Affirmative Action is Bad

Hmm.. first off, I apologize for the comment below. I had seen that you have not responded to my debate while responding to other, and didn't take into consideration you could have overlooked it. I urge the voters do disregard round two as everyone makes mistakes. First off; a clarification… Are we debating affirmative action in theory, or in practice? Point 1: Reverse Discrimination I must ask… did you read the links before posting them? They seem to all enforce my stance… 1st Link: Basically just talking about how the label of "reverse discrimination" shouldn't be used. 2nd Link: Talking about how Affirmative Action isn't reverse discrimination, but rather compensatory justice. 3rd Link: Basically talks about how the argument of reverse discrimination isn't a reason for affirmative action to be unjust or unfair. 4th Link: I think is the same as the first, if it isn't exactly the same, the ideas are similar. 5th Link: Talks about how Affirmative Action is fair and isn't reverse discrimination. Well I guess thanks for doing some research for me. It is ironic because you said that it is hard to find a link that says affirmative action isn't reverse discrimination. You just found five! I will reference them throughout the debate by referring to their number. Could you find a link that actually enforces your stance? Well this leads to several things. First, you demand I justify why reverse discrimination isn't a voter in the debate. Well, I think that links 2, 3, and 5 cover it. Basically reverse discrimination is compensation for the injustices perpetrated by racism and slavery (2), affirmative action doesn't become unjust because of reverse discrimination (3), and a regardless of affirmative action, white males hold 95-97% of high paying jobs (5). That means that Affirmative Action doesn't discriminate at all, and even if it did, it doesn't do it significantly and doesn't make it unjust. Point 2: Educational Standards. "If a black wanted to get a good job in the 60s, he would have to do more schooling and be way more qualified than the white to even be considered. This is the same standard that whites have now." I fail to see how upping the ante for education is bad, and as the fifth link states, white males hold 95-97% of high-level corporate jobs. This means that reverse discrimination isn't really happening. Affirmative Action is just a compensation for the injustices white males perpetrated upon minorities through racial prejudice. You also argue that some students would fall behind if accepted into schools that were out of their league. Logically this makes some sense, however I would like to see a link that says it is happening. Also, it isn't as if schools force people to take classes out of their level. If someone were to get accepted to Harvard even though they didn't deserve it, they could still take the easier classes. Also, affirmative action doesn't make minorities apply to colleges they know they couldn't deal with. If I knew I couldn't deal with Harvard, I wouldn't apply. Catch my point? Affirmative Action doesn't force a minority to apply to a college out of their league. It helps them get into colleges they may not have gotten into (if they are qualified). Point 3: Color-Blind Society. You conceded, not a lot to talk about here. Point 4: Condescending to Minorities "As a black person, this statement offends me. It says that I require hands out to succeed to succeed, which is empirically false." First off, I said "man", not black man, or white man or anything that would denote a specific race. I simply stated that, using the basic principals of humanity (namely the drive for comfort) a human will take a hand-out rather than pride. I never said that blacks need the hand out. That isn't what Affirmative Action is, anyway. Affirmative Action is compensation, not a handout. It helps minorities get the fair consideration they deserve. I was simply arguing that a minority would rather be helped by Affirmative Action that possibly face a poor lifestyle. If they don't need Affirmative Action, then that is great. However, if they get helped by it, that's great too. I think I should also note that you didn't state an impact on this, and I believe this means that the point doesn't matter. Point 5: Demeaning to true achievement. "I know people who have experienced this and have experienced this and know the impact personally." Just saying you know people doesn't mean there is an impact. You still haven't stated the impact, just stated there is one. I wanted to know the impact and you didn't provide one. Again, you concede that this point is truly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Point 6: Education Is Increased "Education is not increased but rather people are less likely to succeed when thrown into bigger arenas." You just argued that opportunities decrease for all because of Affirmative Action. That argues my point actually. If there are more people competing for a job, it stands to reason that in order to stand out, more education is necessary. Point 7: Opportunity "Minorities already have opportunites." I never argued that they didn't. I'm just saying that Affirmative Action makes MORE opportunities. If we got rid of it, there would be fewer opportunities due to the inevitability of bigots discriminating against minorities. Point 8: Racism Affirmative Action is reparation towards people who suffered from discrimination. In that way, it is helping to end discrimination by giving a proverbial taste of your own medicine. Discrimination is a major part of Racism, and in the road to solving for the latter, the first has to be dealt with. That being said, your impact calculus runs on the assumption that my only offensive attacks were in my final three. However, offense (in debate at least) isn't making new arguments. If it were that simple, Pro would always win. A Offensive argument would be one that negates the previous argument, and conversely a defensive argument just says the point isn't important, or won't be that bad. I made offensive attacks on 1, 2, 6, 8. This means I have half offense and half defense. Also, comparing the quantity of points made isn't all of Impact Calculus. Impact Calculus, is (redundantly) the calculation of impact. To do this, one must look at the quality of the points as well. I believe the quality of my points outweighs your points. This was my point. Not only that, but I have negated your points, and extended mine. I look forward to other debates with you and thank you for your time.