Affirmative aAction

Affirmative action is a growing argument among our society. It is multifaceted and often defined vaguely. “Some can define it as the ability to strive for equality and diversity, while others might see it as a quota-based system for different minority groups. Is it a helping hand to equalize opportunity or is it reverse discrimination?” (Education Central).

When affirmative action was first presented to the Supreme Court, it was introduced in the case of The University of California v. Blakke (1978). “In this

Following, currently there are two cases concerning policies at the University of Michigan undergraduate and law schools that may eventually reach the Supreme Court since federal courts in Michigan have reached conflicting decisions. “The university’s officials say that it is no accident that racial and ethnic minorities account for more than 25 percent of its 36,000 students, a statistic that makes this the most diverse of any large institution of higher learning in the Midwest. The mix results from aggressive recruitment of minorities and, in some cases advantages to black and Hispanic applicants in the highly competitive admissions process. Disproportionate advantages, contend come critics, who note that for example, the admissions point system gives 20 points for being black or Hispanic and only 12 points for scoring a perfect 1600 on the S.A.T. The institution’s policy is now a target of two lawsuits by a total of three rejected white applicants, all tur!

Opponents of affirmative action argue the fact of how we can have a country that says that discrimination is wrong and yet have all these exceptions. Affirmative action is nothing more than reverse discrimination. Before the idea of affirmative action we were discriminating against the minority, while now, with affirmative action, we are discriminating against the majority.

Affirmative action programs remain vital safeguards for protecting equal opportunity and are our nation's best tools for removing the roadblocks of race and gender discrimination. “Critics of affirmative action are not proposing anything that, by distributing society’s benefits and opportunities more broadly, might eventually move the nation closer to the meritocracy they profess to desire. Instead of solutions, they are offering merely a scapegoat: this awful thing called affirmative action” (Cose). Why side with those who only criticize the idea and who cannot come up with a solution to better our society and our educational opportunities? “Even if the movement to ban affirmative action succeeds, there is every reason to believe we will again find ourselves pondering how to deal with the same difficult questions of racial estrangement and inequity that spawned affirmative action in the first place” (Cose).

Of course, it is not fair for an individual to be penalized because of his or her race, and on the same line, it is not fair for a particular race to be preferred because of past discrimination, but affirmative action does not assume this as some critics may think. “It has a forwarding look, not a backward looking justification. The policy promises a better educational environment and a less racially stratified society for everyone. It recognizes that prejudice has poisoned society for all of us, and that fostering opportunities for different races to study and work together is a part of an effective, even if slow working, ant

Some topics in this essay:
Supreme Court, Hispanic Asian, Affirmative Action**, Cose Opponents, Education Central, affirmative action, University California, African- American, University Michigan, Street Law, California Blakke, past discrimination, equitable society, diverse student, gender discrimination, supreme court, idea affirmative action, goal equitable, goal equitable society, idea affirmative, equitable society based, racial gender, past racial, geographical cultures social, reach goal equitable,