https://www.echeat.com/ The story has universality because it happens or it can happen in other courtrooms in other countries especially in nations where autocratic or tyrannical rule prevails. When people don’t have a voice or their freedom of expression is suppressed in dictatorial-type of government where rulers wield their authority without impunity, citizens of that nation certainly will not get justice as portrayed in the story. There will always be biases committed by judges in a corrupt government because as they know it, they can always evade being prosecuted themselves for committing biases in handing out verdicts. More so, even in this modern times in more advanced and democratic countries, there are still judges who seem to disregard the need to properly practice their sworn professions and carefully weigh things first before handing out their final decisions. I have not known a Filipino judge in real life who can be a counterpart of the judge in the story but I’ve seen local films depicting the same type in movies of Fernando Poe Jr. and some other Filipino action stars. It is possible that that judge can have a counterpart not only here in our country but also in other parts of the globe knowing how dirty politics and judicial systems are until now. As a saying goes, “Judgement prevents us from seeing the good that lies beyond appearances,” (Dyer Quotes, American Psychologist Quotes) humans are susceptible to commit mistakes due to our tendency to base our assessment especially when we take into account the appearance of a person. Furthermore, we always judge the book by its cover. Our judges must be well-prepared physically, emotionally, intellectually, psychologically and even spiritually, and must have very long and varied experiences in handling different cases to live up to his position. He must not be swift to pass judgement because “A good judge conceives quickly, but judges slowly.” (Proverb Quotes: Judgement Quotes) They are our decision-makers, thus, he must be wise and prudent because a simple mistake can mean life or death, or a lifetime of sorrow and agony for someone innocent. There are thousands of crimes committed in the Philippines in 2018 and most of these came from the three major cities of the country (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_Philippines), ranging from simple offense conducts to more serious felonies like rape, murder etc. Just imagine being accused of a crime you know you did not 2020-10-10T03:59:38.053-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/ANTI-BIAS-JUDGE-45496.aspx This paper discusses Affirmative Action and why it should not have been curtailed. (5 pages; 2 sources; MLA citation style) I Introduction Rarely has a public policy caused the outcry associated with Affirmative Action. By wrong labeling Affirmative Action a “quota system,” opponents have succeeded in overturning or curtailing the program in many areas. This paper looks at the reasons why Affirmative Action was designed, what it is meant to do, and why it’s important to restore it. II What Is Affirmative Action? Affirmative Action is a program designed to provide equal access to various opportunities (education, employment) that would otherwise not be available to women, people of color, and other minorities. It was meant only to provide such access; it was never a quota system: nowhere has it ever been suggested that companies should hire lesser-qualified applicants because they’re women or minorities. What Affirmative Action does is to allow these disadvantaged people an equal opportunity to apply for the positions they might not otherwise have. And it also suggests that when all other factors are completely equal, it is advantageous to employ a woman, black, or minority rather than yet another white man. (White men, the last I heard, own and/or operate 98% of all businesses in the United States. They don’t really have much to worry about.) There are many myths about Affirmative Action, and they were clearly discussed in a very insightful article published in 1996 in the “Journal of Social Issues.” But before going to that source, I would like to make one observation about Affirmative Action, and other social programs. There is a persistent undercurrent of ill-will in the United States to blacks, immigrants, and others. In the case of blacks, for example, one sometimes hears something like “They got their freedom in 1863; how long does it take before we don’t have to give them special treatment? Isn’t 150 years enough?” This observation (aside from being boorish and racist) ignores basic facts of American history: the Emancipation Proclamation did in fact free the slaves, but it was hardly embraced whole-heartedly by the South, or indeed by the nation as a whole. Though technically free from slavery, blacks still faced discrimination, and in the years following the Civil War, they were lynched in increasing numbers. Jim Crow laws codified the despicable “separate but equal” doctrine of the 2011-10-26T13:53:45.86-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Affirmative-Action-–-Why-It-Should-Be-Reinstated-34128.aspx Destroyed beyond repair, your body, mind and soul. You cannot see, walk, talk, eat, and mentally operate. The torturous suffering because of the disease your body contains, and the immense pain coming out with each moans and groans. What is the use of ones body that is deteriorating right before your 2007-05-11T05:27:05-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Physician-Assistant-Rights--33202.aspx Affirmative Action in College Admissions Affirmative action is the practice, usually by institutions, of giving preference to racial minorities or women when hiring employees, giving awards, or deciding whom to admit. Affirmative action arose out of a desire to bring minority groups into institutions and professions that had traditionally been dominated by white males. It