Law School 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 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15
81
Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students / Re: Frederick Douglass
« on: September 02, 2007, 02:32:07 PM »
You are quoting a man who was a former slave. You do realize that. If you are not conscientious enough to understand his frustration when writing this, then I would suggest you throw yourself a bone and try practicing a lil empathy. If you were tormented and harassed beyond the very fiber that holds you together as sentient being you would want your opressor to leave you the hell alone as well.

I have been in situations where either my "betters" or "tormentors" spent significant time imposing their ideas upon my particular circumstances. I can empathize with with what Douglass is saying, but I think the two of us disagree not on the likely emotional state of Douglass when he said this statement, but on the substantiative content of the statement itself.

According to the literal text of this statement, Douglass is asking for the chance for blacks to prove their worth, RATHER THAN asking for help.

Quote
If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are wormeaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall! I am not for tying or fastening them on the tree in any way, except by nature's plan, and if they will not stay there, let them fall. And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also.

Douglas explicitly advocates against "tying or fastening them on the tree in any way," a statement from which I assume he advocates against the ministrations of well-meaning people towards the black population of his time. It is because of the history of this particular era that I think this advocation against assistance is so compelling.

By the way PN you are certainly a formidable opponent with regards to this debate, but I honestly think further dialogue would be better left exercised vocally. I would welcome my future law school to have such a debate. That is of course after we debate more pressing moral issues that affect the very livelihood of mankind (i.e. suspending habeus corpus, spying on law abiding citizens, incompetence & indolence of rebuilding new orleans, occupying a foreign territory, voter intimidation and ballot fraud)  . Pardon my sarcasm, but I think debate on AA should be the last item eaten when we set down at the round table for the great meal of morality and injustice.

Well, I'm not sure what any of the things you mention have to do with what Frederick Douglass said.

FWIW, in inflation-adjusted dollars, more money has been poured into New Orleans than was poured into all of Europe via the Marshall plan.

I will only respond to the katrina comment. You are absolutely positively correct. We have spent a total of 127 billion dollars on katrina which is about 40 billion more than we spent on the marshall plan. the gross gdp of new orleans is only 141 billion. It seems only about 25 billion or so went to sources for which we can modestly account (army core engineers, housing relief) the rest went to subsidiaries of haliburton and other large firms which by the way have a "labor" work force made up entirely of illegals. I don't know how far you lean to the right, but you and i know there has been a gross mismanagement of katrina relief. Whatsmore, is it has been done under neocon leadership.

82
This is frustrating I am about to go to Love or Ibiza

Holla

83
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.


So AA is not about cultural diversity, but simply off-setting the fact someone looks different?

In my mind cultural diversity is secondary, to the outright discrimination a person has experienced merely because of the color of their skin. Cultural diversity should not be scoffed at; but if I have people insulting my intelligence, smothering me with invectives in front of and behing my back, think of me as a criminal and are threatened by my mere existence simply because they think i am black warrants some remedy. wouldn't you agree? Maybe not to the same extent as an African American who has been the beneficiary of a piss poor public education on top of the other issue mentioned, but to an extent nonetheless

84
Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students / Re: Frederick Douglass
« on: August 31, 2007, 03:20:54 PM »
Everybody has asked the question. . ."What shall we do with the Negro?" I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are wormeaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall! I am not for tying or fastening them on the tree in any way, except by nature's plan, and if they will not stay there, let them fall. And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him alone!

- Frederick Douglass

You are quoting a man who was a former slave. You do realize that. If you are not conscientious enough to understand his frustration when writing this, then I would suggest you throw yourself a bone and try practicing a lil empathy. If you were tormented and harassed beyond the very fiber that holds you together as sentient being you would want your opressor to leave you the hell alone as well.

By the way PN you are certainly a formidable opponent with regards to this debate, but I honestly think further dialogue would be better left exercised vocally. I would welcome my future law school to have such a debate. That is of course after we debate more pressing moral issues that affect the very livelihood of mankind (i.e. suspending habeus corpus, spying on law abiding citizens, incompetence & indolence of rebuilding new orleans, occupying a foreign territory, voter intimidation and ballot fraud)  . Pardon my sarcasm, but I think debate on AA should be the last item eaten when we set down at the round table for the great meal of morality and injustice.

85
racial and gender equality are utopian.


In other words unattainable?

yep and so is the American Dream. Just because it's utopian doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted.


Except, of course, that most Americans appear to be living the American Deam (high standard of living, personal freedom, etc.).  Which is presumably why millions of immigrants from around the planet strive to come here. 

If you believe the other thing, however, is unattainable, it's stupid to waste time pursuing it.

What might be worth pursuing (and is far more attainable), however, is a general equality of opportunity.  Maybe we should therefore strive for that.

