the actual question, no, it's not fair, but it is neccesary (to achieve certain goals, the merits of which are an entirely different debate)

banned.
You can appeal to the backseat mods under "I was already typing" estoppel bullshit, but you should have gotten an update about my post.

I'll take my punishment like a man-dingo

[Throttle]

How the hell hasn't this been locked?

[Throttle]

Welp.....I'm a -8L and was wondering what classes to take in high school to be competitive for law school. So far I'm looking at Golden gate.....I have a hs gpa of 2.6. What are my chances?!?!?!?!?!?

[Br3v]

Because the back seat mods haven't given one of the lower mods the go ahead to lock yet.

[Tom Joad]

Shouldn't affirmative action be solely based on the financial situation of the student and not race? If he/she comes from a lower income family, then he/she did not have the resources, regardless of race, to receive the same opportunities. But, an URM (black/hispanic) that comes from a higher income family had the same resources and opportunities as a non URM, so they shouldn't benefit from AA. If an Asian student came from a lower income family, he/she did not have the same opportunities, but then will be looked unfavorably even more during admissions due to their race. Not fair? Life isn't fair? Then maybe we should try to fix the issue. Just my perspective.

That is legitimately the dumbest thing I have ever heard.