| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
13 Oct 2004 03:59:22 PM |
| Object: |
'Value in Diversity' |
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in Southern
Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in diversity." That
credo is in danger of being distorted by several members of the board.
Among the ideas they are advancing: to have science classes offer
instructional materials that teach creationism and cast doubt on
evolution; to require books that stress America's history as "a
Christian nation"; and to revamp sex education so it is informed by
"theological perspectives of the Founders." Board members would also
invite Gideons International to provide Bibles to students, and cull
school reading lists to ban books offering "a neutral or positive view
of immorality or foul language."
Maryland evolution
http://news.google.com/news?q=Maryland%20evolution&num=100&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?q=Maryland+evolution&num=100&hl=en&lr=&tab=nw&ie=UTF-8&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?q=Maryland+evolution&num=100&hl=en&lr=&output=search&cat=gwd/Top
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=Maryland%20evolution&safe=images&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
.
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
13 Oct 2004 05:45:06 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:59:22 +0000 (UTC),
maff <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote:
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in Southern
Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in diversity."
Can't wait to see the lesson plan for teaching Holocaust Denial.
That
credo is in danger of being distorted by several members of the board.
Among the ideas they are advancing: to have science classes offer
instructional materials that teach creationism and cast doubt on
evolution; to require books that stress America's history as "a
Christian nation"; and to revamp sex education so it is informed by
"theological perspectives of the Founders."
I have this hunch that these folks may not know the theological perspectives
of some of the Founding Fathers.
Board members would also
invite Gideons International to provide Bibles to students, and cull
school reading lists to ban books offering "a neutral or positive view
of immorality or foul language."
Will they also be distributing the Book of Mormon, the Qu'ran and the Vedas?
Having seen some of the nonsense being popped out by school boards in the US
and Canada, I'm really wondering whether any part of the education of
children should be left up to people who often have no other qualification
than being able to get their name on the ballot.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
"My illness is due to my doctor's insistence that I drink milk, a
whitish fluid they force down helpless babies." - WC Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 03:57:40 PM |
|
|
AC <mightymartianca@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<slrncmrcbp.2mo.mightymartianca@aaronclausen.alberni.net>...
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:59:22 +0000 (UTC),
maff <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote:
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in Southern
Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in diversity."
Can't wait to see the lesson plan for teaching Holocaust Denial.
That
credo is in danger of being distorted by several members of the board.
Among the ideas they are advancing: to have science classes offer
instructional materials that teach creationism and cast doubt on
evolution; to require books that stress America's history as "a
Christian nation"; and to revamp sex education so it is informed by
"theological perspectives of the Founders."
I have this hunch that these folks may not know the theological perspectives
of some of the Founding Fathers.
"Though the cool deism of Washington can hardly be distinguished in
broad outline from that of Jefferson, the public reaction to the two
men and their religious views differed sharply. Only Jefferson was
denounced as the 'howling atheist,' never Washington. Only Jefferson
was attacked as the enemy of the churches and the clergy, never
Washington. A curious public probed and punches Adams, Franklin and
Jefferson regarding their Christian convictions, but never
Washington." Faith of Our Fathers, Religion and the New Nation. Edwin
S. Gaustad, Harper & Row, (1987) pp 77
"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the
supreme being as his father in the womb of a Virgin Mary, will be
classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of
Jupiter.... But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of
thought in these United States will do away [with] all this artificial
scaffolding. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, 11 April 1823,
as quoted by E. S. Gaustad, "Religion," in Merrill D. Peterson, ed.,
Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography, New York: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1986, p. 287.)
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ed_buckner/quotations.html
"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be
one, He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of
blindfolded Fear."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to his young nephew Peter Carr,
August 10, 1787. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment:
The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York:
George Braziller, 1965, pp. 320-321.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ed_buckner/quotations.html
America's Real Religion
http://www.sunnetworks.net/~ggarman/index.html
Board members would also
invite Gideons International to provide Bibles to students, and cull
school reading lists to ban books offering "a neutral or positive view
of immorality or foul language."
Will they also be distributing the Book of Mormon, the Qu'ran and the Vedas?
