Finally! Supreme Court rules in favor of First Amendment rights for Christians etc.

[HikerGuy83]

Who actually worked harder to get there?
Who had to overcome more obstacles?
Which one will provide the greater benefit to society with his degree?

See, asked the questions you don't have the answers for.

It's always amusing to see white people say, "Poor Little Asians" when promoting this garbage, when they didn't really ask for your help.

Pray tell.....how would they make those assessments.

What if they chose a white person over a black person because they worked harder and had to overcome more obstacles and will provide a greater benefit to society ?

You really going to accept that assessment ?

 

[HikerGuy83]

See, asked the questions you don't have the answers for.

Neither do you.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Again, you work on the assumption that this ruling will mean much of anything.

Which is why the left is browning it's collective drawers over it....for nothing.

You only make this claim because you lost.....and somehow it makes you feel better.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Not at all, dripping Poop. Don't you have some disgusting videos to watch?

(Just for fun, everyone look up unkotare's screen name on Google. DO NOT check out the image search. Once you've seen it, you can't unsee it.)



The SAT isn't unbiased. It was a test developed by a racist, and it still has very racist components.

Universities are chucking it now because it's a largely flawed measure of academic success.

The SAT doesn't predict how smart you are, it just measures how good you are at taking tests.

5 Things Your Sat Score Does Not Measure, Including Intelligence

Here are five things - including intelligence - that the SAT does not measure or predict.

www.thoughtco.com

Someone in my family scored a perfect score on her SAT. And she failed miserably in her first year of college. Why? Because she simply didn't have the discipline to do the work.

(Then again, her parents are Trump supporters... so go figure.)

Spoken like a true sore loser.

Seriously...this is supposed to be an argument ?

 

[JoeB131]

I agree with you to a point.

If they want to help people of color.

Right now, they are excluding asians (but I guess they qualify as white).

Well, let's look at that. Were Asians slaves? Were there laws specifically put on the books to keep them from using the same facilities white people did? Were there laws put on the books to keep them from marrying white people? Did they create laws to imprison them on faulty pretexts to force them into servitude? Nope. Not at all.

And you'll continue to see Harvard accept morons like Joy Reid.

We are so much better off having her around.

No more than Bush getting in to Yale on a Legacy, (even though he's dumber than a stump) or Trump's dad buying his way into Fordham.

I always say, let's have a game of Jeopardy! with Bush, Obama and Trump as the contestants.

I'm betting Obama would win.

Pray tell.....how would they make those assessments.

What if they chose a white person over a black person because they worked harder and had to overcome more obstacles and will provide a greater benefit to society ?

You really going to accept that assessment ?

I'd be fine with it, if there was really merit involved.

Which is why the left is browning it's collective drawers over it....for nothing.

You only make this claim because you lost.....and somehow it makes you feel better.

I'm a realist, Harvard is a liberal institution that isn't going to pay much attention to a Supreme Court it barely considers legitimate. They have a team of the best lawyers figuring out ways to get around this ruling as we speak.

Spoken like a true sore loser.

Seriously...this is supposed to be an argument ?

Did I need to use smaller words for you?

Here's the thing. The SAT isn't the law of the land. Really, nothing keeps Universities from throwing it out as a consideration, and frankly, given its racist history, they probably should.

 

[j-mac]

Naw, the universities will just find other ways to get black kids in the door.

The ruling left a couple wide open. One was it exempted the Military Academies. So all the Ivy League has to do is adopt the same system for selecting candidates. Have every member of Congress forward five qualified candidates.

The other thing it left open was that race CAN be considered as part of the narrative. Which means if you are the poor black kid who worked two jobs to save for college, and is active in the community center, you are going to get in before the Asian kid whose parents drilled him on test taking every day.

The universities can also chuck white privilege admissions like legacies and children of staff.

college admissions should be a meritocracy period....The world needs the trades as well....We know that Universities are less about higher education these days and more about churning out activists....So, to spend the outrageous amount of money they want is a dumb move...

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

So you are exposed as a liar and coward.

You have offered no evidence. Ad hom attacks are meaningless.

 

[Soupnazi630]

You have offered no evidence. Ad hom attacks are meaningless.

That is not how this works.

