<p>"kk, its basic soceity that instills this. You haven't seen commercials and ads that deters abortions?"</p>
<p>-I think "detests" would be a better word than "deters"..... But anyway, yes, I've seen this, but as hotpiece has said, a good portion of the country is pro-choice. To me, it's not "pro-choice" and "pro-life" it's "pro-choice" and "anti-choice".</p>
<p>internment camps and the anti-immigration legislation did not set Asians back?</p>
<p>"internment camps"</p>
<p>-This is nowhere near the enslavement of the Africans. But, I'm not going to get into a "my trauma is worse than yours" battle with you.</p>
<p>"anti-immigration legislation"</p>
<p>Are you saying the country doesn't have the right to limit who enters its borders?</p>
<p>
[quote]
That is because they as a race are more promicious and have sex before marriage
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My word.
That is the exact same argument I read about in a text for one of my classes the other day. The idea was that white people were superior to blacks because some doctors believed (19th century-ish) that black girls got their periods before white girls (on average) because of primitive sexual behaviors. Hopefully it's clear that so much of that idea is a load of bull. (The same doctors also thought that getting your period was a new "problem", and that a woman's natural state was pregnancy).</p>
<p>For the record, sex before marriage is certainly not something new; it's only just more talked of now.</p>
<p>We live in the 21st century. You'd think people would just stop and think before posting ridiculous crap like this.</p>
<p>anyway, it doesn't matter. Until we are able to see when life starts nobody can call anybody wrong so the US is by default, pro-choice.
TOPIC OVER lol.</p>
<p>Economic AA WOULD NOT yield the same results, your logic is flawed.</p>
<p>As an analogy, suppose you have a test that everybody scores out of 100%. While 10% of White people are fail the test, 60% of black people fail the test. </p>
<p>Now suppose you curve the test (economic AA) so that 10% less people are failing the test. we'll say, excluding other racial groups, BEST case scenario, 1% less white people fail and 6% less black people fail. Well now 9% of White people are failing and 54% of black people are failing. </p>
<p>-While less PEOPLE are failing, black people are still failing at a significantly higher rate than white people, the gap is virtually unchanged, even in a best case scenario. THAT is why socioeconomic AA doesn't help the problem that AA is trying to solve. It doesn't help close the gap.</p>
<p>As to the billboards argument above, I saw one the other day.</p>
<p>It read "heart beat begins at 8 days."
And it had a picture of a fetus.</p>
<p>The idea was to deter abortions, and make it look like an 8 day old fetus was that developed.</p>
<p>Upon further inspection of the billboard, under the picture it said "fetus at 8 weeks."</p>
<p>Propaganda/false ads anyone?</p>
<p>It's not like Asians could be discriminated as much as African-Americans were. Besides that whole thing where the white man didn't seem to think that we resembled the sons and daughters of Cain, we were just never really seen as really really low. Just kinda low. The white man took the easy route with us and simply contained the entire race by not allowing Asians to immigrate into the country for around a century. But I mean, hey. It worked, right?</p>
<p>enderkin cut out the stereotypes. check out how some asians like the japanese treat their immigrants</p>
<p>"Now suppose you curve the test (economic AA) so that 10% less people are failing the test. we'll say, excluding other racial groups, BEST case scenario, 1% less white people fail and 6% less black people fail. Well now 9% of White people are failing and 54% of black people are failing."</p>
<p>I don't see why only 6% more would pass, if the entire issue with African-Americans scoring lower is their generally lower socioeconomic status hindering their educational growth.</p>
<p>i don't need to know how the japanese treated their immigrants. I know enough of what they did to my people in Nanjing and elsewhere. no nation is perfect. but asian countries are not the issue at hand. the issue is the racial social patterns in America, which are a result of immigration and bigotry within America.</p>
<p>"Economic AA WOULD NOT yield the same results, your logic is flawed."</p>
