Controversy erupts over Campus Republicans bake sale plans

  • Thread starter Thread starter SwizzleStick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SamH said:
Actually their suggested diagnosis is:

Unions—>lower quality schools---->poverty.
Click to expand...
And to some it is

Stop whining----->Stop being lazy----->Stop blaming white people------>Get some virtue----->Get a job------->Get rich. . . . .

See how that works?
 
ringil said:
And to some it is

Stop whining----->Stop being lazy----->Stop blaming white people------>Get some virtue----->Get a job------->Get rich. . . . .

See how that works?
Click to expand...
I swear I heard the president say:

Stop whining----->Stop being lazy----->Start blaming working people------>Get some marching shoes----->Help Me Get rich. . . . .
 
SamH said:
My wife’s school is unionized and is a very “good” school, but the union prevents them from being a great school.

Watch the documentary.
Click to expand...
Seen it and recommended it on CAF several times…
 
Whitacre_Girl said:
You are correct. There is an over representation of racial minorities at or below the poverty level. However, the issue of performance in school is more directly linked to lower incomes than racial standards. Children who are a racial minority but are not in the poverty level do just as well as their white classmates. Children who are white do just as poorly as their minority classmates.

The reason here has many facets:
  • Lower income families may have only one parent who is working full time and therefore cannot help their children with coursework.
  • Students from lower-income households may have to work more outside of school to support their families.
  • Lower income families have a higher rate of drug abuse and alcohol abuse in the family. Students aren’t being given the care they need when mom or dad or both are strung out on drugs.
  • Lower income families have more pressures that demand the child’s time than studies.
This is not a racial issue, it’s the circumstances that surround lower-income homes. Students need help from mentors, teachers, and schools to overcome these hardships. Giving a free ticket to minorities because they are over represented in the poverty class does nothing to solve the issue. What this school is presenting is an attempt to treat the symptoms, rather than cure the disease. And their method of doing this (racial segregation) is highly immoral.

The answer is to get help, people, and better education to the kids in lower income areas. Attempting to treat the symptoms will only allow the disease to go untreated, ignored, and allow it to fester.
Click to expand...
Education is a great thing. But is low income early in life really a sufficient explanation for poor performance in life? I’m not sure it is.

I know some Vietnamese “boat people” who came here and made good. Nobody was poorer than them, and they couldn’t even speak English. Some can’t do all that well at English now, but they all seem to thrive in this society, and they seek education like a frog seeks a pond. No affirmative action exists for them. There might be some Vietnamese who stayed poor in this country, but I never met one.

The most recent of all immigrants around here are the Hmong; Mountain people, largely from Laos, of almost unbelievably primitive origins and background. Most I have met can barely speak any English, and yet they thrive. They also value education and their kids do well in school. No affirmative action exists for them. Today, one of them in a bank, who could speak English only rather haltingly, solved a difficult technical issue in my presence; made the computer system practically sing and dance.

College of the Ozarks was precisely designed for impecunious students. They pay no tuition. They work it out, and not in easy ways, either. It’s proud of its monicker “Hard Work U”. Their graduates do well upon graduation.

I’m not sure it’s poverty so much as it is culture that keeps people down; their own culture. The really terrible (white) subculture described in the novel and movie “Winter’s Bone” is said to be set in the very same county as College of the Ozarks, and the students of C of O are drawn almost entirely from the very same local areas and ethnic origins as the people in “Winter’s Bone”. They go to the very same grade schools and high schools. Why do some young people sink into the dregs while some who are not a bit wealthier or better educated to start with pull themselves out? In my opinion it has to do with the culture or subculture, perhaps most importantly including that of the family, more than anything else.
 
To me the idea that we would let the government decide who gets to be discriminated in my opinion is a scary idea. Who will the government decide we need to discriminate against next?
 
Wasn’t willing to read all twelve pages of whining, so forgive me if this was mentioned.

The college I am most familiar with does give preferential treatment for minorities. Here are two, very good, reasons.
  1. Legacy students make up a fair percentage of the student body. Legacy students get preferential admission. As there was a time when black students weren’t allowed, there aren’t yet many legacy black students. Thus, white students do get preferential treatment.
  2. College is about expanding your worldview. College students don’t expand their worldview nearly as much if they are surrounded by people that have a similar background to themselves. Perhaps it is a good thing that Joe College white guy might have a black roommate? Perhaps they could both learn from each other. Colleges “shape” their student body to reflect the true society, not just the white, middle class.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Education is a great thing. But is low income early in life really a sufficient explanation for poor performance in life? I’m not sure it is.

I know some Vietnamese “boat people” who came here and made good. Nobody was poorer than them, and they couldn’t even speak English. Some can’t do all that well at English now, but they all seem to thrive in this society, and they seek education like a frog seeks a pond. No affirmative action exists for them. There might be some Vietnamese who stayed poor in this country, but I never met one.

