Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - UNAS

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15
101
Look twinkle toes, this isn't that difficult.

As a "race" black people are only a few hundred years behind in assimilating to the (typically) white mainstream culture, including education, by the way. And, I mean, what’s a few hundred years when it comes to education, culture, and identity, right?

But why the entire race, you may ask? After all, certainly there are middle and upper class blacks that are “unfairly” taking advantage of AA. Why not just look at socioeconomic status for affirmative action?

Well, easy. Because the entire race (or more properly, almost anyyone with a darker skin color) was subjected to slavery and oppression, by the white man and because of white men. This cultural/educational disparity is not something that can be "made up" in a few generations either, despite the impressive efforts of many that are closing that gap. It’ll take some time, and to help close that gap more effectively and expediently, we have affirmative action.

Furthermore, education begets education, privilege begets privilege. Blacks have been on the wrong side of this equation for far too long. It's not like blacks are swarming into top schools like a plague, stealing all the spots from otherwise talented whites. Look at the data - there is a glaring dearth of black students at just about every law school. Worry not - your place in the law is certainly not in jeopardy.

This thread is a joke anyway. Surely there are those blacks that have been able to gain admission to schools on their own merits, without the assistance of affirmative action – I know several of them. Yet you call out an entire race as if no blacks are capable of succeeding without “help.” So from the outset you’re engaging trollish, racist views. And you wonder why H4CS hasn’t taken you seriously?

 ::)


Masterful conspectus. Please bookmark this I am sure we will have to cut & paste it no less than a dozen times in the coming weeks.

102
If he/she looks black/mixed I would check it. If she/he look like a white person with slightly tanned skin I would say no. You get discriminated because you can't hide the fact you are black. ergo, your inability to blend in.

103
Affirmative Action / Re: This is why affirmative should remain in tact
« on: August 13, 2007, 03:37:16 PM »
spelling's overrated anyway.

amen


104
Affirmative Action / Re: This is why affirmative should remain in tact
« on: August 13, 2007, 10:28:48 AM »
This is why affirmative action should remain in tact (sic)!

Selfpwnage. I guess AA is good for getting illiterates like the OP into college.

if you wanna beat me up over a malapropism feel free to. My sole purpose is to make you feel better about yourself.

105
It has been said individuals with prior work experience have the least trouble getting acclimated to the work load of law school in comparison to those that come straight from undergrad. What are your thoughts on this and how have you been managing your work at this stage in the game.

106
At a university where academic acheivement runs rampant, is there a slacker sub-culture?

I have heard gtown is a bit notorious for theirs, but just wanted your opinion?

107
Affirmative Action / Re: This is why affirmative should remain in tact
« on: August 01, 2007, 12:34:29 PM »
One of my best friends growing up was and still is a staunch republican. He only really cares about the right to bear arms though. I appreciate your thoughts.
One of the biggest issues we face with discrimination, racism, prejudice and the other isms is our refusal as Americans to engage in dialogue. My hope gets stronger with every generation, but there needs to be a substantial amount of top-down leadership taking place. Diversity needs to be encouraged on the grandest scale possible. Commingling of races and religions will breakdown mental obstructions that have been erect for 400+ years.

108
Affirmative Action / Re: This is why affirmative should remain in tact
« on: August 01, 2007, 11:59:51 AM »

I realize there was a systematic demoralization and abuse of certain people in early America.  I realize it was NOT fair.  But show me one person who descends from a slave family and I will support his admission over he who was from a slaveholding family.  Aside from that, I find it hard to swallow a pill that makes me - whose family was not here until 1934 (and whose family faced "Italians Need Not Apply" signs when they got here) - "responsible" for enslaving people in eighteenth and nineteenth century Georgia.

You can't be serious.  But if you are, can you tell me which of the following beliefs is driving your thought process?
1)most of the 30+ million black people in America are immigrants of recent vintage
or
2)some black people came on a party cruise in the 1800s and liked the place so much that they decided to stay.

What I was trying to illustrate with my point is that many people choose to justify AA by citing a long history of racism in the US going back to slavery.  THAT is a justification with which I cannot live.

Now, the point that Leo makes is a valid one and one to which I want to respond.  I do not think MY personal chances of admission at any given program would be changed if AA was abandoned, and it is not for that reason that I want it disolved.  I simply think that, on a whole, if we are to REALLY ever become a society that is free from all forms of racial prejudice, AA needs to go away.  It is - for better or worse - one more system that classifies people based on something they CANNOT help: who they were born.

Also, AA is less an issue with admission to larger programs, such as Law or Med schools, than with small programs (PhD, for example).  If dept X at school Y only has 4 open PhD slots for a given year and they utilize AA, there is a greater chance that the overall effect on the applicants will be greater.  I have experienced this firsthand in my own graduate fellowship applications.  It is not that these students are not deserving, nor is it that I am blind to the greater societal concerns.

Will I EVER understand what it is to be a URM in the US?  No.  And that is my point.  Responses such as Leo's serve to foster actual debate without frivolity while those of TinaTina seem flippant in the context of this important issue.

I just feel - with all my sincerity and heart and mind - that if we are EVER to be free from prejudice we need to eliminate ALL vehicles for that prejudice.  AA is a policy of racial prejudice, and it is one of the few institutions that actively fosters a distinction by race.  For us to all be equal, we need to ALL be equal.  And it may be idealistic, but I think that things such as AA hurt this end more than help it.