first appeared after the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s. One of the largest groups that uses affirmative action today are universities during the admissions process. Racial quotas for public colleges were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the case of Bakke v. California. Since then, colleges that wanted to increase diversity have used other types of affirmative action. While private universities have usually had more freedom in their admissions decisions, they have found that other affirmative action policies are a better way of achieving diversity than quotas because they allow for greater flexibility and more fairness. Affirmative action in the college admissions process has been primarily an ethical rather than a legal issue. As long as the decision process did not use racial quotas, colleges were allowed to choose to accept whomever they wanted. This is changing however. California's Proposition 209 prohibits any use of racial preferences in government hiring and public school admissions. More than a dozen states are considering similar legislation. Even though the question is an ethical one, most of the disagreement is over whether or not affirmative action increases fairness in the admissions process. In addition, the debate over affirmative action is about what role diversity in student body play in both the academic mission of a university and in the quality of life on campus. Those against affirmative action often say that it makes it easier for members of some groups to get into college and harder for others. However, the purpose of affirmative action is to increase the admissions rates of minorities that are under-represented in colleges. This under-representation is caused by various social factors. One social factor is that students from families where few people have pursued higher education are less likely to excel in high school. Another factor is that children who come from communities where English is not regularly spoken face a large disadvantage in reading and writing. Lastly, students from school districts with lower funding tend to perform 2007-04-23T03:42:24-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Affirmative-Action-in-College-Admissions-33086.aspx Against Affirmative Action Equality is one of the basic principles the United States is found on. In the Declaration of Independence it states “All Men are Created Equal.” Through out history you would not figure that that statement was held to be true. The United States has a very ugly past when it comes to the topic of equality. The most notable act of inequality was definitely slavery and the segregation laws passed by government. Black people faced discrimination from the start and are still facing it today. Other incidents were the use of Asians to build railroads, and the Japanese we imprisoned during World War Two. In the United States minorities have had a harder time than white males. In counter action for these hardships Affirmative action laws were passed. Affirmative action laws are set in place to increase opportunities for minorities by favoring them in hiring and promotion, college admissions, and the awarding of government contracts. Affirmative action is a very controversial topic and is plagued with many problems. The support for Affirmative action is weak and filled with many contradictions. Affirmative action is an unfair policy and should be ruled unconstitutional. Affirmative action is believed to create diversity in the many institution which it is applied to, especially institutions of higher education. Diversity is important in an institution. It creates better people due to the fact that the miss beliefs of other cultures can be fixed through interaction between the cultures. It also helps in classrooms because the range of beliefs will be broader giving the student a broader mind. It is also believed that students in a diverse institution have the most engagement in college civic activities and also have stronger racial interactions years after attending such an institution. Diversity creates better people because of the broad spectrum to which they learn from and interact. An example of this would be a student who comes from an all white community. This student has no idea of the Black culture or any people with in it. When he goes to college and is put in a classroom with several Black students he has time to learn and better understand what he has not known before. For this reason and many other situations like 2007-04-19T21:23:17-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Against-Affirmative-Action--33055.aspx Affirmative Action Policies “Any governmental classification or preference based on racial or ethnic criteria must be justified by a compelling governmental interest, and the means chosen by the government to effectuate its purpose must be narrowly tailored to the achievement of that goal.” “A public employer must have convincing evidence of prior discrimination in its employment practices before it embarks on an affirmative action program.” Should current laws and regulations concerning affirmative action polices be continued? Affirmative action is designed to stop discrimination in the work place and even out the opportunities for each race but is it really stopping discrimination or are the results of affirmative action helping discrimination exist? Affirmative action is unfair and unjust to well qualified individuals. Defenders of affirmative action feel that minority groups are at a disadvantage from hundreds of years of discrimination that benefited whites, and that affirmative action levels the playing field in the work force for minority groups. But in no way do these minor arguments for Affirmative action make it right or just to take equal opportunity rights away from a more qualified nonminority individual. What Affirmative action is doing is rekindling the fire