Arizona Election 2010 - Proposition 107 / Arizona Civil Rights Amendment

Nope...


Sorry, one reference is hardly what one could call an example of," plenty of whites have been discriminated against in history...".

Given that those white firefighters even had jobs demonstrates that their race wasn't used to stop them from being hired. They sued because they allegedly weren't being PROMOTED, not because they weren't getting hired in the first place.

Is anyone really gonna try and make the case that minorities haven't been discriminated against in the workplace in the U.S. in overwhelming numbers compared to whites? Really?
 

http://www.fireengineering.com/inde...311426001&bclid=74052702001&bctid=79614456001

I already posted the link to meritmattersusa. Not just white males, but anyone that has lost a opportunity for employment, promotion, or admission to a school due to mandated quotas has been discriminated against due to their classification.

"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.'"
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."


Sound familiar? The problem is that some people want to be more equal than others. I'm talking about those that benefit from quotas rather than merit.
 
A member on FH.com identifying himself as Frank Ricci posted this a few days ago:

On Nov. 2, the people of Arizona will decide whether to amend the state constitution to bar the government from discriminating against or granting preferences to individuals or groups in public employment, contracting, and education. I wholeheartedly support Proposition 107, the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative. A person’s race, ethnicity, or skin color should not be a part of their promotion or the application process. Individuals should be promoted, hired, or admitted based on their qualifications, experience, performance, and scores.

I was among fireighters who learned firsthand the ills of the current system. We had all studied for department promotional exams in New Haven, Conn., which is something we had been doing throughout our careers with hard work and dedication. The taxpayers paid over $100,000 to professionally develop the exams and went as far as providing a road map for success. The job-related exam tested the necessary skills, knowledge and abilities to be a competent leader. When the results came out the city decided to throw out the exams, because too few minorities scored high enough to qualify.

The action denied qualified whites, blacks and Hispanics their earned promotion in the interest of diversity. By most accounts the news media neglected to report some minorities did, indeed, earn promotion and minorities in the department supported our lawsuit. Without knowing where we were on the list, my fellow firefighters and I sued the city. We wanted to protect the process, no matter where we fell on the list.


While diversity is an important goal, it has become a code word for a quota system that thrives on mediocrity. Especially in the area of public safety, the public has the right to know that the men and women who serve were selected based on their qualifications. There are no do-overs on the scene of an emergency.

In our lawsuit, District Court granted summary judgment for the city, which the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. But then, on June 29, 2009, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in our favor. The city had violated our Title VII of the Civil Rights Act when it discarded the exam results. New Haven intentionally discriminated against mostly white firefighters to avoid being sued by black firefighters.

Arizona stands poised to set the right example for the entire country. I implore voters to vote in favor of Proposition 107 to ensure equal opportunity for all. As firefighters, we had to take our case to the highest court in the land to make sure our leaders were selected based on their knowledge, skills, and abilities. The belief that citizens should be reduced to racial statistics is flawed and only divides people.

Moreover, Proposition 107 leaves in place all of the protections against discrimination. No one should be given an unfair advantage. Low expectations are a form of bigotry that result in low performance, holidng individuals back and harming all races. Lowering the bar for some racial groups is demeaning, and granting government-sanctioned favors to certain groups based on race should be illegal in every state. Obtaining a position or contract under a cloud of suspicion only sets people up for failure. Anyone, regardless of race, can succeed in America.

Whatever one believes about institutional racism, perceived bias, or racial disparities, making a race a job or admissions qualification in the form of a racial preference is the wrong-headed “solution.” Promoting, hiring, or admitting one person because they’re the “right” race and denying the same to another because they are the “wrong” race is contrary to what America is and hopes to be. In the words of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

Do you want to guarantee fairness and equality for all citizens in Arizona, regardless of race? On the Nov. 2 ballot, you have the opportunity to reaffirm the colorblind principles of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by demanding race-neutral law and government policy in Arizona. Vote “yes” on Proposition 107.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others" George Orwell
 
I didn't say you thought slavery was good, I asked if you thought that the defining of a black slave as 3/5ths of a person was good. You stated that doing so was an anti-slavery measure which it clearly was not. One can be opposed to slavery and still be a racist, as were the people who proposed that fellow human beings should not be counted as complete human beings in a rather pathetic attempt to control the political landscape.