Appear being the keyword. It's one thing to own a home; however, many Americans (nearly half of homeowners) are saddled down with mortgages, foreclosures rates are rising, and property rights are becoming weaker and weaker.  The American dream is utopian.

I wonder if you are a Christian. If so, explain sin to me. If sin is inevitable then why resist?




Not bad

86
The largest issue I have with this debate is the fact that those individuals opposing affirmative action are trumping up the consequences/adverse effects of it. Though discrimination is very difficult to prove, because of the systemic controls in place to prevent such detection, it still can be unveiled (pardon my sentence structure). Perhaps republicans taking a stand against corporate lobbyist for less transparency in employer/employee relations would make evidence of discrimination available for public consumptioin. Nonetheless, at the end of the day the powers that be can always vet the compensation of a Black man, White man, White woman with similar academic and job related experience. These negligible adverse consequences you all continue mention are just that, negligible. Furthermore, instances where privileged minorities are, as you all seem to think, taking advantage of the system are few and far between.
Secondly, quotas particularly regarding employment were put in place because qualified minority candidates were often overlooked for their less qualified White counterparts. Instances of discrimination like this ran rampant, which if I am not mistaken was the root cause for AA coming in to being.

87
You realize how perverse Sowell's argument is when it's white people attacking black people who dare to venture it what used to be fairly exclusively white territory.  Whatever fake statistics he's going to quote will reflect the legal system's violence towards black men in reporting and prosecution.  Sure, AA will cause increased racial conflict, but it's likely going to be conflict from the group that is losing some power manifested towards the group that is trying to gain some equality.  That's why struggles for equality are hard and a desire to avoid all conflict is a desire to never disrupt the status quo.

The problem with AA is precisely that it turns processes (school admissions, government hirings, government contracts) that had previously been not-necessarily influenced by political considerations into processes that definitely are influenced by political considerations. Increasing how much political considerations influence these processes provides people applying to these processes a stronger incentive to pursue political influence, which may distract from applicants pursuing the knowledge or skills that would normally allow them to better compete for positions in the absence of these considerations. And greater knowledge and skills of applicants would improve how much the applicants could learn from, or contribute to, the institution, while political influence does no such thing.

Furthermore, if you define the rule of law as applying an equal set of standards to all people under its rule, then since AA requires the application of different standards to different groups of people, AA is in conflict with the principle of the rule of law.

Since part of the appeal of the rule of law is that its enforcement does not favor particular groups (that is, justice is blind), and this appeal is part of the reason why people follow the rule of law without the need for stronger measures of enforcement, then if AA policies that conflict with the rule of law are implemented, the subsequent reduction in the appeal of the principle may require stronger enforcement to yield the same level of civil peace. Stronger enforcement requires a judiciary that more often encroaches on personal matters, which, in turn, reduces the amount of freedom of the people in the society of its jurisdiction.

On a side note, I don't think crime statistics are necessarily inaccurate. More Black people being arrested and prosecuted isn't necessarily because the police or prosecutors are selectively targeting Blacks; it may be because Black people are committing more crimes. Heather McDonald made this argument in one of her books (which I admit I haven't read). Both factors may play a role in the disproportionate presence of Blacks in reported crime statistics, so I think to come up with anything more than a tentative opinion on how much more one factor plays in the ex post results than the other, one must examine both possibilities, which I doubt you have done (of course, I could be wrong with this doubt).

(FYI, I myself haven't come up with anything more than a tentative opinion on this matter, so please sheath your rhetorical sword.)

I have come to the conclusion that PsuedoNym uses the rope-a-dope method of arguing. Guess what, he won. Simply put, my young Asian brother or sister is turning this debate into a battle of endurance. I am recusing myself with aplomb. My head is bloody but unbowed.

88
I would submit to you that those individuals with 170s are at a school where an underlying culture of cooperation and permisivness is present. Any person White, Black or otherwise thats has a GPA exceeding a 3.6 would probably suceed at any law school despite an LSAT under the 25% mean.

You know distinguishing meaningful utterances from nonsense is not a trivial task.  I know that you were trying to contradict me, but you needn't bother.  I'm talking specifically about the 6 or 7 people I know who scored in the 170s on their LSAT and went on to excel at law school.  They didn't all attend the same law school.  I have to disagree with your point about GPA.  Some schools have an underlying culture of cooperation and permissiveness, thus making it easier to get a high GPA.

I agree with you. Typically the type of student that earns such a score on the lsat attends a law school that has attrition rate of damn near next to nothing.

89
I would submit to you that those individuals with 170s are at a school where an underlying culture of cooperation and permisivness is present. Any person White, Black or otherwise thats has a GPA exceeding a 3.6 would probably suceed at any law school despite an LSAT under the 25% mean.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15