<p>^</p>
<p>Great. An appeal to emotion – the last resort argument for affirmative action proponents.</p>
<p>But, none of these arguments, even the few more carefully and sensibly articulated, answer the following question:</p>
<p>Is it fair for me to be denied admission to a law school because of policies that select for an ethnicity different from my own?</p>
<p>The answer to this question is sometimes yes and sometimes no. So how do we universally allow for opportunity? Maybe that’s a better question? </p>
<p>Jonri puts it well when he/she suggests that grand examples, as they’re internalized by younger students, often lead to the creation of opportunities. But, his examples also show situations of real merit - Supreme Court Justices are appointed because of their abilities, experiences, and, on the whole, credentials. Now, I don’t know if Sotomayor would’ve been able to attend the schools she attended without AA (same for Thomas) but I think we’d both argue that they’re brilliant people and beyond capable to handle the tasks put before them. If, in these cases AA ensured their opportunity to attend their respective schools, if it protected against the intentional exclusion that some here have described, I applaud it. But, that’s not the scenario I am talking about.</p>
<p>Patriot, you’ve already been accepted somewhere for next year? I know that there’s only one T 10 school that’s begun to release decisions - UVA. Is that where you’re going?</p>
<p>^</p>
<p>Sotomayor and Thomas openly admit that they only got into their schools because of affirmative action.</p>
<p>@transfer, his argument also has some good logical points
-diversity is important to a functioning country
-" " " to criminal justice
-" " " integration of america
-" " " to building a fair future for all Americans. There may come a day when white Americans are no longer the majority, and they should still receive representation in law. Would our society really be good if we only had asian corporate lawyers in big cities and suburbs?</p>
<p>Jan, Michigan, Virginia, Georgetown, and Duke have released some acceptances as I know people who have been admitted to them. I, personally, am not applying till next cycle, but it would be suprising with my stats (169, LSAC 3.8+) to not get at least one or two top10. And i’ll likely retake as the 169 is several points below my PT average and I had my heart set on Columbia.</p>
<p>And again, I reiterate, you aren’t being denied admission for your stats, these schools have to fulfill a certain percentage of their school with minorities, so, even if AA went away and there there were enough minorities to fill their classses with the same median statistics, it wouldn’t help you. This easily understood point seems to fly right over the head of you people. Look at what happens to news organizations, corporations, government jobs, etc when they don’t have diversity in the workforce, they get slammed and often there is government intervention. We are in a place that requires diversity in the workforce even if you have to dip a little lower in the talent level (note, i’m not saying minorities are less talented, just that there are often a smaller number of minorities looking for these positions). These schools could lose their accreditation, firms coming to OCI, etc which would make them irrelevant for your purposes anyways. If NYU only took 10% minorities it would FREEFALL in the rankings. This is the reality, now stop *****ing, come to understand simple economcs, and go get a better gpa or study harder for your LSAT.</p>
<p>Wait, you’re bragging about a 169? Okay, all of this makes sense. I’m out.</p>
<p>Bragging? I told you to suck it up, you asked about my statistics, I honestly answered and said I was going to retake. lulz</p>
<p>Your ability to shift the scope of an argument is pretty poor and the fact that you’ve tried to do it in every single post of yours is pretty telling. You don’t win arguments with straw man or ad hominem for that matter, I suggest you try again.</p>