Affirmative Action To Establish And Maintain Diversity

History needs to be revisited in order to understand the need for Affirmative Action. The Founding Fathers did not define “men” as Caucasian men only, but that all races and genders should be included in the equality mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. It would have been nice for the Founding Fathers to define the meaning of certain words in the founding documents, but they did not see the need for such information. Based on the actions of people in the early years of America, it can be determined that Caucasian males were considered to be on a higher plane than other races or genders. The majority of slave owners

Our Constitution and our Declaration of Independence were based on the idea that all men are created equal. What this really meant then and means even more today is that all men should have equal opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Affirmative Action is the one sure legal means to make that possible for everyone, regardless of race, religion or gender. ""Affirmative Action is a policy designed to create a nondiscriminatory environment for the management of human resources and the distribution of economic benefits...It means taking a second look to be fair to everyone who applies for a job or admission to college." (Anderson PG).

Instead, the opposite appears to have happened. When the emphasis is placed on aiding people with certain skin colors or ethnic backgrounds, affirmative action sets the races further apart than before. Could this be just another form of segregation? The attempts at boosting minorities to the level of the others have grotesquely failed. To raise minorities the government has pushed down the majority group, fueling racial conflicts. In addition, lowering the bar for minorities for admission into jobs or schools has created a harmful atmosphere for them. Because some of them could not originally qualify on merit and skills, many face failure or extra hardship when they get ushered into their job or school. As Charles T. Canady said in his speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D. C., "Preferences do nothing to help develop the skills necessary for the economic and social advancement of the disadvantaged" (43). Meanwhile the majorities receive punishment because of their lack of a specific skin tone or origin. "Entitlements by race, sex, ethnicity and sexual orientation-categories that in no way reflect merit-" Shelby Steele described, "are at the root of the great social evils in American life" (175). It is unfair to reward or turn away applicants because of something that is only theirs by ascribed means. When prospective college students or job applicants are considered, the competition should be solely based

The revered civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” In other words, don’t discriminate people because of their race. This should hold true in all aspects of life. Every American deserves an equal opportunity to succeed, which is why affirmative action is inherently racist. Affirmative action refers to various government policies that aim to increase the proportion of minorities and women in jobs and educational institutions historically dominated by white men. The policies usually require employers and institutions to set goals for hiring or admitting minorities. It is responsible for colleges discriminating against Eastern Asians and whites and for employers hiring workers based off of skin color rather than skills or experience. People can’t change their race (except for former president of the Spokane N.A.A.C.P. chapter, Rachel Dolezal, apparently), yet many colleges and employers favor certain races over others by using quotas, or a fixed number of people of each race.

Affirmative action in college admissions continues to be heatedly debated. In 2003, the Supreme Court had ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that diversity was a compelling interest for colleges to use race in admissions. In the amicus brief that the American Sociological Association et al. provided to the Supreme Court, sociological evidence was presented to elucidate the value of affirmative action. Yet in 2006, Proposal 2 was passed in Michigan to ban affirmative action in public education (Levitsky). Based on the information in the amicus brief, the correlation between race and socioeconomic status of the minorities, and the negative effects of banning affirmative action, admissions officers at the University of Michigan should consider

Many white people believe that affirmative action is not fair and limits their chances of acceptance when applying to college or jobs. But what they do not know is affirmative action has be proven to help Caucasian females more than any other race or gender. The reason why is because affirmative action does not only aid people other

Affirmative Action has become of the most controversial social policy issues to be discussed in recent years. It is controversial because it challenges fundamental American beliefs. As Seymour Martin Lipset put it: "Affirmative Action policies have forced a sharp confrontation between two core American values: equality and individualism."(Dudley7) This values oriented approach, which pervades popular discussion and derives from functionalist sociology, fails to explain why similar challenges to our core values did not in the past result in the kind of spite surrounding Affirmative Action today. As the popular lore and written history of urban politics in America

Affirmative action legislation in the United States has its basic framework in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which mandates that firms with more than 15 employees are subject to a variety of anti-discrimination policies, more of which were passed in subsequent years. In some cases, the concept of affirmative action was taken to be a voluntary act to attain diversity. For the most part, however, courts have interpreted affirmative action laws as having little teeth under the Constitution. It has been suggested that "racial preferences in federal law or policy are a remedy of last resort" (Dale, 2005)

Affirmative action has been around for decades. Some believe it isn’t fair but others do. Those who believe and agree with affirmative action tend to say, “The principle of affirmative action is to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people” (Bidmead, Andrew pg 3). Others that disagree with it and find it unfair simply see it as another form of discrimination, giving one group extra advantages based upon nothing but their skin color (Cline, Austin pg 1). I believe that affirmative action is indeed fair because it gives minorities a better chance at having a successful career in their near future.

Affirmative Action is an employment legislation protection system that is intended to address the systemized discrimination faced by women and minorities. It achieves this by enforcing diversity through operational intrusions into recruitment, selection, and other personnel functions and practices in America. Originally, Affirmative Action arose because of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s desire to integrate society on educational, employment, and economic levels, yet it was John F. Kennedy who issued Executive Order 10925 to create the Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, a commission that evolved into our modern Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

As affirmative action has become a simplistic strategy to decrease racial bigotry, it has developed into undermining the minority while producing favoritism. Additionally, the flawed policy has created preference within career fields and an academic mismatch among races. To eliminate this outdated system, financial-based affirmative action would serve as a revolutionary law that would help those suffering in poverty without highlighting the color of an individual 's skin.

In the United States justice is defined as equal treatment of all its citizens under the law. When one citizen is mistreated an injustice has been committed against all people. Affirmative Action is a program whose purpose is to make sure that citizens are treated equally by enforcing a set of policies which are designed to promote the inclusion of all individuals regardless of race, disability, sex, or religion. In the United States democracy we are all equal, but some groups have been enjoying more advantages in society than others for centuries. Current statistics show the depth of modern day racial gaps, which are rooted in historical discrimination and modern-day structural racism. Generations of nominal disadvantages have created

Affirmative Action has been around for a very long time, as time progress so have the people of this nation. The people we were in the 50’s and 60’s are significantly different from who we are today. I think that Affirmative Action is a good contribution and should be kept around. When I think about all the great things that minorities can do I don’t see were any harm is being done.

Some would argue that affirmative action only hurts those of minority, I would agree. Affirmative action allows those of minority the ability to attend school on race and not so much academics. Using this as a standard to allow students into a school not only hurts a student but the university as well. When students are allowed to enter a university because of race and not their abilities it only hinders that student. There have been several court cases sense the beginning of affirmative action, most of which have upheld the AA rule.

Affirmative action is a rather complicated subject that is packed with nuance. It can be difficult to fully assess whether affirmative action is a good thing when discussing it in terms of what is just and what is unjust. Professor Michael J. Sandel argues in favor of affirmative action. However, the arguments he uses when presenting his case are not particularly strong.