Having seen some of the nonsense being popped out by school boards in the US
and Canada, I'm really wondering whether any part of the education of
children should be left up to people who often have no other qualification
than being able to get their name on the ballot.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Casanova" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 04:28:27 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:45:06 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by AC
<mightymartianca@hotmail.com>:
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:59:22 +0000 (UTC),
maff <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote:
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in Southern
Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in diversity."
Can't wait to see the lesson plan for teaching Holocaust Denial.
.....or _The Teachings of Charles Manson_. *That* should be
"diverse" enough for them.
That
credo is in danger of being distorted by several members of the board.
Among the ideas they are advancing: to have science classes offer
instructional materials that teach creationism and cast doubt on
evolution; to require books that stress America's history as "a
Christian nation"; and to revamp sex education so it is informed by
"theological perspectives of the Founders."
I have this hunch that these folks may not know the theological perspectives
of some of the Founding Fathers.
I tend to agree, but this sort of idiot *does* tend toward
wishful thinking. With that in mind, I suggest Ben Franklin
as the ultimate founding-father role model for this sort of
thing. (Although, as a Maryland resident, I suspect opening
Hell-Fire Club franchises specifically for students might
meet with a bit of resistance.)
Or maybe Jefferson...
Board members would also
invite Gideons International to provide Bibles to students, and cull
school reading lists to ban books offering "a neutral or positive view
of immorality or foul language."
Will they also be distributing the Book of Mormon, the Qu'ran and the Vedas?
Don't forget the various native American religions. The
Aztecs in particular should be included.
Having seen some of the nonsense being popped out by school boards in the US
and Canada, I'm really wondering whether any part of the education of
children should be left up to people who often have no other qualification
than being able to get their name on the ballot.
I often wonder whether a degree in "Education", rather than
in the subject being taught (at least at the middle and high
school levels), should be prima facie evidence that the
individual doesn't know the material he/she is attempting to
teach.
I also often wonder whether the fact that almost two-thirds
of the funds allotted for education are spent on
administration of one sort or another might have something
to do with the state of public education in this country.
--
Bob C.
Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
(without the spaces, of course)
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
13 Oct 2004 06:13:33 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:59:22 +0000 (UTC), (maff)
thought hard and said:
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in Southern
Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in diversity." That
credo is in danger of being distorted by several members of the board.
Among the ideas they are advancing: to have science classes offer
instructional materials that teach creationism
<snip>
Oh! I thought you talking about that other type of diversity. You
know, the ***** one all the universities and colleges love to talk
about.
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 16 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, Krzysztof Penderecki, and Geirr Tveitt are my Gods.
Head of EAC Denial Department and Madly Insane Scientist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Jeffery" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
13 Oct 2004 08:37:26 PM |
|
|
"Daniel Kolle" <DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:audrm0tt307f5b053mn29l1piak2viv0vm@4ax.com...
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:59:22 +0000 (UTC), (maff)
thought hard and said:
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in Southern
Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in diversity." That
credo is in danger of being distorted by several members of the board.
Among the ideas they are advancing: to have science classes offer
instructional materials that teach creationism
<snip>
Oh! I thought you talking about that other type of diversity. You
know, the ***** one all the universities and colleges love to talk
about.
Just to make sure there is no confusion. Please explain what that is.
Alan Jeffery
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 16 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, Krzysztof Penderecki, and Geirr
Tveitt are my Gods.
Head of EAC Denial Department and Madly Insane Scientist.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 8/10/2004
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
13 Oct 2004 09:08:58 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 01:37:26 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Jeffery"
<observa_no_spam@xtra.co.nz> thought hard and said:
"Daniel Kolle" <DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:audrm0tt307f5b053mn29l1piak2viv0vm@4ax.com...
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:59:22 +0000 (UTC), (maff)
thought hard and said:
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in Southern
Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in diversity." That
credo is in danger of being distorted by several members of the board.
Among the ideas they are advancing: to have science classes offer
instructional materials that teach creationism
<snip>
Oh! I thought you talking about that other type of diversity. You
know, the ***** one all the universities and colleges love to talk
about.
Just to make sure there is no confusion. Please explain what that is.
Alan Jeffery
My omment is about affirmative action. Its proponents claim it
increases diversity. Diversity is overrated.
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 16 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, Krzysztof Penderecki, and Geirr Tveitt are my Gods.
