Fed Govt declares treating all people equally is now illegal

**Seroquel** · 07-01-2011 09:18 PM

So when are you guys planning the second revolution?

Michigan's ban on considering race, gender in college admissions ruled illegal

By ED WHITE, Associated Press
BRETT MOUNTAIN/Bloomberg News

Proposal 2, approved by voters in 2006, forced the University of Michigan and other state public colleges to change their admissions policies.
DETROIT (AP) — A federal appeals court on today struck down Michigan's ban on considering race and gender when enrolling students at public colleges, saying it burdens minorities and violates the U.S. Constitution.

The 2-1 decision upends a sweeping law approved by voters in 2006 and had forced the University of Michigan and others to change admission policies. The court said it violates the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

The court focused its argument mostly on the fact that the voter-approved ban is in the Michigan Constitution, making a repeal extremely difficult.

"Proposal 2 reorders the political process in Michigan to place special burdens on minority interests," judges R. Guy Cole Jr. and Martha Craig Daughtrey said.

The ban was placed in the Michigan Constitution after getting 58 percent of the vote nearly five years ago. It affected government hiring as well as college admissions.

In 2008, a federal judge in Detroit upheld the law, saying it was race-neutral because no single race can benefit.

**Aeolar** · 07-01-2011 09:21 PM

A moment of silence for all the idiots, please...

**Solarflare** · 07-01-2011 09:41 PM

**Descensus** · 07-01-2011 09:52 PM

Maybe someone can explain this in more detail?

**Maria92** · 07-01-2011 11:45 PM

Near as I can tell, it won't force colleges to consider race/gender, but will stop a law that would force them to NOT consider race/gender. So, the thread title is misleading. Colleges are free to ignore those factors if they so choose, but aren't forced to do so.

**~~DeletePlease~~** · 07-02-2011 01:28 AM

"saying it burdens minorities and violates the U.S. Constitution."

How did the old law do that?

**StonedApe** · 07-02-2011 01:43 AM

Originally Posted by GavinGill

"saying it burdens minorities and violates the U.S. Constitution."

How did the old law do that?

Not sure about the constitution part. But the burden part refers to the fact that white people run things here(and not just politically, it runs deep into our culture), even though they stole the land from the Indians and used black slaves to build everything. Then even after slavery they refused to acknowledge that black people were humans until about 50 years ago.

This whole process has created a situation where black people and people of other races are more poorer and because of this have less of a chance of going to college. So they make scholarships to make it so they have a better chance.

Not that I'm for scholarships based on or influenced by race. Just trying to explain. If white people really wanna make things right they should stop exploiting black people(and other races and nationalities), because it still goes on.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Near as I can tell, it won't force colleges to consider race/gender, but will stop a law that would force them to NOT consider race/gender. So, the thread title is misleading. Colleges are free to ignore those factors if they so choose, but aren't forced to do so.

True, but at the same time, all state colleges will have these kinds of scholarships and acceptance practices, because college professors and those types feel extreme pressure to be politically correct. It'd be "racist" for them not to.

That's the reason they got banned, because otherwise they will be used in most if not all state schools. We don't have the money to do this sort of thing right now, we're broke. We have to cut some things and this is something that isn't a necessity. IMO we need to reform education at the high school level so that people learn real skills so that they can do things like start their own business. Things that will make them more desirable to an employer or better yet self sufficiant. It shouldn't be a requirement that people go to college in order to get a decent job. We also need to reform grade school so that children are actually nourished by the environment and develop a love of learning. Without this school is just a waste, it's just a means to an end, it's the death of the soul. Because it sets everything up to be that, a means to an end. There's no love in it. When they finish school they get a job, but not because they want to do something, or they want to help people, but because it provides them with comfort and security(or so they hope).

Reminds me of this Allan Watts Video made by the South Park guys.

**DrunkenArse** · 07-02-2011 03:10 AM

I personally think that the optimum solution is to do the research necessary and spend the necessary money to ensure that people (of any race) from poor school districts that traditionally have the worst schools to have schools so good that they can compete on regular scholarships. Also, community rooftop gardens are winner too. The main thing is to protect the kids from the harshest consequences of economic deprivation (though I think that seeing at least a little of it is good for everyone) and let them feel that they have actual opportunities.

Then this whole "race" thing will sort itself out.

Also, @stonedape. Don't forget the best part of the story that you told. As the new slaves were being transporting across the atlantic in three foot high cells where something like only two thirds of them survived, they were calling them "savages".

**StonedApe** · 07-02-2011 03:24 AM

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

I personally think that the optimum solution is to do the research necessary and spend the necessary money to ensure that people (of any race) from poor school districts that traditionally have the worst schools to have schools so good that they can compete on regular scholarships. Also, community rooftop gardens are winner too. The main thing is to protect the kids from the harshest consequences of economic deprivation (though I think that seeing at least a little of it is good for everyone) and let them feel that they have actual opportunities.

Then this whole "race" thing will sort itself out.

Also, @stonedape. Don't forget the best part of the story that you told. As the new slaves were being transporting across the atlantic in three foot high cells where something like only two thirds of them survived, they were calling them "savages".

Yeah, I'd be pretty ashamed to be white if I thought that whiteness really had anything to do with what those people did. It's all about power and dominance in reality. I wonder how many of them at the time actually realized the atrocious irony of the situation. Some of them must have.

Reminds me of that great story about Ghandi. A reporter asks him,"what do you think about western civilization?" His response,"that would be nice."

**tommo** · 07-02-2011 04:02 PM

Oh geez. Yeah I have a problem with these requirements that institutions consider race.

Way too many people exploit it for one.
We have "Torres Strait Islander/Aborigines" here. If you are one of them or have that heritage, you get special consideration.

The problem is, for example, this guy won this art prize recently for Aboriginals. He was as white as they get. But had some great great etc. grandparent who was Aboriginal.
It's okay in a way if the person has been brought up in a horrible area and suffered through it all to try and be "successful". But otherwise it is racist.

A few people have called me racist for saying this, but it is racist to differentiate between races (besides stating facts of course).

I agree with you PhilosopherStoned, we need to develop the communities that we give special consideration to in these circumstances, so that they no longer need special consideration because they have the same opportunities as everyone else.