 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Affirmative Action?
|
|
|
|||||||
|
BS: Affirmative Action? |
Share Thread
|
||||||
|
Subject: BS: Affirmative Action? From: beardedbruce Date: 21 Jun 06 - 11:11 AM "While the courts have generally ruled against favoritism in education based on race, the Kamehameha case is different. The school receives no federal money. " http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/06/20/hawaiian.school.ap/index.html IMO, the school has every right to a race-restricted admissions (or religious affiliation, or other bias) policy, as would an all-white school in the same circumstances- ie, without Federal funding. The article does not, however, discuss any special tax preference that the school might get. Comments, please? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: freda underhill Date: 21 Jun 06 - 11:30 AM In Australia most state laws allow for organisations to apply for an exemption or exception under their Anti-discrimination laws,in order to positively discriminate in favour of a particular minority group. Exemptions from the Anti-Discrimination Act Independent schools in Australia enjoy a tax exempt status. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: GUEST Date: 21 Jun 06 - 01:14 PM First bend the law. Then break the law. Then ignore the law. Then wonder what happened to the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: Bunnahabhain Date: 21 Jun 06 - 04:24 PM You got the last stage wrong there. First bend the law. Then break the law. Then ignore the law. Then wonder which goverment department you'll be in charge of after the reshuffle... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 21 Jun 06 - 05:35 PM The difference between an all-white school and an all-minority school is usually that the all-white school is discriminating for the wrong reasons. The all-minority school is usually in place to try to maintain the culture and language that might easily otherwise be gobbled up by the mainstream society (whatever its race). So this is an instance of apples and oranges. The Boy Scouts wants to be an all-straight organization and it can be because it is private. But it can't participate in a lot of public school venues and other public arenas now because of its over policy of discrimination. I think the difference is that to set up an organization to exclude others who are considered "inferior" is different than trying to avoid cultural genocide. Why does the white student want to get into Kamehameha? Probably so his daddy can bring a big lucrative lawsuit. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: artbrooks Date: 21 Jun 06 - 06:27 PM This school, and its admission policies, were established well before Hawaii became part of the US (and let's not get into that bucket of worms). IMHO, it has as much right to retain that policy as Louisiana has to keep those parts of the Napoleonic Code that it chooses to and as New Mexico has to remain officially bilingual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: Susu's Hubby Date: 21 Jun 06 - 06:32 PM "Why does the white student want to get into Kamehameha? Probably so his daddy can bring a big lucrative lawsuit." Or maybe he saw something in the school curriculum that was not included in, perhaps, the public school. Maybe he wants the same opportunities opened up to him that may be only allowed in the "minority" school. Is that too much to ask? But since we all know that there are no "all white schools" then he may just have to settle for what the public school has to offer. Serves the little white boy right, doesn't it, SRS? "The difference between an all-white school and an all-minority school is usually that the all-white school is discriminating for the wrong reasons." I like that you put "usually" in there. It gets you off the hook of being stereotypical. But then, there's this gem..... "Probably so his daddy can bring a big lucrative lawsuit." So are you saying that discrimination is ok? What are the right reasons to discriminate? I happen to agree that if no federal monies are given to an organization then they can do whatever and include whomever they want. But to take such a negative tone on the issue (one way or the other) is "probably" why we have such a debate going on in this country today. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: artbrooks Date: 21 Jun 06 - 06:53 PM Discrimination is more often ok (and legal) than otherwise. To select the best qualified person for a job, based upon objective criteria, is discrimination. So is selecting Oscar/Grammy/Golden Globe winners. So is deciding upon a stout rather than a light lager, or a Republican/Democratic/Libertarian/Independent political candidate. Some forms of discrimination are illegal (literally); these are discrimination based upon gender, race, national origin, age (old only...young people are fair game), religion, and disability. In some jurisdictions, sexual orientation is included. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: dianavan Date: 22 Jun 06 - 02:33 AM First the article states that this is about the school limiting enrollment to Native Hawaiians and then it says, "Of 5,400 students enrolled at the school's three K-12 campuses, only two do not have Hawaiian ancestry." Which is it? Seems to me that if there are two without Hawaiian ancestry, it has not limited enrollment to Hawaiians only. Regardless, if its a private school that is not receiving govt. funding, why should the government have anything to say about it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Affirmative Action? From: Barry Finn Date: 22 Jun 06 - 03:31 AM This has nothing to do with affirmative action, which is suppose to allow a minority which has been discriminated against a chance to have the same chance that has in the past been offered to the majority. The Native Hawaiians have had a hard struggle just trying to did their traditions out of it's early grave. When I lived there back in the late 70's they were just beginning to go back to their native tounge, they were digging up a few of the old "slack key" guitar players & taking their dancing to a more respectful place. They had just launched a traditional vessel & sailed it using the ancient navagional methods. The island (during the late 70's) of Ni'ihau (the Forbidden Island) was off limits to all who weren't at least 50% Hawaiian & they live their by the old ways & customs. The non Hawaiian Governor even needed permission they land their. So if the Kamehameha School wants to educate it's own native people so that they can keep their traditions, cutlure, history & customs alive so be it. God knows that those that weren't of Hawaiian ancestory & blood didn't do much to save it for them. Hawaiians are quite a family oriented society & if those two non Hawaiian students are adopted or were raised (I don't know if this is the case) in a Hawaiian family they would be percieved by most as native Hawaiians. I'm still 100% in favor of affirmative action. Racism & discrimination are still very much apart of our present day society. Nobody raised an eyebrow as the Hawaiians were losing their identity, no one should be raising an eyebrow now that they're trying to save it, after all the islands did belong to them & they're still not happy about it, any wonder why. Barry |