Head of EAC Denial Department and Madly Insane Scientist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Bohn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
13 Oct 2004 09:48:31 PM |
|
|
Daniel Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:94orm0pbph75f2c7rpup23q3hl715sndi4@4ax.com:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 01:37:26 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Jeffery"
<observa_no_spam@xtra.co.nz> thought hard and said:
"Daniel Kolle" <DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:audrm0tt307f5b053mn29l1piak2viv0vm@4ax.com...
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:59:22 +0000 (UTC), (maff)
thought hard and said:
'Value in Diversity'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28384-2004Oct12.html
Page A20
ON ITS WEB SITE, the Board of Education of Charles County, in
Southern Maryland, affirms its belief that "there is value in
diversity." That credo is in danger of being distorted by several
members of the board. Among the ideas they are advancing: to have
science classes offer instructional materials that teach
creationism
<snip>
Oh! I thought you talking about that other type of diversity. You
know, the ***** one all the universities and colleges love to
talk about.
Just to make sure there is no confusion. Please explain what that is.
Alan Jeffery
My omment is about affirmative action. Its proponents claim it
increases diversity. Diversity is overrated.
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 16 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, Krzysztof Penderecki, and Geirr
Tveitt are my Gods. Head of EAC Denial Department and Madly Insane
Scientist.
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
--
apatriot #23, aa #1779, Grand Poobah (Pubbah)(Hell! head honcho), EAC
Department of Oxygen Deprivation Responsible for brain damage
everywhere!
Gary Bohn
Conservatism is the political philosophy that it ain't broke so don't
try to fix it. Therefore, if that is indeed how it is, that is what
ought to be.
The Wilkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 10:37:46 AM |
|
|
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Bohn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 06:47:33 PM |
|
|
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in
news:873c0hux0y.fsf@drizzle.com:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon
how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Elf
Not *special rights*, equal rights. You sound bitter.
--
apatriot #23, aa #1779, Grand Poobah (Pubbah)(Hell! head honcho), EAC
Department of Oxygen Deprivation Responsible for brain damage
everywhere!
Gary Bohn
Conservatism is the political philosophy that it ain't broke so don't
try to fix it. Therefore, if that is indeed how it is, that is what
ought to be.
The Wilkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 10:20:31 AM |
|
|
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon
how much melanin their bodies produce.
Not *special rights*, equal rights. You sound bitter.
Nah, I've never had to view the issue from either end. I'm
pretty blind about the whole issue; this is strictly an intellectual
exercise for me.
"Equal opportunity" forbidding the government from
discriminating on the basis of race, gender, etc. is equality. Laws
_forbidding_ private citizens from discriminatory practices result
primarily in court cases; they're just as much sand in the gears as
discrimination itself.
Elf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Casanova" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 03:53:55 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:47:33 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Gary Bohn
<garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca>:
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in
news:873c0hux0y.fsf@drizzle.com:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon
how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Elf
Not *special rights*, equal rights.
No, it has to do with special privileges extended to some
segments of the population because of past injustices to
their ancestors.
You sound bitter.
No, he sounds irritated.
--
Bob C.
Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
(without the spaces, of course)
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
.
|
|
|
| User: "rich hammett" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
17 Oct 2004 08:41:51 PM |
|
|
In talk.origins Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:47:33 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Gary Bohn
<garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca>:
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in
news:873c0hux0y.fsf@drizzle.com:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon
how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Elf
Not *special rights*, equal rights.
No, it has to do with special privileges extended to some
segments of the population because of past injustices to
their ancestors.
It is not because of wrongs to ancestors. It is because of
current and RECENT wrongs.
rich
You sound bitter.
No, he sounds irritated.
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ "Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world;
\ than the pride that divides
/ when a colorful rag is unfurled."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Wustner" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 01:54:52 PM |
|
|
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Utter nonsense. The lighter-skinned folk *already have* those "special
rights" you talk about. What it really does is take the first steps
toward leveling the playing field.
--
Frank Wustner
Atheist #119
BAAWA Knight
.
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 11:24:39 PM |
|
|
"Frank Wustner" <fwustner@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fwustner-0E2091.12031714102004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Utter nonsense. The lighter-skinned folk *already have* those "special
rights" you talk about. What it really does is take the first steps
toward leveling the playing field.