You made accusations with no evidence,

Making your attacks lies ands smear.

 

[JoeB131]

college admissions should be a meritocracy period....The world needs the trades as well....We know that Universities are less about higher education these days and more about churning out activists....So, to spend the outrageous amount of money they want is a dumb move...

Let's get real... College is a product.

You need this product to get advancement.

Shouldn't be that way, but it is.

So Harvard is more prestigious a product than let's say, UIC!

Harvard is a BMW, UIC is a Ford Focus.

If you want to claim meritocracy, then get rid of athletics, dean's interest, Legacies, children of staff advancement, veteran admissions, and not only affirmative action for race, but for gender as well.

Then come up with a better measure of academic excellence than a flawed standardized test.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

That is not how this works.

You made accusations with no evidence,

Making your attacks lies ands smear.

You are gaslighting. You are doing what you accuse me of doing. Where is your evidence? You have none.

 

[Soupnazi630]

You are gaslighting. You are doing what you accuse me of doing. Where is your evidence? You have none.

The burden of proof is on you not me liar

You made an accusation back it up with evidence or it proves you are a liar and moral coward'

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The burden of proof is on you not me liar

You made an accusation back it up with evidence or it proves you are a liar and moral coward'

You have no evidence. I point that out and you want to provide evidence that you have no evidence.

Your allegation, your burden.

 

[Soupnazi630]

You have no evidence. I point that out and you want to provide evidence that you have no evidence.

Your allegation, your burden.

Wrong motherfucker I made no accusation YOU DID

You have the burden of proof and since you run away like a coward it IS proof that you ARDE a cowardly dishonest person

That is fact and how this works

The proof I have is YOU run away

 

[mak2]

Geeze, can't we all just get along?

 

[BS Filter]

Regardless of which side you're on, this is legislating from the bench and bad practice. If the Colorado legislature wanted to exempt religious people, they would have written the law with the exemption spelled out. They didn't. The law should be struck down in its entirety. Inserting a carve-out for religious people is just playing the identity politics game.

We've always had exemptions for religious reasons. We're just taking our country back and some people don't like it. Tough shit.

 

[BS Filter]

Geeze, can't we all just get along?

Nope. This is a war.

 

[j-mac]

Let's get real... College is a product.

You need this product to get advancement.

Shouldn't be that way, but it is.

So Harvard is more prestigious a product than let's say, UIC!

Harvard is a BMW, UIC is a Ford Focus.

If you want to claim meritocracy, then get rid of athletics, dean's interest, Legacies, children of staff advancement, veteran admissions, and not only affirmative action for race, but for gender as well.

Then come up with a better measure of academic excellence than a flawed standardized test.

We need the trades too.

 

[BS Filter]

Well, let's look at that. Were Asians slaves? Were there laws specifically put on the books to keep them from using the same facilities white people did? Were there laws put on the books to keep them from marrying white people? Did they create laws to imprison them on faulty pretexts to force them into servitude? Nope. Not at all.



No more than Bush getting in to Yale on a Legacy, (even though he's dumber than a stump) or Trump's dad buying his way into Fordham.

I always say, let's have a game of Jeopardy! with Bush, Obama and Trump as the contestants.

I'm betting Obama would win.



I'd be fine with it, if there was really merit involved.



I'm a realist, Harvard is a liberal institution that isn't going to pay much attention to a Supreme Court it barely considers legitimate. They have a team of the best lawyers figuring out ways to get around this ruling as we speak.


Did I need to use smaller words for you?

Here's the thing. The SAT isn't the law of the land. Really, nothing keeps Universities from throwing it out as a consideration, and frankly, given its racist history, they probably should.

So in order to right wrongs from the past we must discriminate?

 

[dblack]

We've always had exemptions for religious reasons. We're just taking our country back and some people don't like it. Tough shit.

Nonsense. The first amendment says ... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Read it again. There's no mention of exemptions or loopholes for religious people. It's just a restriction on Congress.

 

[BS Filter]

Nonsense. The first amendment says ... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Read it again. There's no mention of exemptions or loopholes for religious people. It's just a restriction on Congress.

So you believe that the states have a right to take away our Constitutional rights. The Supreme Court disagrees with you.