between an almost settled hatred among different races. This is too high of a price to pay just to allow some less qualified minority individuals to hold a particular job or position. At a time when campuses nationwide are struggling with issues of diversity, an Orlando Florida school board created two new law schools at universities with high minority enrollment in an effort to bring more blacks and Hispanics into legal careers without using affirmative action. This fall, the new College of Law will hold its first classes in an old downtown building here as part of Florida A&M University, a historically black university. At the same time, a public law school will open at Florida International University, a Miami institution where half the students are Hispanic. "I don't think of this as a Hispanic law school, I think of it as a diverse law school," said Leonard Strickman, dean of Florida International's College of Law. "The ideal is diversity that happens without having to distort either how people are brought in or how they're trained. And at this campus, in this city, that kind of diversity is implicit." This appears to 2007-03-20T03:22:42-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Affirmative-Action-Policies-32838.aspx On Affirmative Action in America Affirmative action applies to employers in hiring and promoting minorities and women, governments in reserving a portion of their contracts for businesses owned by minorities and women, and colleges and universities in admitting minorities and women (Welch, 504). The history of affirmative action has its roots in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which stemmed from the 1954 United States Supreme Court Case of Brown vs. Board of Education. In this case, the Court ruled unanimously that school segregation violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order #11246 at Howard University that required federal contractors to undertake affirmative action to increase the number of minorities that they employ. He wanted to ensure that minorities were recruited to have real opportunities to be hired and then eventually get a promotion. In 1969, the Department of Labor exposed widespread racial discrimination of the Construction Department so President Richard M. Nixon decided to incorporate a system of "goals and timetables" to evaluate federal construction companies according to affirmative action. This idea of "goals and timetables" provided guidelines for companies to follow and comply with affirmative action regulations. During the presidency of Gerald R. Ford, he extended affirmative action to people with disabilities and Vietnam veterans but there were no goals or timetables for these two groups. This type of affirmative action required recruitment efforts, accessibility, accommodation and reviews of physical and mental job qualifications. President Jimmy Carter consolidated all federal agencies that were required by law to follow the affirmative action play into the Department of Labor. Before Carter did this, each agency handled affirmative action in its own individual way, some were not as consistent as other agencies were. He created the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Program (OFCCP) in 1978 to ensure compliance with the affirmative action policies. Affirmative action began to go downhill when Ronald Reagan and later George Bush came into office. Affirmative action lost some gains it had made and was more or less ignored by the Republicans in the White House and in Congress. Affirmative action was being neglected by our federal administrators. But during this time of neglect there was one positive aspect, the passage of Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The ADA bans discrimination against workers with disabilities and requires employers to make ‘reasonable accommodations’ so 2007-01-06T18:12:42-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/On-Affirmative-Action-in-America-32244.aspx Affirmative Action Essay Affirmative action was originally designed to help minorities, but women especially white women have made the greatest gains as a result of these program. Affirmative action is a growing argument among our society. It is multifaceted and very often defined vaguely. Many people define affirmative action as the ability to strive for equality and inclusiveness. Others might see it as a quote based system for different minority groups. In 1974, a woman named Rose was turned down for a supervisory job in favor of a male. She was told that she was the most qualified person, but the position was going to be filled by a man because he had a family to support. Five years before that, when Rose was about to fill an entry level position in banking a personnel officer outlined the woman’s pay scale which was $25 to $50 month less than what men were being paid for the same position. Rose was furious because she felt this was discriminating to her. She confronted the personnel officer and he saw nothing wrong with it. Thanks to affirmative action today things like these situations are becoming more rare and corrected more quickly. Affirmative action has definitely helped women and minorities in their careers, but it has yet to succeed in the goal of equality to the fullest for the business world to women and minorities. Some observers argue that women have made huge strides with the help of affirmative action. They now hold 40 percent of all corporate middle management jobs and the number of women-owned businesses has grown by 57 percent since 1982. Affirmative action was designed to give qualified minorities a chance to compete on equal footing with whites. Equal opportunities for the blacks has remained more wishful thinking than fact. Black students are continuing to struggle to seek an education and black business owners are still competing against their White counterparts. Black workers are experiencing an unemployment