Monday, June 23, 2003

Well the thinner than a bulimic supermodel of a margin in the Supreme Court maintained Affirmative Action with some minor changes.

Even thought I'm in favor of Affirmative Action, I understand some of the trouble it presents legally, socially and otherwise. What really gets me though is the people who brought the lawsuit, and even more so those who supported it from the sidelines - those conservatives who dub themselves as civil rights groups claiming the unconstitutionality of race playing a factor in admissions for gaining entrance into an institution of higher learning.

There is so much focus in the inequality for admissions to a University - How about some of these groups waging a lawsuit between the inequality of funding between grade schools and high schools in poorer urban (and generally Black and/or Hispanic, although not as a rule) areas versus the same types of schools in suburban middle to upper class (and primarily white)? The supporters of the lawsuit might have a leg to stand on if they stood as strong for equality in education at the lower levels. Bring up the issue of education in our public schools and the only thing you'll hear from this very same crowd is something about the teachers union being at fault for our lousy educational system. Of course this doesn't explain the phenominal education I got while growing up in a upper middle predominantly white suburb in New York State. The teachers union there has the same pull as the ones in the city. These people can't be bothered with unequal funding for actual education, they're throwing hissy fits over admissions into grad school.

While perusing a newspaper this morning I had a flashback - I think it was caused by what I saw in the photo in the daily, supporters of the lawsuit in DC holding up poster claiming the Supreme Court is upholding racism (sorry, couldn't get the photos from the paper online so you'll have to trust me). Most of them looked pretty much identical to the same assholes I used to debate with in high school and college about this kinda stuff. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say they probably hold the same beliefs as well. They're typically blind, selfish, have no real interest in equality unless it affects them, and to top it all off very very loud about their not always all that well informed opinions. Generally these guys are anal retentive sticklers for the law when it comes to the notion of equality that may affect them negatively, but when they benefit from that inequality they pretty much keep their mouth shut. Hell, it's not just in cases regarding equality, but any ruling from the courts that they don't like, the law be damned.

Its these very same pricks that every single time they hear a minority group cry foul about anything, no matter what the complaint is they respond with the same prefab response. In my experience most of the time they can't be bothed to find out the facts about whatever that group has taken umbrage with. These same assholes are always bitching and moaning about how groups are always "using their minority status" to complain about everything, and then they log the complaint that minorities expect things to be "handed over to them with no work involved." I can almost hear them say "Whites are such an oppressed minority" - boo fucking hoo. Really, it ain't that bad being white male.

Affirmative Action, at least in this particular case anyway, only gets your foot thru the door. It doesn't give the degree away - you still need to have a father who is a sitting Vice President to pull that one off. You still have to work towards the degree to get the degree. The only reason why these groups bring these suits is their own narrowminded self interest. If there was actual concern on the parts of these people for equality then they would be working on multiple fronts. Instead they waste their time and money on this. And of course their not going to waste their time with the Affirmative Action in place in the military. If it were removed, minority enrollment might drop and that means the very same people who complain about equality will be forced to enlist, and we can't have that now, can we?

Here's the group that brought the lawsuit - The Center for Individual Rights. You can check out a list of all their ground breaking lawsuits too - like seeing to it that minorities dont have better access to low income housing. I'd agree that defending a 100 Watt primarily gay radio station against the FCC is a good thing, so maybe they aren't all bad. But most of them are, just check out their list of court cases. The list entails victories like defending the boy scout's right to exclude gays, and the very legitimate defense of the first amendment rights of protestors who opposed low income housing in their neighborhood, better known as NIMBY's, Not in My Backyard.

Understand all these court cases have legal validity, and absolutely no one should have their first amendment rights suppressed whether they are protesting the war or someone building a homeless shelter in their neighborhood. It's just that their client list is filled with people I'd rather not spend my free time with, almost without exception. At least the ACLU doesn't just defend people like the KKK. I don't always agree with what they spend their time on, i.e. campaign finance reform (money is not free speech), but their principles I respect. Something tells me that the guy that was arrested in NY for sporting an anti war t-shirt in a mall got any aid from the Center for Individual Rights (he's not fighting anything anymore, charges were dropped). They'd probably cite something like a private property statute that every conservative would under these circumstances. I just don't get a good vibe from a group whose greatest priority is seeing that minorities have access to higher education. I am guessing that the CIR can't be bothered with discrimination going in the other direction.

Which reminds me - a libertarian group would be all over an opportunity to challenge the FCC, so I can see some justification there, even if it does force the CIR to defend a gay focused radio station in Cleveland. What I'd like to know is what's the C for I R's stand on that court case involving two gay men from Texas arrested for having sex? For goodness sakes, if that isn't an easy slam dunk and right up the CIR's idealogical alley then I don't know what wpould be.

However if it isn't really so much prinicple as much as what I really think it is, then I'm gonna take a wild stab and say they aren't touching this case because everybody knows that right wingers hate fags. Lord knows all that money that they are receiving in the form of contributions, from bible thumpers and right wingers due to the publicity of this case, will dry up pretty fast if those contributors found out that they were defedning *faggots! But hey, it's just a theory, I could be wrong - but I seriously doubt it.

*Note - no offense to the gay readership BMA may have, just dramatizing the awful mindset many of these people have.

Here's an article about the ruling in Salon.com.

And the Chicago Trib too - Supreme Court narrowly upholds affirmative action - By Jan Crawford Greenburg
Washington Bureau, Published June 24, 2003

Here's an article I need to read more of - Reasons why "percent plans" won't work for college admissions nationwide. It's an article on the website the U of Michigan set up just for info regarding the admissions lawsuit. It's woth checking out if your interested in that kinda stuff.

And one more thing, this is a keeper! It's a link with a web video that calls a spade a spade. Actually it's mostly photos in sequence with music, so it's not too hi-res. Don't click this around anybody that is a fan of the current President though. This was found thanks to Rich of Suburban Limbo. No day is complete without a funny snub against the dumbass in the White House.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home