Naive Naive Naive. Why must the first step in removing all vehicles for prejudice involve the extirpation of AA, a program that by and large does not affect a material portion of whites? It’s almost like white folks have never even “casually” examined the demographic breakdown of law schools, let alone top law schools. Which by the way are typically less than 8% Black. As I said in my earlier post, it takes almost no kilocalories of brain energy to cite the removal of AA as a means to deal with all discrimination. The challenge lies in creating an effective strategy to deal with discrimination, racism and other forms of prejudice that exceeds the performance of what we have done in the past. Easier said then done. First step to combating discrimination…level the playing field. Come on guys that’s a softball. Give me a couple ideas we can theoretically employ to level the playing field.

Don’t mind me I will just grab a chair and rest these old bones in the meanwhile so I don’t interfere with the great meeting of the minds
Quick hint…it starts on an individual level.


She didn't say it would be the first step.  And I think her point is not how AA affects whites (even though I disagree with you that it affects an immaterial number of whites), but just the principle of it.  For me, AA just seems wrong.  Like Tina, it just seems to me so inherently awrong to discriminate on the basis of race that there better be a pretty good justification for it, which there very well may be.

For example, UNAS, if I'm thinking of the right person, (if not, sorry) you did pretty well on the LSATs (mid 160s or so?), but had a sub 3.0 GPA because you partied a lot in college, and you were talking about your chances for T14 or T25 schools - this just strikes me as so wrong, that you have a legitimate chance at these schools, just because you get to check a box, whereas a white person with your stats would not even dream of these schools.  I don't have any jealousy toward you, nor anger, and I don't think I was rejected from any schools because of AA, but the principle that a slacker can accomplish the same thing by checking a box that someone else achieved by 4 years of hard work, just seems really wrong.  It just seems to me to undermine the whole academic process.

I'm still on the fence about AA, and of course there are so many benefits of it that people have already mentioned a million times, but I guess I still need more convincing that the benefits outweigh the negative aspects.  I agree with your main point though, that it's easy to say that eliminating AA is a way to deal with discrimination, but much harder to actually think of a way to deal with discrimination.  As far as trying to lessen discrimination, I suppose AA is a decent attempt.

You are correct I am the same UNAS. A MBA and 5 years of job experience should be able to offset a 4 year social excursion for anybody black white or otherwise, but I know Adcoms don't always look at it that way.

109
Affirmative Action / Re: This is why affirmative should remain in tact
« on: August 01, 2007, 10:06:31 AM »

I realize there was a systematic demoralization and abuse of certain people in early America.  I realize it was NOT fair.  But show me one person who descends from a slave family and I will support his admission over he who was from a slaveholding family.  Aside from that, I find it hard to swallow a pill that makes me - whose family was not here until 1934 (and whose family faced "Italians Need Not Apply" signs when they got here) - "responsible" for enslaving people in eighteenth and nineteenth century Georgia.

You can't be serious.  But if you are, can you tell me which of the following beliefs is driving your thought process?
1)most of the 30+ million black people in America are immigrants of recent vintage
or
2)some black people came on a party cruise in the 1800s and liked the place so much that they decided to stay.

What I was trying to illustrate with my point is that many people choose to justify AA by citing a long history of racism in the US going back to slavery.  THAT is a justification with which I cannot live.

Now, the point that Leo makes is a valid one and one to which I want to respond.  I do not think MY personal chances of admission at any given program would be changed if AA was abandoned, and it is not for that reason that I want it disolved.  I simply think that, on a whole, if we are to REALLY ever become a society that is free from all forms of racial prejudice, AA needs to go away.  It is - for better or worse - one more system that classifies people based on something they CANNOT help: who they were born.

Also, AA is less an issue with admission to larger programs, such as Law or Med schools, than with small programs (PhD, for example).  If dept X at school Y only has 4 open PhD slots for a given year and they utilize AA, there is a greater chance that the overall effect on the applicants will be greater.  I have experienced this firsthand in my own graduate fellowship applications.  It is not that these students are not deserving, nor is it that I am blind to the greater societal concerns.

Will I EVER understand what it is to be a URM in the US?  No.  And that is my point.  Responses such as Leo's serve to foster actual debate without frivolity while those of TinaTina seem flippant in the context of this important issue.

I just feel - with all my sincerity and heart and mind - that if we are EVER to be free from prejudice we need to eliminate ALL vehicles for that prejudice.  AA is a policy of racial prejudice, and it is one of the few institutions that actively fosters a distinction by race.  For us to all be equal, we need to ALL be equal.  And it may be idealistic, but I think that things such as AA hurt this end more than help it.

Naive Naive Naive. Why must the first step in removing all vehicles for prejudice involve the extirpation of AA, a program that by and large does not affect a material portion of whites? It’s almost like white folks have never even “casually” examined the demographic breakdown of law schools, let alone top law schools. Which by the way are typically less than 8% Black. As I said in my earlier post, it takes almost no kilocalories of brain energy to cite the removal of AA as a means to deal with all discrimination. The challenge lies in creating an effective strategy to deal with discrimination, racism and other forms of prejudice that exceeds the performance of what we have done in the past. Easier said then done. First step to combating discrimination…level the playing field. Come on guys that’s a softball. Give me a couple ideas we can theoretically employ to level the playing field.

Don’t mind me I will just grab a chair and rest these old bones in the meanwhile so I don’t interfere with the great meeting of the minds
Quick hint…it starts on an individual level.

110
Black Law Student Discussion Board / Re: As an up and coming 0L...
« on: July 27, 2007, 11:57:05 AM »
I hate to be rude guys, but no *&^%?

good brother Burning Sands you mean to tell me someone actually spit on you?

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15