rate twice that of Whites and hold dead end labor intensive low paying jobs. The employment outlook for minorities is grim, but not hopeless. We definitely need affirmative action to overcome the disparities of employment that exist in his country. A recent Urban Benchmarks study found that of 71 metro areas surveyed nationwide. Pittsburgh had the highest rate of employment related problems among non Hispanic whites between the ages of 25 2006-10-29T21:30:45-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Affirmative-Action-Essay-31611.aspx The System that Created Affirmative Action Affirmative action is a subject of increasing debate and tension in American society. The debate seems to be more emotional than intellectual, and it has probably generated more tension than anything else. People tend to over examine the ethical and moral issues that affirmative action raises while forgetting to analyze the system that has created it. Often, affirmative action is looked upon as the cure-all for a nation once ill with the disease of racial discrimination, which some people feel, is now cured. More people say Affirmative action should be seen as, a temporary, partial, and perhaps even flawed remedy for past and continuing discrimination against minority groups in American society. Affirmative action working as it should, affords minority groups greater equality of opportunity. Some claim that these programs distort what is now a level playing field and bestow partisan treatment on minorities because of the color of their skin. While this view may seem very logical on the surface, many contend that it lacks any historical support and is aimed more at preserving existing white privilege than establishing equality of opportunity for all. Some critics attack affirmative action and say that affirmative action corrupts the purity of the process. And that extreme care must be taken in determining who receives affirmative action program benefits and how long and at what rate they receive them. I must, also, agree in that affirmative action may tear down a "color-blind" society. And while the policies of affirmative action are not perfect and do raise some legitimate ethical concerns, some people still believe that they take us away from a system that is inherently unfair to some groups. Affirmative action seems to contradict several of the characteristics our society is known for. One is that we are governed by our abilities and just as some have the characteristic of leadership others have the gift of working with their hands. Some would say we are sending a mixed message. And that the belief that was taught to many people while growing up is contradicted by affirmative action; as it judges not what a person works for, but who they are. And others say affirmative action abolishes this factor. Most people would not want to be rewarded with a good job or admission into a certain graduate program, based on something other than work ethic 2006-08-05T11:33:49-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/The-System-that-Created-Affirmative-Action-31038.aspx Self-Defeating Nature of Affirmative Action In the year 2002, all minorities have come along way with affirmative action. Some people are saying that affirmative action is slavery, that were are putting ourselves through it all over again. In stating that Ward Connerly tells us that slavery has not ended. It’s still around and we call it affirmative action. Affirmative Action draws its life from the proposition that black Americans cannot succeed in this nation without special consideration. That is “dependency.” Affirmative Action is like an old car that has 2006-07-30T11:45:39-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Self-Defeating-Nature-of-Affirmative-Action-30804.aspx Seeing Racism in Every-Day Society I was very confused about the topic I was going to choose when I got to know about the project. At the beginning we decided to meet with some friends and make a play or something similar. At first I thought it was a great idea, but then I realized I wasn’t so interest in doing that. I wanted to do something that really concerned me and was at the same time of my interest, a topic I would learn of. I had chosen Mr.McGough as a tutor so I decided to make of my Personal Project an art project. I found the idea very interesting and we started working on my Project immediately. I started by doing a list of topics which I wanted to know about. I specially focused on topics that had to do with problems that the world is suffering, problems our society, the world community have to face. I found out about some topics that seemed really attractive, like homeless people, Racism and discrimination, destruction of the environment, women role in society and children of the street. I saw all this different subjects very interesting. But there was one, that by reading about it, I found out it was a big problem which a almost didn’t know anything about. This was racism or racial discrimination. I didn’t know what this really meant. I only knew it was when somebody discriminates another because or their skin colour, black or white mainly, because of their language, culture, etc. I saw this as a very far away problem, but I realized this happens around us every day. I had to focus on one little part of racism because there are many things related to it and it would have been very difficult to cover the whole theme. I decided to focus on racial discrimination because of skin colour, focusing mainly on black and white skin colour people. I started researching and reading about racism and I started concerning more and more about this problem. I found many interesting ways of researching for my project. First of all I made two surveys. Were people from all ages, mainly teenagers, were given a couple of situations and they had a number of options to choose from for each situation. I was very