Then it should be called what it is...."getting even."
I despise racism, whether it is the "good ol' boy" network, or putting
someone to the front of the line *because* of the color of their skin, or
that they have factory indoor or outdoor plumbing.
Yes, I believe minorities have a huge hurdle to overcome to break out of the
historic, socio-economic rut they're in. And I believe it is incumbent upon
us (the haves) to help them do it.
I'm not claiming to have some magical answer. But I will not sit and
sugarcoat "affirmative action." It is NOT equality.
--
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Apatriot #22
Atheist FF/EMT
.....and ordained minister
Stork pin recipient: May 1, 2003 -Madelyn
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 02:33:13 PM |
|
|
Frank Wustner <fwustner@hotmail.com> writes:
Utter nonsense. The lighter-skinned folk *already have* those "special
rights" you talk about.
Which are? Note: I'm asking about "special rights" that are
enforced by law.
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Bohn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 06:54:04 PM |
|
|
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in
news:87pt3lrszp.fsf@drizzle.com:
Frank Wustner <fwustner@hotmail.com> writes:
Utter nonsense. The lighter-skinned folk *already have* those
"special rights" you talk about.
Which are? Note: I'm asking about "special rights" that are
enforced by law.
Elf
I have been an assistant manager in two businesses and a manager in one,
my wife is aboriginal. I have watched while my wife went from place to
place looking for a job, only to find one that had what you call
affirmative action. I have watched managers and district managers refuse
to hire on basis of colour. It's time for you to get in touch with
reality. The AA is an attempt to give non-whites the same opportunities
to work as whites.
--
apatriot #23, aa #1779, Grand Poobah (Pubbah)(Hell! head honcho), EAC
Department of Oxygen Deprivation Responsible for brain damage
everywhere!
Gary Bohn
Conservatism is the political philosophy that it ain't broke so don't
try to fix it. Therefore, if that is indeed how it is, that is what
ought to be.
The Wilkins
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Blow" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 05:20:59 PM |
|
|
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
Frank Wustner <fwustner@hotmail.com> writes:
Utter nonsense. The lighter-skinned folk *already have* those "special
rights" you talk about.
Which are? Note: I'm asking about "special rights" that are
enforced by law.
How about access to housing without discrimination. That does not seem
too special.
Joe
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "rich hammett" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 12:59:06 PM |
|
|
In talk.origins Elf M. Sternberg <elf@drizzle.com> sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
What exactly is it about affirmative action you deem offensive?
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Or it notes that there is an externally-defined class of people that
are easily seen to be discriminated against, and attempts to offer
a partial remedy to that discrimination.
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ "Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world;
\ than the pride that divides
/ when a colorful rag is unfurled."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 02:03:45 PM |
|
|
rich hammett <bubbarichau@warmmail.com> writes:
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Or it notes that there is an externally-defined class of people that
are easily seen to be discriminated against, and attempts to offer
a partial remedy to that discrimination.
The only legitimate remedy is allow people their freedom of
conscience in all things, hiring and firing, buying and selling
included. Only the goverment should be constrained from the recognition
of external definitions for conditions which have no bearing on an
individual's capacities. There is nothing about "race, creed, religion
or national origin" that does not make two people equally capable of
doing a task. An employer or retailer who uses those criteria to filter
out qualified people suffers from doing so; let him.
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Bohn" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
14 Oct 2004 06:49:51 PM |
|
|
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in
news:874qkxt8x5.fsf@drizzle.com:
rich hammett <bubbarichau@warmmail.com> writes:
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based
upon how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Or it notes that there is an externally-defined class of people that
are easily seen to be discriminated against, and attempts to offer
a partial remedy to that discrimination.
The only legitimate remedy is allow people their freedom of
conscience in all things, hiring and firing, buying and selling
included. Only the goverment should be constrained from the
recognition of external definitions for conditions which have no
bearing on an individual's capacities. There is nothing about "race,
creed, religion or national origin" that does not make two people
equally capable of doing a task. An employer or retailer who uses
those criteria to filter out qualified people suffers from doing so;
let him.
Elf
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
--
apatriot #23, aa #1779, Grand Poobah (Pubbah)(Hell! head honcho), EAC
Department of Oxygen Deprivation Responsible for brain damage
everywhere!
