When by law (due to affirmative action and the suprem court) the color of one mans skin make them more or less qualified for a job.
206937
That is a hard question.  In an ideal world there would be no racism, therefore no need for Affirmative Action.  But I don't have to tell you that the world is far from ideal.  By the question I'm assuming you view Affirmative Action as reverse descrimination.\n\nIf you could tell me that nobody is judged by race anymore and back it up I would tell you that I agree and would be for removing Affirmative Action.  Seeing that you cannot do that, there needs to be a check in place to ensure a balance stays in place.  It's called checks and balances.  Just because a check is in place, it doesn't mean that there is always someone trying to get around it, it means that in case someone does try, there is a means to catch it.\n\nAffirmative is a way to prevent preferential treatment of the masses over the minority, not the cause of it.  Flawed logic like yours has erupted in many instances such as the topic of legalizing drugs, it's only a problem because it's illegal.  What they don't consider is the consequences as a result of such an action.  There would no longer be illegal activity, but there would then be an increase of "legal" drug abuse and distribution, not lessening the problem, simply re-labeling it and inadvertently promoting it.\n\nThe same can be applied to Affirmative Action.  If it were to be removed, there would be nothing in place to catch those who would attempt to bypass minority candidates who are qualified and with no way to catch it, or prevent it, it will be free to run rampant again.\n\nDon't fear it, it is a safeguard for those who need protection, are you offended when your bank put up surveillance cameras?  No, it made your bank that much more secure, it wasn't meant to call you a thief.
101528
I believe it is Title 7 of the civil rights acts prohibits discrimination of anyone over the age of 40 (you may want to double check that number, but I'm pretty sure it's right).  Basically that means as long as he is physically & mentally capable of performing the tasks that the job requires, and is the most qualified applicant, they have to hire him.
664452
Check with EEOC for the current rules.  Decades ago it was felt that asking for age, race, religious or ethnic background or gender was prima facia evidence of an intent to discriminate in employment.  A photograph obviously is indicative of age, race, gender and sometimes religious or ethnic background.  \n\nWhile the law is complex, medical schools may still have the right to decide to admit students so as to have an entering class with a certain gender and racial mix.  E.g. a medical school may want to have a male/female ratio close to 50/50; or have a minimum percentage of Native Americans, or Blacks.  A photograph would be useful in deciding which category an applicant would be put in by an observer -- which might be different from the category the applicant might claim.
528918
it basically means that if there is two qualified people trying for a new job but one is white and the other is not(black, hispanic...)the one that is not white will get it.\ni'm against it. if there two qualified people then first come first served. or who has more experience.
385683
You are probably thinking of Affirmative Action:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
549996
Maybe their not intimidated by your skin color, but because of your beauty.
514410
Come on....... I consider every one to be equalls.  You are the one dogging on other races.  That is one thing that gets to me.  How come certain races always imply their is racism?  And want special privileges.  All people have the right to work and to earn respect from others.  Don't expect handouts.    We all started from one race... then the fall of man.  We all need to take care of ourselves.
526175
Affirmative action applies to hiring, firing and promotions.\n\nHere's a Wikipedia article on it.  You can use it to extend your search if you need to do so.
530986
This is the same as happened in South Africa, but within one race.  In time, there will be justice if the people demand it.
616862
Some court decisions have leaned toward the employer's needs in these cases.  Where the appearance of an employee can reasonably be expected to be acceptable to the general public, the clientele, an employer has the right to decide on an applicant's appearance and whether it might or might not be acceptable to the businesses customers.  \n\nIn reality, everyone is to a large degree hired or not on the basis of appearance and the manner in which they answer questions during the interview, where there is one.  So, this also supports what some of the courts have said.
454387
The original concept of affirmative action was simply to actively search out bright and promising young minorities, and help and encourage them to seek some higher education.  But when the pols got through with it and added "quotas" as a measure of compliance, it did become very much a matter of reverse discrimination.  The really sad part about it was that many young people were put into extremely competitive schools, way over their heads, became frustrated and dropped out.  Better to get a 4 year diploma from "Middling U." than drop out of Harvard after 1 semester.  So no, not only is it not fair as a matter of reverse discrimination, it has been self-defeating from the viewpoint of its original intent.  Hope this helps!!
399064
Well, that's called age discrimination and it's illegal.  I believe the law is that they must hire the most qualified candidate regardless of age, gender etc etc.  Contact the EEOC if you want to make an issue of it.
182308
Just as slavery was accepted, but morally bankrupt when compared to the phrase " all men are created equal", affirmative action is accepted by some, but morally bankrupt.  Equal opportunity for all should be taken at its face value, not perverted to raise one group of people over another.
538195
In my honest and humble opinion... I think the government is doing it to avoid a law suit or being labeled as prejudice themselves. The government isn't the ones that said hey im being discriminated against because of my race or nationality it is a few squeaky wheels that messed with the cog so much our government had no choice but to acknowledge there is a difference in skin tones. Its scary that people always blame someone else often our government for their short comings rather than accept that they aren't perfect, learn from their mistakes, move on, and try to become better people by learning from their mistakes.\n\n\nHave a GREAT day!
610981
That doesn't really sound like a discriminatory policy, since it has nothing to do with race, sex, religion, or any other protected class. It's a reasonable policy based on the need to reduce fraud.
506868
Other states are in fact eliminating affirmative action stipulations because affirmative action it and of it's self sets up and environment of preference because of color. I believe business for the most part is color blind, if a person has a good or service that they can provide at a lower cost artficial stimulation because of race is wrong, whether that person is white, black, yellow or purple.
301483
Yes there is a rule in the U.S.A., Germany England, Mexico\nAlthough the main difference is that there the proportion is medium and there is greater scope in the general class of people.There the jobs are assigned according to merit,where this is not the case in case of our country.