surprised by these surveys, I noticed most teenagers prefer to act as they 2006-06-21T16:58:59-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Racism-in-Everyday-Society-29785.aspx Facts and Statistics on Affirmative Action in America The writer Mary Anne Warren is focusing on describing the current practices in many organizations today in regards to the implementing a goal vs. a quota system for the purposes of affirmative action. She defines a quota as "Those who use the term "quotas" pejoratively tend to assume that the numerical standards will be set so high or enforced so rigidly that strong reverse discrimination-that is, the deliberate hiring of demonstrably less well qualified candidates-will be necessary to implement them." (Warren, 370). Warren then describes goal as "The term "goal", on the other hand, suggests that this will not be the case, and that good faith efforts to comply with the standards by means short of strong reverse discrimination will be acceptable." (Warren, 370). The critical thing that must be understood when exploring the subject is that the writer is describing how affirmative action is being applied in American organizations today in other words the current reality. However, she fails to speak to us about how the law designs this program to function. This is the critical component that American organizations must be educated to understand. Affirmative action as defined by law is most definitively not based on a quota system. In fact, what is not widely known is that this program can be equally used by all individuals provided that an inequality exists in the group that they belong to as not being reflected in the work force. So what is affirmative action? What is it designed to do? It is not designed to provide an opportunity to an unqualified candidate. It is designed as "a way of compensating individuals or groups for past injustices or for present disadvantages stemming form past injustices" (Warren, 373). It is further designed "as a means about bringing about further future goods-for example, raising the status of downtrodden groups." (Warren, 373). The keyword in these quotes is the word "group". Who are these groups? The law has identified them. Some of the groups identified are: race, religious beliefs, blood trait, gender, disability (whether physical or mental), veteran status, national origin, and the list continues. In no way does this require that you have to hire an unqualified person for a position because they fall into one or more of these groups. What it does mean is that you can not discriminate and exclude a person from getting a job, 2006-05-31T17:34:56-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Facts-and-Statistics-on-Affirmative-Action-in-America-28912.aspx Should capital punishment be abolished? In my opinion, yes it should. I assume this for many reasons. One is the fact that if the person being executed is not the one who is guilty. Another is that it is more expensive to be executed rather than life imprisonment. I also feel that it is an easy way out for the one being executed. I would much rather die than be in prison for the rest on my life. I also think the issue of sympathy plays a big role in why it should be abolished. The jury in a court case has the power to convict or to free a person. When they convict someone, they are ultimately putting that person’s life at stake. If the death penalty is carried out then they will have to live with that for the rest of their life. Whether or not they were right when they gave their verdict. The first piece of evidence I found was at…………………………….. I believe that execution is morally wrong. This article also agrees with me. Found in the article, it states “it is the cruel and inhumane taking of a human life”. So basically it is murder. Also in the article, “no one, not even the state, has the right to play God”. In my opinion, execution is just like murdering someone. Taking a life is taking a life, no matter what the circumstances. No one should be able to kill someone. The second piece of evidence came from the same article. It also brought up the issue of innocent executions. “The death penalty is irrevocable, the executed cannot be given another chance.” Within the last one hundred years there have been more than 75 documented cases of wrongful conviction. In 8 of these cases, the death penalty was carried out. Even though that does not sound like a lot, it is still more than none. “A prisoner discovered innocent can be freed; the same does not apply to a corpse.” The words in quotes all came from the article. It is bringing up a good fact. In my opinion, executing an innocent person is the same as taking a gun and shooting your neighbor (as 2005-12-31T03:29:04-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Yes-Capital-Punishment-should-be-Abolished-28335.aspx A New Age of Discrimination Many upcoming high school graduates have aspirations of continuing his or her education at a major university. In order to become accepted into a college of one’s choice, he or she must dedicate time and efforts to obtain the grades required. People have been taught that through hard work and dedication comes the reward of a better future. Although this seems to be the ideal and just situation, our nation has made the effort to give more equality to the minority groups through affirmative action. At the time when affirmative action was first introduced, it may have been the most plausible reparation; however, many Americans in both majority and minority groups are feeling the repercussions of the act. Affirmative action has evolved into a road block for hard-working students who strive for a good education more than it has helped the minority groups (“Negative”). Affirmative action was adopted to create opportunities for minority groups but, in turn, has created reverse discrimination and preferential treatment in college admissions. There