Debatepedia partners with The People Speak Global Debates and the The National Debate Series: Boston (Nov. 10)
Debate Digest Nov 19th: Medical marijuana. Next Debate Digest article: Trying 9/11 terror suspects in NYC courts
Debate: Affirmative action
From Debatepedia
(List of links)
< Debate: Affirmative actionThe following pages link to Debate: Affirmative action:
View (previous 50) (next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500).- Debate:Affirmative Action in the United States (redirect page)
- Argument: Many groups that have been victims of institutional racism are actually harmed by affirmative action instead of compensated
- Debate:Affirmitive Action in the United States (redirect page)
- Argument: Affirmative action is the only way to level the playing field and change a perpetual legacy of disadvantage
- Position:Countries supporting affirmative action
- Argument: The laws should be "race-blind" to counter all forms of discrimination
- Argument: Affirmative action contradicts the notion of meritocracy
- Position:Clarence Thomas, US Supreme Court Justice, advocates "color-blind" policies
- Argument: Affirmative action fails to compensate for past wrongs by affecting the wrong groups
- Argument: Affirmative action fails to achieve justice as it sacrifices the rights of one group to attempt to bring justice to another
- Argument: Affirmative action achieves justice by compensating groups for past wrongs
- Argument: Affirmative Action should not attempt to neutralize unfair advantages via race-considerations, but by social and economic background
- Position:Ward Connerly of the American Civil Rights Institute opposes affirmative action
- Argument: Affirmative Action uses a definition of "diversity" that is too narrow
- Argument: Affirmative Action is justified to ask some citizens to take-up an unequal burden for the sake of a social good (equality)
- Argument: Affirmative Action makes race only a small "plus" for certain candidates among a much larger array of competitive considerations
- Argument: An ethnic group today should not be blamed and held accountable for the wrongs of their ancestors
- Argument: It is appropriate for organizations to concentrate on specific diversity factors such as race instead of having to give equal treatment to all forms of diversity
- Argument: Greater ethnic or gender representation at all class levels is socially important
- Argument: Affirmative Action causes some students to be "mismatched" with programs that they can't keep up with
- Argument: Going to a top university is the key to success, not performance at the university
- Argument: Affirmative Action actually enables the selection of highly qualified candidates that only appear less qualified due to their systemic exclusion
- Argument: Affirmative action may damage the ethos of those that are more qualified, yet lose out to affirmative action candidates
- Argument: Minority schools are not diverse, and yet provide an important learning environment
- Argument: Diverse schools actually receive poor ratings from the students themselves
- Argument: Affirmative Action is wrong to consider race instead of economic or educational disadvantages
- Argument: Countering the argument that Affirmative Action unfairly damages poor and unprivileged white males
- Argument: Affirmative Action helps create an important, diverse learning environment
- Position:California has been trending away from Affirmative Action since the early 1990s
- Position:The Urban League supports Affirmative Action
- Argument: Predominantly black schools don't offer as many AP classes, making it harder for blacks to get high grades
- Resolved: Universities should use affirmative action to encourage minority enrollment
- Debate Digest cue
- Debate:Affirmative Action (redirect page)
- User talk:Lenkahabetinova
