<p>Don't worry, I thought he meant South Dakota.</p>
<p>how about is it diminished if you are only half hispanic or half african american...or if you are hispanic if you od not speak spanish at the home or have a spanish sounding name?</p>
<p>I dont think it should be diminished if you are like half, but dont live with lets say the white parent (my dad is white, but I havent seen or heard form him in 15 years). Hispanics that dont speak spanish are a shame. I am like half hispanic and I speak the Castillan toungue perfectly as compared to other latinos who are full latinos and can barely speak it. Its sad really, people lose their culture and dont gain anything in return</p>
<p>.....</p>
<p>It's not really their fault if they don't speak Spanish. It's more their parent's.</p>
<p>DHA, you are quick to pass judgement.</p>
<p>I agree with zogoto.</p>
<p>I agree with JustWondering.</p>
<p>Yea, thats true. I didnt realize that. But still, its iffy if you are hispanic and dont speak spanish. Its is, anyways, where I life where it is latino, USA</p>
<p>Girl that got into Harvard from my school last year:
4.1 weighted GPA.
1390 on SATs
Lives in a 5,000 squarefoot house. Dad is CEO of computer software company. Drives a Mercedes to school.
Black.</p>
<p>... Need I say more?</p>
<p>damn Affirmative Action...!</p>
<p>to hell!...</p>
<p>I, a person who's part native american and as conservative as you can get, am totally against AA. Each minority needs to learn to get over it. Why should we admit more native americans who are less qualified than a white person in the exact same situation (including family income levels). People, this is so stupid. I mean, think about it. For example, those of southern european descent don't get an advantage in admissions because they're not thought to be as supperior as those from northern europe (aryans= germans, british, nordic). When you move to this country, expect to be treated equally.</p>
<p>We're not having this debate again.
(The truth is, as much as we'd like to pretend so, not everyone is treated equally in this country... that's why AA exists, even though it's not perfect...)
But it wouldn't be any more fair for a person in the same situation described above to get in because of legacy, and that's not going anywhere either.
And I'll say no more.</p>
<p>"(The truth is, as much as we'd like to pretend so, not everyone is treated equally in this country... that's why AA exists, even though it's not perfect...)"</p>
<p>A rich URM does not really fit this description. There's a really rich mexican kid at our school and no one really discriminates...</p>
<p>i acknowledge the status that aa pays little heed to ses...but i also agree with zogoto, rich minorities dont get picked on nearly as much</p>
<p>no offense zogoto, but not being a minority, how would you know how much discrimination he has faced?</p>
<p>and rickster, aa exists because of much bigger problems than bullying.</p>
<p>My zip code includes a neighborhood with 20 million dollar mansions...</p>
<p>And my house costs 80k...</p>
<p>Examples like you exist but youre not the norm.</p>
<p>candlize,</p>
<p>It's not like discrimination is a private thing. Discrimination is a mood. I would have been able to tell. Besides, he would have probably said something; we used to be best friends.</p>
<p>affirmative action does NOT exist for the purposes of justifying past discrimination...i took a conlaw course at a local college this past summer and studying bakke vs. regents of the u of c, aa was deemed constitional only if it purported the the extension of a diverse student body...therefore, anyone complaining about affirmative being exploited by rich minorities is sorely mistaken...it is for the purposes of preserving diversity in both ethnic and socioeconomic realms...it just so happens, some applicants cover both (as in poor black or latino kids)....the only problem, candlze, aa exists for, is to make sure the student bodies of america's institutions do not become homogenous...</p>
<p>To be fair, she prob was a legacy too</p>
<br>
<p>aa was deemed constitional only if it purported the the extension of a diverse student body</p>
<br>
<p>That's true as far as public universities are concerned. But no Supreme Court case limits the right of a private school like Harvard to use AA for other purposes. It's hypothetically possible that courts could exert control over private school admissions policies based on their receipt of public aid money, but so far, it hasn't happened. Harvard may use AA to remedy past discrimination, or in order to place URMs in positions of power on Wall Street, or for public relations purposes, or just about any other reason.</p>