Gary Bohn
Conservatism is the political philosophy that it ain't broke so don't
try to fix it. Therefore, if that is indeed how it is, that is what
ought to be.
The Wilkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 10:26:23 AM |
|
|
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
Which is my point. Any company that deliberately slows itself
down by hiring lesser-qualified people is committing suicide. I suppose
that, in the U.S., some great fix was needed given the sheer inequality
of established capital blacks had opposite whites after the Civil War,
but for such a fix to persist indefinitely is simply not warranted.
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Mathers" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 03:42:39 PM |
|
|
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
Which is my point. Any company that deliberately slows itself
down by hiring lesser-qualified people is committing suicide. I suppose
that, in the U.S., some great fix was needed given the sheer inequality
of established capital blacks had opposite whites after the Civil War,
but for such a fix to persist indefinitely is simply not warranted.
Elf
No it is economically an advantage to hire one group at a low wage and
have the discrimated group hired at a even lower wage. Substitutibiity
of labor is easily accomplished in most jobs. Most employment is not
tech/high skilled where subsitutibility of labor is critical to profits.
Your basic assumptions about post Civil War blacks disadvantage are
correct but education for African-Americans from post Civil War to the
1970's was severely constrained by white racist policies in the South.
The last three decades have not overcome the century of
discrimination, even though there has been significant improvement.
Education while crucial for advancement is highly contingent upon class
background. Most African-Americans are in the lower and working class
in the South and this alone constrains educational development in
indiviuals whether black or white. The non-South patterns of historical
discrimantion were not as harash as the South but were none the less
salient for restricting educational and economic betterment.
RAM
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Morgan" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 07:57:25 PM |
|
|
In article <87u0swf17b.fsf@drizzle.com>,
Elf M. Sternberg <elf@drizzle.com> wrote:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
Which is my point. Any company that deliberately slows itself
down by hiring lesser-qualified people is committing suicide.
This seems a little extreme. Companies exist in all stages of success.
Some meander along, some wither and die, some grow and crush all others.
It's entirely possibly that by hiring (mostly) lesser qualified people
a company would merely not do as well as they could but still do pretty
well. And there are plenty of companies top heavy with brains and
dripping with motivation that fall apart.
Alan
--
Defendit numerus
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "rich hammett" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 11:19:37 AM |
|
|
In talk.origins Elf M. Sternberg <elf@drizzle.com> sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
Which is my point. Any company that deliberately slows itself
down by hiring lesser-qualified people is committing suicide. I suppose
that, in the U.S., some great fix was needed given the sheer inequality
of established capital blacks had opposite whites after the Civil War,
but for such a fix to persist indefinitely is simply not warranted.
Strangely, the system was still rolling along, excluding
whoever they damn well wanted, into the 1970's. Don't
try to pretend that the systemic inequality ended in
1865.
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ "Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world;
\ than the pride that divides
/ when a colorful rag is unfurled."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 04:14:38 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:26:23 +0000 (UTC),
Elf M. Sternberg <elf@drizzle.com> wrote:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
Which is my point. Any company that deliberately slows itself
down by hiring lesser-qualified people is committing suicide. I suppose
that, in the U.S., some great fix was needed given the sheer inequality
of established capital blacks had opposite whites after the Civil War,
but for such a fix to persist indefinitely is simply not warranted.
The problem was that it wasn't fixed at the end of the Civil War. We can
debate until the end of time why Reconstruction failed to help the ex-slave,
but the fact remains that the ex-slave and his descendants were, at best,
second-class citizens, in those places where they were treated like citizens
at all. The descendants of the white slave masters did everything they
could to make sure that any benefit of the 13th amendment never accrued to
the ex-slaves and their descendants. In a final bit of cruel, bigoted
irony, they came up wit the notion of Separate but Equal, which certainly
kept blacks separate, but certainly did not keep them equal.
Things are a lot better today than they were, but they are by no means where
they should be. I agree that the end of the process should be a blind
system where gender, skin color and sexual preference play no part at all.
