Con's choice

The two links that you provide don't say what you think they do. Let's take a look at each of them. The first one never says it is because of affirmative action that the university is doing it. Rather, it is because the university wishes there to be a more diverse student body. Justice Scalia said in the last line of this page "...it would also dramatically change the character of one of the nation's top public universities. There is an important place in higher education for those universities and research institutions that attract the best and the brightest. Without a diverse student body, however, those schools - and all who attend them - would be the poorer. So would our society as a whole." He specifically says that a diversity of people HELPS our society. So that link specifically goes against the only argument you have presented in this debate. Now for the second link. Not only does this site have no credible sources since it is just an argument site that anyone can edit similar to debate.org. But it argues my side as well. The first argument presented is about righting wrongs of the past. Nowhere in this round has that argument been presented. The arguments aren't proven one way or another, so I'm going to claim the "YES" arguments on this site. You mentioned your story of your dad and aunt applying for the job. My first argument here is that no one else knows whether this is true or not. For all we know you could be making this up. Secondly, we don't know for sure if it was because this company didn't have enough minorities. For all we know, they could have preferred women than men. We don't know for sure if it was because of affirmative action. When presented with the arguments of todays round, we see that my opponent hasn't given an argument that can stand. The first link she provided argued my side. The second link provides both so they cancel each other out. And her story can't be proven true, or the merits confirmed. So when judging, look to who has the more evidence just from her own arguments. That is clearly me. Now for my own arguments. There is a reason that affirmative action is a part of today's society. The courts have heard arguments regarding both sides, and have decided to allow affirmative action into todays society. Not only that, but it has been passed through both the house and senate. The people in charge of our country, who are doing things to help us, have decided that is an important enough issue to be part of law. Now let's look at this idea of affirmative action. The idea of affirmative action is what we are debating. And affirmative action is supposed to help only when there are two equally qualified people applying for the job. Just because affirmative action MAY not be what it was supposed to be doesn't mean it is a bad thing. Affirmative action is good no matter what people say it has become. But it isn't a bad thing now. Like I have said earlier, affirmative action steps in when there are two equally qualified people applying for the same job and there are too few minorities in the workplace. Only then does affirmative action step in. My opponent has failed to argue that. I can really only see a vote for me.