Deontologist: So basically, the point of that post was to prove that blacks innately underperform on tests. That doesn't sound right to me, but I'll admit that I don't know anything about it. So, let's assume it's true, for the sake of argument. Does this mean we shouldn't admit them? Or that we should still hold them to the SAME standards as whites, knowing (as we now do) that they INNATELY underperform? If you consult the original post in this thread, you will find what I believe is a quite cogent defense of AA: if it indeed reduces racial stratification in society, then it's proven its worth. Why attack its methods? Alleged class mobility is a mainstay of American culture; or American myth, perhaps, since it happens less and less today (for more, see the excellent NYT feature on Class in America, May 2005). If AA catalyzes such mobility, then this ought to be a good thing. The only real problem with it is that to make this omelet, eggs are indeed broken: usually, the hopes some white middle class dreamer who's used to feeling superior to inner city 'slackers.' But then, we didn't order an egg-white omelet, did we?
I believe that's true (value of diversity). I think it could be argued, though, that AA could be used to make sure a minority candidate gets into a school their numbers would qualify them for otherwise than one where they are 8-10 points below. IMO, that would not only create diversity within the legal community, but it would also become impossible for someone to argue that their seat had been "stolen" by someone who wasn't also "qualified."Also just thoughts.
Are insults part of the liberal's training? Why is it that I'm automatically a racist because I'm against AA? How long ago was slavery? Were any African Americans today under slavery? Most African Americans going into school now didn't even live through the biggest part of the civil rights movement that Dr. King led. Reperations were due to those who were wronged, but this isn't that world. How dare you say that I want to keep the minorities in the ghetto. I would LOVE to see them get out. That's why I've already expressed I would be a proponent of economic AA. However, not all minorities live in these conditions, and not all whites don't live in these conditions. Further, I know the minorities are capable of whatever they want to. I actually hope one of them is president in 2008. I would love to see Condi Rice as president.
Quote from: Saxby Clemens II on August 08, 2006, 05:18:52 PMI believe that's true (value of diversity). I think it could be argued, though, that AA could be used to make sure a minority candidate gets into a school their numbers would qualify them for otherwise than one where they are 8-10 points below. IMO, that would not only create diversity within the legal community, but it would also become impossible for someone to argue that their seat had been "stolen" by someone who wasn't also "qualified."Also just thoughts. I agree with you more or less. Its worthwhile to have a diverse pool of lawyers regardless of where they graduate from.The problem is that the T-14 schools are gatekeepers to the upper echelons of power in the US. There are plenty of smart kids throughout the tiers, but its the kids at the T-14s which are chosen to Clerk for the Supreme Court/Federal Appeals, get the US Attorneys jobs, positions in the Department of Defense, associate positions in the big time firms, professorships at law schools etc. So by increasing divesity at those schools you hopefully diversify these sectors aswell.We have to keep in mind you dont get any "AA" points on the bar exam, so if these so-called "undeserving" AA admits really cant tow the line they would get weeded out anyway.
I think the LSAT and the importance placed on it is totally ridiculous, Galt, but I think it's pretty evident that it is the single most important factor in deciding whether or not to admit a candidate. Wrong, IMO, but that's just the way it is. I just think with the admissions process being, again IMO, stupid, the issue of AA is complicated.
How many times are people on this board going to say things about pandering to people who feel that their seats have been stolen? I don't think anyone on this thread has made that claim!!! We've made the claim that it isn't "fair" that seats are given to those with lesser credentials.