I don't like AA, but quite frankly I don't think anyone has any other idea
how to reverse generations of conscious and unconscious racism. The
evidence of the post-Reconstruction era indicates that most segments of
white society in the South were quite happy to oppress black people, and
until the Civil Right gathered steam, there was darn little being done by
anybody.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
"My illness is due to my doctor's insistence that I drink milk, a
whitish fluid they force down helpless babies." - WC Fields
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Liberator Veritatis" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 07:47:33 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:26:23 +0000 (UTC), "Elf M. Sternberg"
<elf@drizzle.com> wrote:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
Which is my point. Any company that deliberately slows itself
down by hiring lesser-qualified people is committing suicide. I suppose
that, in the U.S., some great fix was needed given the sheer inequality
of established capital blacks had opposite whites after the Civil War,
but for such a fix to persist indefinitely is simply not warranted.
Elf
Well, just to argue with you, I think that what you are saying isn't
true at all. Imagine a diner that hires black waiters. If the
prevailing social mores are racist, then they will go right out of
business. So, I think that it is just as much suicide to go against
the local culture as it is to hire "less qualified" employees.
Actually, the question is what constitutes "qualifications"? Are ugly
women just as qualified to be models as pretty women? The same
applies to black works in a racist (against blacks) society.
The fact is that they were racists in the South (East) until fairly
recently in US history. By that I do not mean that there were some
racists, I mean that the *private* social order was indeed racist. In
fact, there was much more than racist businesses and that sort of
thing. It was a racist legal system (which really IS wrong and an
injustice and so on). There were all these problems with voting and
abuse by police and courts and so on. Of course like any political
movement, it all gets taken too far and starts intruding into areas it
should not to "stamp out racism" rather than the much less glamorous
(and much less exploitable) ideal of simply "establishing justice".
But, I think it was on the whole true that you had a racist culture
and it was a very bad place for blacks to be in the South which makes
you wonder why they stuck around there. Businesses would have to be
AFRAID NOT to be racist as would private individuals.
But just by the way, this affirmative action race card crap now, is
just ridiculous. I'm sorry, but your HBCU degree isn't worth ***** --
not because you are black, but because you really are stupid and
uneducated. Those universities do not educate you. (In fact most
universities do not, but especially HBCUs are no better than the
University of Phoenix Online.) It is all such an obvious and crude
ploy.
--
Liberator Veritatis
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
19 Oct 2004 02:36:28 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:26:23 +0000 (UTC), "Elf M. Sternberg"
<elf@drizzle.com> wrote:
Gary Bohn <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> writes:
You seem to have your head in the sand. Non-whites can't get jobs, not
because of their lack of qualifications, but because of their colour. In
many instances the whites will be hired because they *are* white, not
because they have better qualifications.
Which is my point. Any company that deliberately slows itself
down by hiring lesser-qualified people is committing suicide. I suppose
that, in the U.S., some great fix was needed given the sheer inequality
of established capital blacks had opposite whites after the Civil War,
but for such a fix to persist indefinitely is simply not warranted.
Up through the 60's and possibly up to, say, 1990. I don't see AA now
being other than a problem reversed.
Elf
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dick C" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 10:29:15 AM |
|
|
Elf M. Sternberg wrote in talk.origins
rich hammett <bubbarichau@warmmail.com> writes:
Trivial: it extends special rights to individuals based upon
how
much melanin their bodies produce.
Or it notes that there is an externally-defined class of people that
are easily seen to be discriminated against, and attempts to offer
a partial remedy to that discrimination.
The only legitimate remedy is allow people their freedom of
conscience in all things, hiring and firing, buying and selling
included.
Believe it or not, there are reasons, valid reasons, for those laws
to be in place. And it is to give everybody equal rights, they
remove no rights from you. I know you live in the same area I do,
so maybe you did not see it, or maybe you are too young to have seen
it. But up until the 60's we did not have the equal rights laws.
In the south, where discrimination was the most prevalent, minorities
could not do anything where whites went. And jobs were extremely
limited to minorities. They would be given only the most menial of
jobs. And if, by some chance, they actually got a decent job, it was
almost always at lower pay than whites received. They could not buy
a house in a neighbor hood they wanted, they could not rent a good
motel room, they could not eat at the better restaurants, or even
any restaurant that whites ate at. Most of the time they had to enter
public buildings by a different entrance. They couldn't even drink
out of the same water fountains. And no matter how tired and aged
a black person was, they could not sit in the front of the bus, even
if the only seats open were in the front.
