SCOTUS Rules On Race As A Placement Factor

[RetiredGySgt]

Please, please learn the quote function. It's so much easier for all of us to follow the arguments...

He did use the quote function.

 

[Larkinn]

Please, please learn the quote function. It's so much easier for all of us to follow the arguments...

I'll try.

 

[Annie]

He did use the quote function.

Not quite, he added the name which is a good start. But those little blue arrows help tons when the thread becomes more than 2 pages.

 

[red states rule]

We can only hope for another lib steps down, and put an end to the PC crap liberal Judges hand down from the bench

At least Pres Bush made good appointments to the SC

 

[red states rule]

"The only segregation occurring in the US now is on College Campuses by Blacks demanding segregated living and studying arrangements."


did you forget to add , "in my inexpert layman's opinion", because that statement sure reads like it's presented as a statement of fact.

Libs are starting to play the race card on again. Watch out for Jesse and Rev Al running to the nearest TV camera or liberal reporter

 

[Larkinn]

Libs are starting to play the race card on again. Watch out for Jesse and Rev Al running to the nearest TV camera or liberal reporter

It was a court ruling about race...of course its going to be mentioned. Derr...

 

[red states rule]

It was a court ruling about race...of course its going to be mentioned. Derr...

It is about taking race out of the issue - something libs do not want

 

[Little-Acorn]

The Supreme Court dealt a severe blow to school integration efforts today, ruling that the Constitution forbids assigning students to particular schools because of their race, even when the goal is campus diversity.

The article gets it wrong again - unsurprising for a paper out of San Francisco.

The Supreme Court didn't deal a blow to school integration efforts. The Constitution did that, when the 14th amendment made it illegal to discriminate based on race or color. The Supremes merely pointed it out, as is their legitimate job.

What's the problem? You don't like it when you're not allowed to use race or color as a factor, one way or another? Then amend the Constitution. Right now it says you're SOL, and that's not the Supreme Court's fault.

The article author sounds similar to a bank robber who says cops are depriving him of his "right" to take money out of the vault by force. They're not doing it, the law is doing it. They are merely upholding the law, as is their job. And the Supremes are upholding the law too, just as they should.

It's up to us (actually 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states) to change it if we don't like it. But why are you complaining about the Supreme Court? They've done exactly what they should (for a change): uphold the law as we, the people, wrote it. I wouldn't have them do anything else.

Don't like it? Get your amendment going. And if 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states don't agree with you, I guess you're out of luck. That's the Constitutional republic we live in. And just maybe, 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states are wiser than you are in this matter. That's why the Constitution specifies those numbers to amend it - the Framers figured that such a large, diverse group would come to the right decision more often than a few misguided hotheads would. Maybe you'd like to pick another form of govt - there are plenty around the world to choose from. Let me know what you find.

But until then, why criticize the Supreme Court for doing their job correctly?

 

[actsnoblemartin]

race should never be considered, the end.

The article gets it wrong again - unsurprising for a paper out of San Francisco.

The Supreme Court didn't deal a blow to school integration efforts. The Constitution did that, when the 14th amendment made it illegal to discriminate based on race or color. The Supremes merely pointed it out, as is their legitimate job.

What's the problem? You don't like it when you're not allowed to use race or color as a factor, one way or another? Then amend the Constitution. Right now it says you're SOL, and that's not the Supreme Court's fault.

The article author sounds similar to a bank robber who says cops are depriving him of his "right" to take money out of the vault by force. They're not doing it, the law is doing it. They are merely upholding the law, as is their job. And the Supremes are upholding the law too, just as they should.

It's up to us (actually 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states) to change it if we don't like it. But why are you complaining about the Supreme Court? They've done exactly what they should (for a change): uphold the law as we, the people, wrote it. I wouldn't have them do anything else.

Don't like it? Get your amendment going. And if 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states don't agree with you, I guess you're out of luck. That's the Constitutional republic we live in. And just maybe, 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states are wiser than you are in this matter. That's why the Constitution specifies those numbers to amend it - the Framers figured that such a large, diverse group would come to the right decision more often than a few misguided hotheads would. Maybe you'd like to pick another form of govt - there are plenty around the world to choose from. Let me know what you find.

But until then, why criticize the Supreme Court for doing their job correctly?

 

[JeffWartman]

It is a fact. I notice when you make your statements of "fact" about Islam and Sunni/shiite behavior you never add " my inexpert layman's opinion"

It sounds funny when you pretend to be an expert on anything.

 

[Larkinn]

It is about taking race out of the issue - something libs do not want

Tell me how you can take race out of an all black or all white school in a diverse city?

The Supreme Court didn't deal a blow to school integration efforts. The Constitution did that, when the 14th amendment made it illegal to discriminate based on race or color. The Supremes merely pointed it out, as is their legitimate job.

Discrimination != not allowed to mention it, ever.

So no, actually, it was the USSC which did that. Not the Constitution.

 

[red states rule]

It sounds funny when you pretend to be an expert on anything.

Pot calling the kettle black

 

[red states rule]

Tell me how you can take race out of an all black or all white school in a diverse city?



Discrimination != not allowed to mention it, ever.

So no, actually, it was the USSC which did that. Not the Constitution.

You can take race out by ignoring the color of all the kids - and treating them all equally

Something libs can't do

 

[maineman]

You can take race out by ignoring the color of all the kids - and treating them all equally

Something libs can't do

and if conservatives would put their money where their mouths are, and actually funded schools in minority inner city neigborhoods like they do the all white schools in the 'burbs, then maybe you could bitch.

 

[red states rule]

and if conservatives would put their money where their mouths are, and actually funded schools in minority inner city neigborhoods like they do the all white schools in the 'burbs, then maybe you could bitch.

Record amounts of money is being spent on education - money is not the answer

If it was DC schools would be the best - they are near the bottom in results

 

[maineman]

Record amounts of money is being spent on education - money is not the answer

If it was DC schools would be the best - they are near the bottom in results

are you suggesting that the school budget dollars per student are the same in inner city schools as they are in white suburbs? yes or no?

 

[red states rule]

are you suggesting that the school budget dollars per student are the same in inner city schools as they are in white suburbs? yes or no?

I am saying money will not solve the issue

It is was DC schools would have the best results in the nation

 

[maineman]

are you suggesting that the school budget dollars per student are the same in inner city schools as they are in white suburbs? yes or no?

you forgot to answer this question.

 

[red states rule]

you forgot to answer this question.

no i didn't

money is not the answer - to libs it always the answer

 

[maineman]

no i didn't

money is not the answer - to libs it always the answer

I didn't ask you what the "answer" was, I asked you if you were suggesting that the school budget dollars per student are the same in inner city schools as they are in white suburbs? yes or no?

now can you quit tapdancing and just type "yes" or "no"?