Californians: NO on Prop 54

[TaiLo]

Seems like I'm always agreeing with bengee, but I do. His stories that he told happen everywhere. We really can't legislate behavior. Anything that has been attempted to make racism disappear (aside from the amendment) seems to have been a failure (i.e., Affirmative Action), although they have helped SOME (not all). It may sound good, just as those that preceded it, but ultimately, it may cause more harm than good.

 

[Timmotheus]

Originally posted by TaiLo
Seems like I'm always agreeing with bengee, but I do. His stories that he told happen everywhere. We really can't legislate behavior. Anything that has been attempted to make racism disappear (aside from the amendment) seems to have been a failure (i.e., Affirmative Action), although they have helped SOME (not all). It may sound good, just as those that preceded it, but ultimately, it may cause more harm than good.

Affirmative Action does not make racism disappear in any way shape or form. It increases the distinction between different races, and gives an unfair advantage to minorities. I find that fascinating, especialy because latinos are now the majority in the state of California, and would still benefit from Affirmative Action. It should be switched, and be beneficent to the other races, who are not as abundant as the latinos. Affirmative Action is, essentially, a euphemism for racism, and government condoned racism at that.

 

[DGB454]

Isn't AA not just for the minority but also for the people who are traditionally underprivilaged? I know usually that does mean the minority but in certain states like Cali. where Latinos are the majority aren't they still the most underpaid ethnic group there?

 

[Timmotheus]

Originally posted by DGB454
Isn't AA not just for the minority but also for the people who are traditionally underprivilaged? I know usually that does mean the minority but in certain states like Cali. where Latinos are the majority aren't they still the most underpaid ethnic group there?

They aren't underpaid. They might have the lowest average income, but they are rarely underpaid.

 

[DGB454]

Good point. I will rephrase it to say the lowest average income.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by DGB454
Isn't AA not just for the minority but also for the people who are traditionally underprivilaged? I know usually that does mean the minority but in certain states like Cali. where Latinos are the majority aren't they still the most underpaid ethnic group there?

This is actually a very interesting comment - it'd be interesting to find out the intentions of the appeal of Affirmative Action, originally and presently. I first heard about it for contracts - construction, etc. - where you have to give x% to a racial group with x% of people in the community. In that instance, it has nothing to do with privilege - just figures (unless they specifically said privilege had a role). But there certainly are instances - school admissions, for example - where privilege could be a factor.

Like I said - it would be interesting to see how they could (and how they do) apply affirmative action.

 

[TaiLo]

Okay, I didn't say that AA made racism disappear. Just was trying to say that the government thought it did. Anyway, from what I last was told, AA was dead anyway, but I don't know if it's been taken out everywhere--at least it looks like it's dying (the AA office at my school is collecting a lot of dust from what I can see). Wasn't there a court decision that did that?

 

[Mopar Muscle]

racism, along with discrimination, will always be a part of todays society. i'm not saying that it is right, but we all discriminate. every day.

 

[TaiLo]

I agree. People will always be prejudice of someone, even if they don't think so. Probably only Jesus would be imprejudice (is that a word?). We won't be getting into that now. Anyway, I still think that this will just be blinding us from the truth that discrimination still occurs. It won't blind people from colors as people think.

 

[Danoff]

Bottom line? Government should not be racist. I see no problem with assisting in removing their ability to do so.

Rasim and descrimination will continue, but it should be curtailed as much as possible in the government. Free people can do what they like but government officials have certain obligations.

Oh yea, so YES on prop 54

 

[Danoff]

Bustamante is running ads in California that say that health care officials will not be able to collect the information they need to fight heart disease and diabetis because of this proposition.

This is so far off the mark!

Government officials will be banned from collecting racial data (which is used in those medical studies). It doesn't say anything about preventing private companies from doing those studies. That's where all the medacine comes from anyway.

He's just afraid that it will end racism in government. And we all know that affirmative action (racism) is a good thing.

 

[Danoff]

Here is the attorny general's summary of the proposition:


Amends Constitution to prohibit state and local governments from using race, ethnicity, color, or national origin to classify current or prospective students, contractors or employees in public educationk,contracting, or employment operations. Does not prohibit classification by sex.

Prohibition also covers persons subject to other operations of government unless Legislature finds compelling state interest, authorizes by two-thirds of each house, and Governor approves.

"Classifying" defined as separating, sorting, or organizing persons of personal data. Exemptions include: law enforcement descriptions, prisoner and undercover assignments; actions taken to maintain federal funding.