is evidence to show affirmative action has not met its expectation, but first, its history will help to give a better understanding. Affirmative action by definition, according to WordNet 2.0, is a policy designed to redress past discrimination against women and minority groups through measures to improve their economic and education opportunities. The United States Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit segregation in public accommodations and discrimination in education and employment. Afterward, on “September 25, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued the Executive Order #11246, which required federal contractors to take ‘affirmative action’ to remedy past discrimination against African Americans” (“United”). Without realizing it, President Johnson took part in a very discriminating act. The Civil Rights Act passed during a time when minorities felt as though they deserved retribution for the many years of suffering they endured. America’s effort to rectify this led to affirmative action, which allows women and minorities not to be overlooked in college admissions. Many see this as a step toward the end of racism; however, many Americans, including those of minorities, view affirmative action as an “. . . attempt to end discrimination with discrimination” (“Affirmative”). Furthermore, it somewhat indicates minorities are incapable of accomplishing such goals on their own. History tells the purpose behind 2005-06-25T19:33:14-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Affirmative-Action--27131.aspx A Nation of Immigrants: An Overview of the Economic and Political Conditions of Selected Racial and Ethnic Groups. The North American economic development has seen several stages of development. The first stage of economic development was a plantation-slave economy mixed with mercantilism, the second stage of development was a competitive industrial economy, and the stage third stage of economic development is multinational capitalism. Economic institution and related governmental actions have formed the tides of migration and the resulting patterns of immigrant adjustment. The original groups of inhabitants in North America were Native Americans. These Native people lost much of their land and many of their lives to the vicious European invasions. Many groups of immigrants came to America, yet each group had left their native country for various reasons and under various circumstances. Some immigrant groups entered America as slaves, others came to work at low paying labor jobs, and some came as entrepreneurs. These various groups were discriminated against at varying level, depending on the resources the group brought with them. Those immigrants who made the journey to America on their own freewill with economic resources found that it was much easier to find good jobs than those immigrants with less than such freewill and resources. Small business opportunities unfortunately were not available for most immigrants. The waves of immigrant migration to the North America are highlighted in phases. With phase one came English colonists from the 1600's to the 1800's. The English created colonies and forced land from the native people. The English also established a form of capitalism. During this same time Africans were seized from their native lands and were shipped to America involuntarily in the form of property, to be used as slave labor. Also, phase one brought an era in which Irish Catholics immigrated to America, driven from their native land from the 1830's to the 1860's, due to famine, oppression, and poor living conditions. These Irish immigrants were able to obtain low wage jobs. Phase two began with the immigration of Chinese people from the 1850's to the 1870's; these people came due to recruitment efforts by the United States and in hope of obtaining better living conditions. The Chinese became employed mostly in construction, and menial service jobs. The Italians arrived between the 1880's and the 1910's. The Italian people were recruited for construction and other related low wage labor jobs. The Japanese 2004-12-29T07:00:04-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Nation-of-Immigrants-Overview-of-Economic-Political-Status-26097.aspx Opposing Views of the Affirmative Action Program "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...." Even before it became a nation, America was heralded as a land of equality. Thomas Jefferson's statement begs more than a few questions, one of which is: "How can we ensure equality to everyone?" Beginning in the late 1960s, the federal government provided an answer to this question in the form of affirmative action. In recent years, many people have called this policy into question. Interestingly, affirmative action is sometimes attacked by the people it helps, and defended by those it hurts. In particular, two recent essays demonstrate that people's race does not necessarily determine their beliefs on the issue of affirmative action. "Why I Believe in Affirmative Action" is by Paul R. Spickard, a white man who is defending affirmative action, while "A Negative Vote on Affirmative Action" is by Shelby Steele, an African-American who is attacking the program. When the two essays are considered as responses to each other, Steele's logical explanations of the effects and implications of affirmative action expose the flaws in Spickard's ethical arguments supporting it. Both authors structure their arguments to appeal to their respective audiences. Since Spickard's essay is written for Christianity Today, he makes a lot of ethical appeals that a Christian audience could easily relate to. Steele, on the other hand, is writing for The New York Times Magazine, so he relies on logic that would appeal to a more general audience. Spickard begins his ethical appeal by establishing his credibility through focusing on his support of affirmative action even though he has been denied employment because of the program. He says, "I am willing to take second best if overall fairness is achieved," and backs up his position by referring to Philippians 2:3-6, which instructs Christians to look out for the welfare of others before their own. He is, in effect, saying that his position must be right because he supports affirmative action out of the goodness of his heart, rather than because he benefits from it. In contrast to Spickard, Steele begins with the opposite scenario, stating how he could really be helped by affirmative action through financial aid for his children's college education. However, he says that he does not want the assistance of affirmative action, because he believes the help should go to those who are truly 2004-12-21T07:29:20-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Opposing-Views-of-the-Affirmative-Action-Program-25944.aspx In 1973 a thirty-three year-old Caucasian male named Allan Bakke applied to and was denied admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis. In 1974 he filed another application and was once again rejected, even though his test scores were considerably higher than various minorities that were admitted under a special program. This special program specified that 16 out of 100 possible spaces for the students in the medical program were set aside solely for minorities, while the other 84 slots were for anyone who qualified, including minorities. What happened to Bakke is known as reverse discrimination. Bakke felt his rejections to be violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment, so he took the University of California Regents to the Superior Court of California. It was ruled that "the admissions program violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment"1 The clause reads as follows: "...No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor without due process of the law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."2 The court ruled that race could not be a factor in admissions. However, they did not force the admittance of Bakke because the court could not know if he would have been admitted if the special admissions program for minorities did not exist. Bakke disagreed with the court on this issue and he brought it before the California Supreme Court. The California Supreme Court held that it was the University's burden to prove that Bakke would not have been admitted if the special program was not in effect. The school could not meet this requirement, and Bakke was admitted by court orde r. However, the University appealed to the Supreme Court for "certiorari", which was granted, and the order to admit Bakke was suspended pending thCourt's decision.3 The Issues and Arguments for Each Side "Bakke was the most significant civil rights case to reach the United States Supreme Court since Brown v. Board the Education of Topeka, Kansas."4 The special admissions program at Davis tried to further integrate the higher education system because merely removing the barriers, as the Brown case did, did not always work. In short, Bakke was questioning how far the University of California Medical School at Davis could go the try to make up for past 2004-07-05T09:34:34-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Essay-on-Reverse-Discrimination-25348.aspx One day, there were two people who went to an interview for only one job position at the same company. The first person attended a prestigious and highly academic university, had years of work experience in the field and, in the mind of the employer, had the potential to make a positive impact on the company's performance. The second person was just starting out in the field and seemed to lack the ambition that was visible in his opponent. "Who was chosen for the job?" you ask. Well, if the story took place before 1964, the answer would be obvious. However, with the somewhat recent adoption of the social policy known as affirmative action, the answer becomes unclear. After the United States Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964,it became apparent that certain business traditions, such as seniority status and aptitude tests, prevented total equality in employment. Then President, Lyndon B. Johnson, decided something needed to be done to remedy these flaws. On September 24, 1965, he issued Executive Order #11246 at Howard University that required federal contractors "to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed . . . without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin (Civil Rights)." When Lyndon Banes Johnson signed that order, he enacted a very discriminating piece of legislature. Affirmative action was created in an effort to help minorities leap discriminative barriers that were ever so present when the bill was first enacted, in 1965. At this time, the country was in the wake of nationwide civil-rights demonstrations, and racial tension was at its peak. Most of the corporate executive and managerial positions were occupied by white males, who controlled the hiring and firing of employees. The U.S. government, in 1965, believed that these employers were discriminating against minorities and believed that there was no better time than the present to bring about change. When the Civil Rights Law passed, minorities, especially African-Americans, believed that they should receive retribution for the years of discrimination they endured. The government responded by passing laws to aide them in attaining better employment as reprieve for the previous two hundred years of suffering their race endured at the hands of the white man. To many, this made sense. Supporters of affirmative action asked, "why not let the government help them get better jobs?" After all, the white man was responsible for their suffering. 2004-07-05T01:05:12-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Discrimination--25272.aspx