Resolved: Affirmative action should be practiced in college admissions.

Thank you for accepting my challenge and I hope that this will be a great debate. First of all, I would like to flow through my framework found in-between my definition and contention one. This is extremely important within this debate because affirmative action is simply a tie-breaker. At no time during this process do we go out of our way to admit a minority or woman. Rather, we find to equally qualified candidates in which we can only accept one, and we have the option to use affirmative action (if previously accepted). At this point in time, my opponents burden shifts to having to prove that this tie-breaking method in some way should not be used. ---‘Prove it'--> -From: http://www.washingtonpost.com... -"it is a remedy for the preferential treatment white men have traditionally received and continue to enjoy. In 1993, women made, on average, only 71.5 cents for every dollar made by men." (There is also more in the article if you are interested.) ---My point stands. There is a built in disadvantage for women (proven by the evidence), and I am positive that it is the same for minorities. I would urge my opponent to prove anything else if I am wrong. ---‘racism in either direction'--> -This is where my opponent is wrong. First of all, he cold drops my interpretation and framework that explains that affirmative action is simply a tie-breaker. Secondly, without affirmative action, women and minorities would receive the worse end of tie-breakers that were just made ‘on the spot' by administrations (therefore creating a single discrimination which was truly the problem to begin with). Finally, Affirmative Action is a choice and is in no way FORCED upon these groups of people. ---‘BEST candidate'--> -Well, if institutions believe that this is what they want to do then it is legitimate. However, they should also be able to select affirmative action so that in the rare instance you have someone with an identical GPA and SAT scores and both were active in their community and extracurricular activities, then what do you do? It would be ‘racist' to choose the white man over the black woman wouldn't it? The problem here is ‘equal opportunity' will find SOMETHING to break the tie, but there is a legitimate option just to admit the one with the built in disadvantages as proven above. ---‘institution's own right to choose who that person is'--> -I am not denying legitimacy to equal opportunity institutions. I am merely defending the rights of these institutions to have a built in tie-breaker when that situation arises (rare or not). ---‘fundamental freedoms and liberties that are so intrinsic to the fabric of this nation'--> -I could be mistaken but aren't you referring to the nation that enslaved millions of African Americans and treated them like dirt for 2 centuries? I guess I could have gotten that nation confused with the nation that employs women at equal job tasks yet less pay. OH WAIT! We ARE talking about the same nation aren't we?! I, once again, defend the institutions right to choose affirmative action as a way to evaluate two equal components. ---‘chances of finding two candidates with the exact qualifications'--> -Irrelevant. Not to mention that it has happened before and it will happen again. ---‘governmental interaction'--> -the government isn't infringing on Caucasian rights, they are simply allowing institutions to pick their own methods. ---‘private institutions may reserve the right to choose (doesn't mean they should)'--> -Right, they get this right. But what if we were to FORCE them to always be equal opportunity? Would you trust a board of people to make the choice between a rich white boy who played QB for his high school, or some black person who lived in poverty all their life? CERTAINLY they could make the right choice, but in all reality, affirmative action will confirm that these people have a built in disadvantage, and thus should be given the tie-breaker. My case therefore stands and my opponent, well, doesn't really present any offence through his own case. Therefore, I can only see vote for PRO because there is a built in disadvantage, it is only a tie-breaker, and it is a choice made by the institutions. Thank you and good luck!