The most recent of all immigrants around here are the Hmong; Mountain people, largely from Laos, of almost unbelievably primitive origins and background. Most I have met can barely speak any English, and yet they thrive. They also value education and their kids do well in school. No affirmative action exists for them. Today, one of them in a bank, who could speak English only rather haltingly, solved a difficult technical issue in my presence; made the computer system practically sing and dance.

College of the Ozarks was precisely designed for impecunious students. They pay no tuition. They work it out, and not in easy ways, either. It’s proud of its monicker “Hard Work U”. Their graduates do well upon graduation.

I’m not sure it’s poverty so much as it is culture that keeps people down; their own culture. The really terrible (white) subculture described in the novel and movie “Winter’s Bone” is said to be set in the very same county as College of the Ozarks, and the students of C of O are drawn almost entirely from the very same local areas and ethnic origins as the people in “Winter’s Bone”. They go to the very same grade schools and high schools. Why do some young people sink into the dregs while some who are not a bit wealthier or better educated to start with pull themselves out? In my opinion it has to do with the culture or subculture, perhaps most importantly including that of the family, more than anything else.
Click to expand...
There are cultures who immigrate here who do not want charity. They haven’t been trained their entire lives to expect a handout from others, and they are grateful for the opportunity this country has offered them. The Vietnamese value family and education, and hard work to achieve goals. There are many jokes about how the Vietnamese parents will accept nothing but “A” grades and the kids get punished if they bring home less than that. The stories are true. The children are expected to do well in school and are not praised for “doing the best that they can” in spite of getting Cs and Ds. They would be in a world of trouble for those grades. Is there any wonder Asian students outperform our students in every category?

Just a couple of generations ago, there was still some pride left in this country. People did not want to take handouts and would go to extremes to hide the fact that they were taking food stamps. But over time, the government teat got bigger and bigger and the pride in standing on one’s own two feet started to disappear. Instead, we now have the “I need to get MY share” attitude.
 
cloistered said:
Wasn’t willing to read all twelve pages of whining, so forgive me if this was mentioned.

The college I am most familiar with does give preferential treatment for minorities. Here are two, very good, reasons.
  1. Legacy students make up a fair percentage of the student body. Legacy students get preferential admission. As there was a time when black students weren’t allowed, there aren’t yet many legacy black students. Thus, white students do get preferential treatment.
  2. College is about expanding your worldview. College students don’t expand their worldview nearly as much if they are surrounded by people that have a similar background to themselves. Perhaps it is a good thing that Joe College white guy might have a black roommate? Perhaps they could both learn from each other. Colleges “shape” their student body to reflect the true society, not just the white, middle class.
Click to expand...
It really didn’t seem to me that all the posts consisted in whining, but if you didn’t read them all, then perhaps I, who did, might be allowed to comment.
  1. Perhaps the school in question would do well to re-examine its policy about “legacy students”, regardless of color. Does that really get them the best students, or only those students whose parents they think most likely to donate to the school? That really doesn’t speak to the issue of affirmative action, however, because not all non-minority students are “legacies”.
2 Is there any objective basis to assert that better educations, or even better social attitudes are fostered by affirmative action? Is not the best environment for one who seeks to learn, that environment in which the participants are interested in learning, regardless of race or ethnicity? Are universities really there to “reflect society”, or are they there to teach?
 
cloistered said:
Wasn’t willing to read all twelve pages of whining, so forgive me if this was mentioned.

The college I am most familiar with does give preferential treatment for minorities. Here are two, very good, reasons.
  1. Legacy students make up a fair percentage of the student body. Legacy students get preferential admission. As there was a time when black students weren’t allowed, there aren’t yet many legacy black students. Thus, white students do get preferential treatment.
  2. College is about expanding your worldview. College students don’t expand their worldview nearly as much if they are surrounded by people that have a similar background to themselves. Perhaps it is a good thing that Joe College white guy might have a black roommate? Perhaps they could both learn from each other. Colleges “shape” their student body to reflect the true society, not just the white, middle class.
Click to expand...
Are you kidding me? Are you living in some different world than I am? My kids have had friends of all shapes, sorts and colors from pre-school up through college. They never have judged anyone based on his or her skin color. We are Catholics, after all. Our church includes so many ethnicities I can’t even begin to count. We probably have at least one family from just about every nation on earth, from what I can see at Mass.

You talk as if we live in a segregated world. We don’t.
 
cloistered said:
Wasn’t willing to read all twelve pages of whining, so forgive me if this was mentioned.

