Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thomas: Racial preferences unconstitutional (Thomas dissents)
Atlanta Journal- Constitution ^ | 6.23.03

Posted on 06/23/2003 3:29:45 PM PDT by mhking

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 last
To: El Gato; Age of Reason; Gritty
Good points all.

Yeah, if you have been in this country a long time just research your genealogical family tree, research some of those long vanished east coast Indian tribes, and convert one of your great great grandmothers into a tribeswoman.

If you haven't been here long, then claim a Spanish "hidalgo" great great grandmother via Mexico.

In any case, just claim minority status. Make them prove you wrong. Guess we will all jump on the gravy train now!

81 posted on 06/24/2003 7:50:16 AM PDT by dark_lord (The Statue of Liberty now holds a baseball bat and she's yelling 'You want a piece of me?')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Vincente Fox is Irish on his father's side, hence the name. I think he is Spanish on his mother's side.

My point exactly, despite his Irish ancestory, he'd be considered hispanic. So would Alberto Fujimoro(sic) former President of Peru. There are lots of people of Japanese and Chinese ancestory in Mexico and other "Latin American countries. Are they considered Hispanic and thus eligible for special consideration at U. Mich law school? If not, why not?

I have no problem with the admissions committees looking at a persons background to evaluate her degree of achievment based on where she started, but that has nothing to do with race or ethnicity per se. A kid, say someone like Jessica Lynch or her relatives, from some hollow in Apalachia could be just as "disadvantaged" as a kid from the Ghetto or the Bario, so why should he/she be discriminated against? In fact taking such socio economic factors into account is exactly what many schools in Texas and elsewhere do, including the University of Michigan. I don't see that race should be a factor. The argument of "compelling state interest" in "diversity" doesn't wash, someday the state might (once again) decide that keeping people of some ethnic group OUT is a "compelling state interest". "Compelling state interest" should not be allowed to overide the the Constitutional manadate of "equal protection". The fouthteenth amendment does not say "except when there is a compelling state interest" to apply the laws unequally, nor does the second amendment say "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...except when there is a compelling state interest to do so".

82 posted on 06/24/2003 11:56:20 AM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
Thank you.
83 posted on 06/24/2003 9:53:47 PM PDT by First_Salute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion; mhking; rdb3
I am proud of Thomas.

I am, too. I would have been fine with it being struck down, but I am basically OK with the overall ruling (because I think we're still inching toward racial justice and it probably needs some sort of external knob still to keep us moving in the direction) but he was brave and of course correct in his comments. We are lucky to have him on the bench.

O'Connor (remember she was supposed to be the ultra conservative, right-winger that would destroy the country because Reagan appointed her?) said we should be done with affirmative action in 25 years. I hope she is right.

Quote from Sandra Day O'Connor: "The power I exert on the court depends on the power of my arguments, not on my gender."

84 posted on 06/25/2003 2:50:11 AM PDT by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason
I knew a dean (sadly, now passed on) who was on the admissions committee for Harvard College. He told me they were certain some students had done exactly that -- applied and gotten into Harvard by saying they were black when they weren't.

He said the college never did anything about it, because they were afraid it would lead to more such applications.
85 posted on 06/25/2003 10:25:49 AM PDT by sjfrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sjfrank
I knew a dean . . . on the admissions committee for Harvard College. He told me they were certain some students had . . . applied and gotten into Harvard by saying they were black when they weren't.

He said the college never did anything about it, because they were afraid it would lead to more such applications.

Gee, why would they be afraid of more such applications had they rejected the original applications?

I mean, if they could reject the original applicants, then that should discourage--not encourage--future applicants.

Like I said the way to defeat this racist nonsense is for all to regard themselves as Afro-American, and let the racists prove we aren't because we don't fit their STEREOTYPING.

86 posted on 06/25/2003 11:25:49 AM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: joanie-f
Please read #7. It will be like a cool, fresh breeze washing over you on a hot day of house painting.
87 posted on 06/29/2003 2:51:42 PM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson