Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action in college admissions and says race cannot be a factor

  • Thread starter Thread starter psychodave
  • Start date Start date
psychodave said:
I'm excited to see the liberal spin on what I wrote.
Click to expand...

How about a redneck spin?
giphy.gif
 
And I hasten to add, fake Indian Elizabeth Warren will be bloviating about the impact of the decision upon her BIPOC "brethren" likewise in fawning coverage on MSNBC or CNN or NYT.
 
psychodave said:
Color should have zero consideration, but I disagree what Jackson wrote. While African American citizens have made almost immeasurable contributions during wars, I would have to think, if measured, more white citizens have died fighting wars for America. Had Jackson said "poor" Americans, I'd likely agree.

I'm excited to see the liberal spin on what I wrote.
Click to expand...
Let the children of the people who own the land die for it.
 
Strandberg Junkie said:
You really that naive Dave? Do you know how many decades went by where all the best colleges
were able to openly discriminate against minorities in order to maintain their upper white crust status?

And that affirmative action was an effort to make up for past wrongs and insure they wouldn't happen again?

But hey, chalk up a win for the good guys, right?
Click to expand...
I've never had an issue with race based admissions for this very reason. What got me to reconsider that position was having bi-racial grandchildren. I don't have a problem with remedial efforts to attempt to make up for a very long history of inequality however doing so potentially dilutes the achievement of black students. I remember reading that Clarence Thomas resenting people questioning whether or not he earned his spot at Yale.

I was helping my granddaughter with her homework one evening and started thinking. She puts in a lot of hard work academically and if she keeps it up, will achieve a lot. Her achievements won't do her any good if many people attribute them to race based handouts as opposed to hard work.

I think those given a race-based boost probably would have found equivalent success albeit it at lower prestige universities. I think the real issue that needs to be addressed is lifting kids up out of a culture of poverty, which is not exclusive to any one race though black people are disproportionately represented due to a long history of American apartheid.
 

Fact Check: Liberal Supreme Court Justices Rely on False Claims about Racism, Anti-Gay Bigotry to Bolster Dissents​

Sotomayor-and-Jackson.jpg
Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pose together at Justice Jackson’s investiture ceremony at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., September 30, 2022. (Fred Schilling/Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States via Reuters)
The Supreme Court of the United States this week slashed Joe Biden’s student debt forgiveness plan, did away with affirmative action, and upheld the First Amendment’s protection of religious expression. In dissenting from the majority in both cases, the Court’s liberal justices relied on plainly inaccurate claims.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson joined the dissent in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, in which the Court ruled that race-conscious admissions policies violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. She cited an Association of American Medical Colleges study that argues for the “critical importance of diversity in the medical profession.” Affirmative action, Jackson claimed, doubles the chance of black infant survival: “For high-risk Black newborns, having a Black physician more than doubles the likelihood that the baby will live, and not die.”

The study, however, finds that black infants have a 99.6 percent survival rate with black doctors and a 99.8 percent survival rate with white doctors. What Jackson misinterpreted when she claimed that the black infant survival rate “doubles” with a black doctor is the discrepancy that more white doctors are in Neonatal intensive care units (NICU), where babies are less likely to survive. If a black baby has a black doctor, it’s likely because that baby is not in a NICU, which of course yields higher survival rates.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a long dissent for 303 Creative v. Elenis, in which the court determined that a Christian web designer cannot be compelled to make a wedding website for a gay couple. In her dissent, Sotomayor said a “social system of discrimination created an environment in which LGBT people were unsafe,” and quoted many examples including the murder of Matthew Shepard, who was, “targeted by two men, tortured, tied to a buck fence, and left to die for who he was,” Sotomayor wrote. Shepard, who was involved in the Wyoming meth drug culture, was murdered by a bisexual who confirmed that the murder had nothing to do with Shepard’s being gay.

