07-04-2023, 02:16 AM
(07-03-2023, 08:55 PM)Dill Wrote: Yes, after the first run at AA with a white person failed,
Interesting. So your point is that it was ok discrimination when it was just whites?
Quote:the anti-AA lobby shifted to the Asian angle, led by an RW lobbyist coopting an Asian group.
Coopting? If only non-white people had any sort of agency, they could stop being manipulated by the all powerful whites. You literally sound like the people who believe The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, except your boogeyman is white people and not Jews. Behind every curtain is a nefarious white man pulling the strings!
Quote:It is not "factually legal" that whites and Asians were being treated unfairly.
Of course it is, our highest court just determined this. There's no room for Dill subjectivity here.
Quote:You are confusing judgments of value and fact there.
No, you're confusing your opinion with actual law as determined by our judicial system.
Quote:What happened was that the argument fairness should be based on expanded opportunity and the value of diversity
was rejected by the argument that that expansion and value were not fair.
This was an application of ethical standards, different definitions of common good.
Which, at the end, have the rule of law. Hence my statement was correct and yours was incorrect. Thank you for agreeing.
