We are all equal again, right?

[Dill]

(07-14-2023, 03:51 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, I just get tired of having to explain the same thing multiple times while you endlessly state the same position in different, and increasingly wordy, fashion.  You think discrimination is fair because of past wrongs, I do not.  That's pretty much the end of it, thanks.

Stating "the same position in different, and increasingly wordy, fashion" is a manner of adding the knowledge and historical/institutional 
context absent from your pre-judgment of AA, at Yale or elsewhere. Evidence-based arguments are like that.

If you look closely at that "wordiness," you might see that 
the anti-AA issue is NOT about some choice between discrimination and non-discrimination. 

Eliminating the tiny bit of race-based evaluation involved in Harvard and UNC admissions just means a 
default back to white privilege--both in educational background and legacy admissions.

So while I think a measure of discrimination is fair to eliminate past wrongs which continue into the present.

You favor continued "colorblind" discrimination of the type which preceded AA at Yale and Harvard, when the black population
of Yale was roughly 1% of the student body. 

Black admissions won't drop to that level now, but it will likely drop quite a bit,
to line more closely with the number of students from wealthy families with private school straining. 

You think that's "fair" because admissions can't say "race" anymore. I think that just continues "past wrongs."