The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 4 votes and with 16 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
1st round: Definitions
2nd round: Opening Argumenta
3rd round: Rebuttals
4th round: Rebuttals; no new arguments
I would like to thank Cowscreen for accepting this debate. My definitions follow.
affirmative action - an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women
minority - a part of a population differing from others in some characteristics
reparations - the making of amends for a wrong one has done.
A# = Argument #
I would again like thank Cowscreen for accepting this debate. I hope it will be productive and educational and not descend into a flame war like some other debates regarding race on this site have done. My arguments follow.
A1: The Unfairness of Affirmative Action
The idea of affirmative action violates what we as a nation are unified as. Affirmative action is an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women. The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence states that
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
These may be the most important words that shows what our country stands for. This statement still holds true today (Note: men in this context means everybody). To implement such a policy like affirmative action would be violating what America stands for as a whole.
The stem of affirmative action grows from the belief that injustices done to minority groups should be reversed and unleashed on the perpetrators of such actions. This creates a system where if you have a certain skin color or characteristic that fits under the list of injustices, and you are applying for, say, a marketing job, you are instantly granted priority over other people, even if those other people are better at said marketing.
We would be putting minority groups ahead of majorities for the so-called sake of equality and repairing injustices in our past. This is not created equal. Some may even interpret affirmative action as putting minority groups behind of majorities. This is simply unfair, for both the majority and minority.
A2: The Effects of Affirmative Action
Implementing affirmative action would have a negative effect on majority groups. It would mean less positions available to them due to quotas and make them feel like they are not accepted into society because of a non changeable fact about them, like their skin color.
It might also fuel more discrimination. If majorities are feeling that because of quotas people are taking their jobs and getting more options, they might start hating people of different skin colors, creating more and more racism. This makes affirmative action contradictory and we would work backwards under that system.
Implementing affirmative action would also make minorities feel that they are so weak that they can not get jobs by themselves without quotas. Do we want minorities to feel like they are nothing and can not do anything? Certainly not.
BoP on Pro. Extend.
Extend. Vote for Con.
In the setup, you said that there are 4 rounds. There are 5
Hey! I might accept this later on. I just want to formulate an opening argument first.
So, you seem to have completely missed my point, even though I did ask you to reread what I wrote. My position was on the definition of affirmative action, not on affirmative action itself. If you think I've made a position on affirmative action, by all means, directly quote me. Until then, my advice stays the same. Reread what I've written and avoid starting topics that you cannot or do not wish to defend
If you want to debate, don’t spam up the comments.
If you have defended your position so effectively as you claim, then this debate should be no problem for you. But you don't seem to want to accept it, so... that advice you gave... I'm sure you will figure it out (eventually).
I don't follow, given that I have already successfully defended my position. Perhaps you should reread what I've written, so you can respond in a manner that is remotely sensible.
Sounds like good advice you might consider yourself.
Or perhaps you could avoid starting topics that you either cannot or do not wish to defend
You know, I could debate you here in the comments...
Or you could debate nmvarco in the actual debate.
What do you mean "if"? It's part of the definition for affirmative action which provides context to why the minority is receiving special treatment. It would be like defining abortion as the removal of a parasite from the human womb. It's technically true, but wildly misleading without further clarifying that the "parasite" in question is a human baby.
Do you agree or disagree that with my addition, the definition of affirmative action is more accurate than with nmvarco's definition alone?
If that is the case, why don't you take Pro for this debate?
... in response to unfair discrimination
The special treatment of a minority
What is affirmation action?