<p>Sure it would. If a school wants more Black students, it is going to get them, whether it says that it uses 'racial' AA or 'economic' - plain and simple. Just because the school says it uses economic AA doesn't mean it has to start accepting MORE poor White; there will STILL be plenty of poor minorities to fill their classes.</p>
<p>"if the entire issue with African-Americans scoring lower is their generally lower socioeconomic status hindering their educational growth."</p>
<p>-This is pretty much the argument. Thus, it would only make sense that using socioeconomic AA would STILL yield a system wherein Black students got a benefit. The only "losers" in this system are the wealthy. Like I said, if a school REALLY wants to find good, poor Black students, all it has to do is look in Black neighborhoods of any large city.</p>
<p>I'm still stuck on the fact that collegehopeful said Africans are poor. Maybe he meant Black Americans(a statement which still would not be true) because Africans(immigrants) are the most successful minority in America, even more than Asians. It's just that we aren't considered a race minority. But as a group we are. </p>
<p>To collegehopeful,
Plus there are many reasons for why Black Americans have a the highest proportional poverty rate. And I hope that when you go to college you will get a sufficient enough education to find out why. Or maybe you can even read the newspaper, read some books because your statements are so elementary, ignorant and misinformed</p>
<p>I think collegehopeful meant Africans in Africa, at least that's how I read it.</p>
<p>then he is still definitely wrong. Most immigrants, from anywhere, are very driven academically because they have to try harder to assimilate and gain respect in America. That's why a lot of them seem so "smart".</p>
<p>@ enderkin because is 10% more of all people pass, then 10% more of all black students would pass and that would be 6% more. </p>
<p>@kk, read my analogy above + the problem that colleges have found is that their aren't enough poor african americans that are qualified to do the work of say, Harvard. As somebody quoted before, there are only about 1,700 african americans who scored to elite school caliber on the SATs a couple years ago, how many of those do you think were poor? (best case scenario, 30%, about 550).</p>
<p>@everyone, colleges pursuing more Asians wouldn't be justified because their is no lagging gap between asians and the majority. So their would be no purpose.</p>
<p>nvm, you're right trackbabi</p>
<p>plus I'd say Asians benefit a lot in the college process. They are so many of them in schools which is a great thing. If it weren't for the civil rights movement, anyway, there wouldn't be any minorities in schools no matter how qualified you are. If Asians feel so discriminated against then they should do what Black people did and protest against it. Go to your admissions office and tell them what you think don't keep quiet and then complain.</p>
<p>"the problem that colleges have found is that their aren't enough poor african americans that are qualified to do the work of say, Harvard."</p>
<p>Well, that depends on how and when we define "poor" now doesn't it? Socioeconomics doesn't just look at economic status, but the social factors that contribute to a person's wealth. So, things like living in a single-parent home or in a high-crime neighborhood could be seen as a socioeconomic disadvantage and could lead to a certain person getting an advantage from a (socio)economic AA program. Pretty much whatever else the college decides is a "socioeconomic disadvantage" could be used to give an advantage to whomever it wishes. </p>
<p>Since Black people overwhelmingly live in the same areas, it would not be difficult for school officials to tailor such a program to yield their desired outcome of more Black students. This is why anti-AA people often just call for an end to AA instead of calling for socioeconomic AA - they know how it can be used by schools. </p>
<p>"how many of those do you think were poor? (best case scenario, 30%, about 550)."</p>
<p>From an economic standpoint, maybe - I don't know. From a socioeconomic standpoint, however, I'd bet that a sizable portion of the students were in some way "disadvantaged".</p>
<p>^^^Thats what Michigan does today, but they're still having trouble getting the result they want.</p>
<p>But the disadvantage of african americans is simply proof and justification that AA helps a problem that exists and needs to be solved. </p>
<p>The reason schools practice AA is because in their ideal school, racial diversity is a part of it. When the unnatural gap is closed, then that will simply happen naturally.</p>