The college I am most familiar with does give preferential treatment for minorities. Here are two, very good, reasons.
  1. Legacy students make up a fair percentage of the student body. Legacy students get preferential admission. As there was a time when black students weren’t allowed, there aren’t yet many legacy black students. Thus, white students do get preferential treatment.
  2. College is about expanding your worldview. College students don’t expand their worldview nearly as much if they are surrounded by people that have a similar background to themselves. Perhaps it is a good thing that Joe College white guy might have a black roommate? Perhaps they could both learn from each other. Colleges “shape” their student body to reflect the true society, not just the white, middle class.
Click to expand...
Welcome to CAF!
  1. Your logic is weak on this one. The legacy students aren’t getting preferential treatment due to the color of their skin. If the standards for a legacy student are lower, than I am opposed to that. If they have 5000 qualified applicants for 500 spots though, for example, I can understand giving preference to legacy applicants. I would also favor opening up scholarship slots for qualified applicants from humble means.
  2. I don’t think artificially engineering a college environment reflects “the true society.” In fact, by definition, it doesn’t…it’s engineered, not genuine.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
Just a couple of generations ago, there was still some pride left in this country. People did not want to take handouts and would go to extremes to hide the fact that they were taking food stamps. But over time, the government teat got bigger and bigger and the pride in standing on one’s own two feet started to disappear. Instead, we now have the “I need to get MY share” attitude.
Click to expand...
Will, a couple of generations ago black folks were certainly in a different situation weren’t they? But those were the “good ole’ days” right?

Everyone needs help sometimes. Why should someone feel ashamed to receive assistance from the government? You seem to be speaking highly of this “pride”, which I see as shame and sin. “Oh, I’m too good to receive food stamps! I’m not like THOSE people.”

Satan fell due to his pride you know.
 
ringil said:
Everyone needs help sometimes. Why should someone feel ashamed to receive assistance from the government?
Click to expand...
No one should feel ashamed to accept help no matter the source.
But it is offensive to qualify the help based upon skin color.

Those that advocate this idea are advocating something that runs counter to the Catholic faith.
 
cloistered said:
Wasn’t willing to read all twelve pages of whining,
Click to expand...
Was Frederick Douglas a whiner? What is the difference between a whiner and someone is thinks that discrimination based on skin pigmentation is wrong?
 
This is a complex issue reflected in a crude, and perhaps immature caricature in the form of a “bake sale”.

First of all, somebody said this is counter to the “Catholic Faith”. I’ll let Cardinal Adam Maida of Detroit shed some light into that;
“Sadly, our society has still not fully overcome the effects of past and present discrimination,” said Cardinal Maida in a statement. “Therefore, please know that the Catholic Church sees the continued importance of affirmative action to ensure that justice is served for all people and that equal opportunities are afforded to all in every aspect of life, especially education and employment.”
Click to expand...
So I don’t think affirmative action is counter to the Catholic faith, however my main problem with it is that it robs minorities of their accomplishments.

I’m Hispanic, and I’ve never received any preferential treatment because of my race, however based on the political tone seen in our current political discourse … I believe some segments of our society think highly educated minorities got to where they are unfairly due to achieving a privilege over a more deserving person. I think in most cases this is not the true, and I think even in some implementations of affirmative action this is not the case (you could say that all things being equal, race is taken into account and it favor a minority).

However, I don’t want anybody but God and my parents to take credit for my achievements. So in this sense, there is a problem with affirmative action unfortunately.

Yet the argument that there are minorities at a great disadvantage is there, and can’t be ignored. That’s why I don’t see this policy as some type of intrinsic evil, but it’s not an ideal solution.

I prefer programs who focus on giving preferential treatment to people that are economically disadvantaged over racial considerations. You’ll find that a lot of these people will also happen to include minorities, but they will also include poor white families which also need help.

I also believe in diversity, at school, workplace, etc. I think the real “affirmative” action that should take place is to fund programs that promote and focus on reaching out to certain groups that are not represented. For example, I am truly concerned that we don’t have enough women in engineering, I would love to help in programs to resolve this. I encourage employers and schools to fund minority and minority outreach groups, which is one thing we do at my workplace. I find that being Hispanic, I have a special way of reaching people that come from the same cultural background as myself. I feel this is the better and more organic way of helping these communities.

The irony is that I already see a need for these type of policies to be applied on non-immigrant Caucasians. For my Computer Science graduate program, they were a distinct minority (we had a lot of international, not immigrant students), which I found really odd at a state university. Plus remember Caucasians will be a minority in the US in the not too distant future.
 
I think both sides of this argument are being knee-jerk stupid (I’m referring to the people in the article not the comments on this thread :))

If the goal of the University is to recognize the individual accomplishments of disadvantaged youth, the sensible thing would be to use parent’s education level rather than race or national origin. Rick Perry makes the point that he wasn’t dealt “four aces” like Mit Romney, and he’s right. He should get credit for his accomplishments. If two people end up in the same place in life, the one who traveled the longer, harder road to get there is the better person.

On the other hand, if the goal is to create create a culturally diverse campus community - well, that’s a different story. Good professors at good universities look to their students for new ideas and a fresh perspective. Therefore, given that our historical body of knowledge was created predominately by men who were mostly white, students who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group (or are female) will have something unique to contribute in comparison to their white male counterparts. You might be able to point to individual cases where this doesn’t hold true, but in the aggregate it will make a difference.
 
SanAgustin said:
I believe some segments of our society think highly educated minorities got to where they are unfairly due to achieving a privilege over a more deserving person.
Click to expand...
I don’t think we are there yet. I still believe most educated minorities got there by the sweat of their own brow.

But you are right, in that is where the mentality will be eventually. Especially when a college campus decides it may start giving financial discounts to minorities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top