Sotomayor’s interpretation of Shepard’s death is in line with the mainstream narrative that’s coalesced around the incident. That popular telling has inspired countless articles, a gay-rights non-profit, and, ultimately, the Matthew Shepard Act, a law signed by President Obama in 2009 that expanded the scope of offenses that could be considered hate crimes under federal law. Sotomayor’s version of events was eventually debunked by author Stephen Jiminez, who spent thirteen years reporting and writing a book about Shepard’s death. The book, Hidden Truths about the Murder of Matthew Shepard, was published in 2013 and advances the argument that a dispute over meth was to blame for the tragedy.

Sotomayor also used the 2016 mass murder at the gay-friendly Pulse nightclub in Orlando Fla., to prove “significantly higher… rates of violent victimization” for LGBT people. Omar Mateen, the Pulse shooter, confirmed after the massacre that he planned to attack Disney World, was deterred by the park’s police presence, and resolved to shoot up thee first Google search result for “Orlando nightclubs.” Although the media claimed that the Pulse shooter specifically targeted gay people, the FBI has found not evidence to prove such.
 
Prof. Lawnchair said:

Fact Check: Liberal Supreme Court Justices Rely on False Claims about Racism, Anti-Gay Bigotry to Bolster Dissents​

Sotomayor-and-Jackson.jpg
Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pose together at Justice Jackson’s investiture ceremony at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., September 30, 2022. (Fred Schilling/Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States via Reuters)
The Supreme Court of the United States this week slashed Joe Biden’s student debt forgiveness plan, did away with affirmative action, and upheld the First Amendment’s protection of religious expression. In dissenting from the majority in both cases, the Court’s liberal justices relied on plainly inaccurate claims.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson joined the dissent in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, in which the Court ruled that race-conscious admissions policies violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. She cited an Association of American Medical Colleges study that argues for the “critical importance of diversity in the medical profession.” Affirmative action, Jackson claimed, doubles the chance of black infant survival: “For high-risk Black newborns, having a Black physician more than doubles the likelihood that the baby will live, and not die.”

The study, however, finds that black infants have a 99.6 percent survival rate with black doctors and a 99.8 percent survival rate with white doctors. What Jackson misinterpreted when she claimed that the black infant survival rate “doubles” with a black doctor is the discrepancy that more white doctors are in Neonatal intensive care units (NICU), where babies are less likely to survive. If a black baby has a black doctor, it’s likely because that baby is not in a NICU, which of course yields higher survival rates.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a long dissent for 303 Creative v. Elenis, in which the court determined that a Christian web designer cannot be compelled to make a wedding website for a gay couple. In her dissent, Sotomayor said a “social system of discrimination created an environment in which LGBT people were unsafe,” and quoted many examples including the murder of Matthew Shepard, who was, “targeted by two men, tortured, tied to a buck fence, and left to die for who he was,” Sotomayor wrote. Shepard, who was involved in the Wyoming meth drug culture, was murdered by a bisexual who confirmed that the murder had nothing to do with Shepard’s being gay.

Sotomayor’s interpretation of Shepard’s death is in line with the mainstream narrative that’s coalesced around the incident. That popular telling has inspired countless articles, a gay-rights non-profit, and, ultimately, the Matthew Shepard Act, a law signed by President Obama in 2009 that expanded the scope of offenses that could be considered hate crimes under federal law. Sotomayor’s version of events was eventually debunked by author Stephen Jiminez, who spent thirteen years reporting and writing a book about Shepard’s death. The book, Hidden Truths about the Murder of Matthew Shepard, was published in 2013 and advances the argument that a dispute over meth was to blame for the tragedy.

Sotomayor also used the 2016 mass murder at the gay-friendly Pulse nightclub in Orlando Fla., to prove “significantly higher… rates of violent victimization” for LGBT people. Omar Mateen, the Pulse shooter, confirmed after the massacre that he planned to attack Disney World, was deterred by the park’s police presence, and resolved to shoot up thee first Google search result for “Orlando nightclubs.” Although the media claimed that the Pulse shooter specifically targeted gay people, the FBI has found not evidence to prove such.
Click to expand...
I don't know how factually correct that article is but is a thought provoking one that elevates the forum as opposed to a response saying "do what I think is right or GTFO" or a homophobic slur. Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top