Affirmative action and racial profiling are both race based legislation...(topic continued)

My opponent is correct in his assertion that people are free to hold whatever political opinions they see fit, this however is not proof that there is no contradiction with supporting/opposing racial profiling or affirmative action, and not both. I will explain at the end of my argument how it is not a contradiction to support one issue MORE than the other. The contradiction at hand is supporting one issue OVER the other. I will now address my opponents examples in the first round: My opponent has provided two examples, his first involves a man (Lionel) who opposes racial profiling due to living in a predominantly black ghetto while also living a clean lifestyle. Lionel also supports affirmative action for being denied many job opportunities despite his qualifications. If Lionel truly believes that affirmative action would be the best way to obtain his desired job position, and that it is perfectly acceptable for his race to be taken into account in ways that could possibly favor him over those who are more or just as qualified as he is, then Lionel should understand that this is the same mentality used by Steve in my opponent's second example. Steve's mentality is that the best way to achieve a lower crime rate and keep his car safe is to have the police force take race into account. Steve assumes that blacks are commiting crimes the same way Lionel assumes that employers are discriminating against him. What these two people have in common is that they both jump to conclusions over the intentions of a specific group of people, and even though they may seem obvious, the intentions of these groups CANNOT be proved without a doubt. Lionel believes he is being discriminated against by employers on the basis of his color and that affirmative action is needed to counteract this, but ignores the possibility that there may be other non-minorities who are more or just as qualified and will be turned down as a result. Steve believes it is the black drug dealers who are breaking into his car and that blacks must be profiled as a result, but ignores the possibility that police may be stopping far more innocent people like Lionel rather than those who are criminals. : : : If one was to believe that legal action is necessary in order to provide opportunities for people affected by the impact of race, and that race is a major factor in providing justice, then it would be logically consistent of this person to support affirmative action and racial profiling. Also, if one was to believe that individuals should not be given more/less freedoms than other individuals, and that the norteriety of the ethnic group in which an individual belongs to has no place in legislation, then it would be logically consistent of this person to be against affirmative action and racial profiling. Supporting one issue over the other is simply taking the same idea and making an exception to it. : : : Notice my opponent has used the word "naturally" when describing how his second example is in favor of racial profiling. In no way is it a contradiction to "naturally" favor one of these polices more than the other. As my opponent has clearly demonstrated, the backgrounds and experiences of people may vary dramatically. What is a contradiction is to support one issue over the other.