You may whine about the loss of some right, but the reality is
that the only right you lost is the right to force minorities
to a lower level.
You still have all the rights that worth anything, and because of
the anti discrimination laws, others have the same rights.
And if you think that we will not go back to that state if we repealed
the laws, you have a most unrealistic view of life and people I have
seen.
--
***** #1349
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
~Benjamin Franklin
Home Page: dickcr.iwarp.com
email:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 11:39:38 AM |
|
|
***** C <foo.dickcr@comcast.net> writes:
And it is to give everybody equal rights, they remove no rights from
you.
Sure they do. If I own something, but am not free to choose
with whom I may share it, then my right to decide my fate with respect
to my property is diminished or removed. This includes a house I own,
or a restaurant I operate.
You may whine about the loss of some right, but the reality is
that the only right you lost is the right to force minorities
to a lower level.
As much as I hate to say it, that's still a right that I believe
individuals should have; I believe individuals should have the right to
act as obnoxiously as they wish.
You still have all the rights that worth anything...
Except freedom of conscience. Oh, wait, that doesn't matter
because it's *the wrong kind of conscience.* Y'know, theists say the
same thing about us.
To me, this is all pretty much an intellectual argument about
the role' of government. I prefer the notion of the watchman state; its
purpose is primarily negative and its approach must be egalitarian, but
imposing those values on citizens is beyond the charter of a social
contract that must persist for generations. The imposition of equal
opportunity rights in the workplace and in public accomodations is, I
suppose, egalitarian for everyone except the business owner. I
understand why people think the business owner's conscience is
irrelevant; I just don't like it.
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dick C" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Value in Diversity' |
15 Oct 2004 03:17:13 PM |
|
|
Elf M. Sternberg wrote in talk.origins
***** C <foo. > writes:
And it is to give everybody equal rights, they remove no rights from
you.
Sure they do. If I own something, but am not free to choose
with whom I may share it, then my right to decide my fate with respect
to my property is diminished or removed. This includes a house I own,
or a restaurant I operate.
How is that a right? And you should note, that you have the right, in
to sell your house to your friends or family, without putting it on
the market. You also have the right to serve who you like in your
home, or to host a private party and to invite whoever you want. Based
on whatever criteria you choose. But if you are going public, then it
should be all the public. Not just who you choose.
If you are going to sell to the public, but then will not sell to someone
based on the color of their skin, or where they go to church, or
some other arbitrary standard, you are not exercising your rights,
you are removing theirs.
You may whine about the loss of some right, but the reality is
that the only right you lost is the right to force minorities
to a lower level.
As much as I hate to say it, that's still a right that I believe
individuals should have; I believe individuals should have the right to
act as obnoxiously as they wish.
And they can. But your right to swing your fist ends at my chin. The
ACLU spends lots of time fighting for people to be as obnoxious as
they want. It is very obnoxious to a lot of people to have the Nazis
or KKK march through town, or to have the ten commandmants be removed
from a government building.
You still have all the rights that worth anything...
Except freedom of conscience. Oh, wait, that doesn't matter
because it's *the wrong kind of conscience.* Y'know, theists say the
same thing about us.
Freedom of Consience? What right is that? Where is that granted?
To me, this is all pretty much an intellectual argument about
the role' of government. I prefer the notion of the watchman state; its
purpose is primarily negative and its approach must be egalitarian, but
imposing those values on citizens is beyond the charter of a social
contract that must persist for generations. The imposition of equal
opportunity rights in the workplace and in public accomodations is, I
suppose, egalitarian for everyone except the business owner. I
understand why people think the business owner's conscience is
irrelevant; I just don't like it.
What is strange is that you are arguing not for the "freedom of
conscience", rather for the right to discriminate, the right to
put us back into the era of the 1950's or earlier. When minorities
not only had no rights, or jobs, or any of what white people consider
normal, they didn't even have the right to be protected from those
who had rights.
You may not like it, but the constitution spells out certain rights,
and those are supposed to apply to all, but they have not until
the force of the law is brought about. `
--
***** #1349
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
~Benjamin Franklin
Home Page: dickcr.iwarp.com
email:
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