As for Mr. Beck, you called him a raving lunatic, not me, so much for not taking cheap shots. Your argument, that proclaiming that black slaves should only count as 3/5ths of a person was some sort of anti-slavery movement is the exact same argument that he, Beck, has attempted to make on his show. Given that you and he have espoused the same argument, forgive me for lumping your opinion with his.

Since you would rather concentrate on the wrongdoings of the past, and ignore the realities of pre-Civil War America, I'll simply state this oppinon on the matter.

Protected class hiring quotas to the detriment of others are inherently rasist, sexist, ect and discriminatory in nature. There us no arguing this fact. Some people may feel this is justified given past injustices. That is their right. It is also the right of the voters of a jurisdiction to ban a discriminatory practice based on votes. If this does not sit well with you, then it is also your right not to be a resident of said jurisdiction. The great thing about the CURRENT state of our country is my rights don't trample yours.
 
edited

I wonder if you could share some concrete examples of cases where "plenty of whites were discriminated against in history" where that discrimination was based on their skin color and not to their country of origin?
Does it really matter outside of it being racism?


Or maybe you can explain the reasoning behind determining that African-Americans were at one time considered 3/5ths of a human being in this country? Was that due to their "fiscal stance" (sic), their ethnicity or their skin color?

P.S. what exactly is a "fiscal stance" anyway?

...or maybe it wasn't blacks who were counted as 3/5ths, it was slaves who were counted as 3/5ths. Yes, the vast majority of slaves were black, but not all blacks were slaves.
 
Sorry, one reference is hardly what one could call an example of," plenty of whites have been discriminated against in history...".

Given that those white firefighters even had jobs demonstrates that their race wasn't used to stop them from being hired. They sued because they allegedly weren't being PROMOTED, not because they weren't getting hired in the first place.
Being passed over for promotion is no different than not being selected for employment. Both are discriminatory.

Is anyone really gonna try and make the case that minorities haven't been discriminated against in the workplace in the U.S. in overwhelming numbers compared to whites? Really?

It's 2010. Over the long term, blacks have been discriminated aginst in the workplace in overwhelming numbers compared to whites, but AA has changed that in recent times. I've seen firsthand how people of color are protected and receive less severe discipline than others for the same offenses. The employer needs to keep their numbers, and is also afraid of a suit should they try and play the race card. If I only had a dollar for every time I've heard "They can't fire me because I'm black." I've seen the "rule of nines" in effect where a promotional list is developed, a rank order is given, and then they dip down the list to pick who they need to get their numbers. I've seen a few in my own academy get third chances at some practicals where others were failed right out of a job after the standard two attempts. Don't tell me these things don't happen because I've seen it with my own eyes.

A post on another forum says it well:

To be perfectly politically incorrect about this, I have to ask: Is this part of the White Man's burden? Since the mid-1960's, Society seems to be expected to literally move Heaven and Earth to pacify blacks. Someone should tally up the cost of all this, which has to include: welfare, public housing, excessive school spending, dumbing down academic standards to try close the 'achievement gap,' high crime, destroyed neighborhoods and even destroyed cities (Detroit, Camden, etc.), the mortgage debacle, discriminatory racial quotas, etc.

And I'd add one more burden -- the severe skewing of our political process to the Left by millions of blacks who are dependent on big government either in the form of being directly on welfare or indirectly through government 'jobs' and jobs in the private sector through Affirmative Action. This will not -- indeed, can not -- go on indefinitely. But who will openly state this most inconvenient truth?
 
I want to be sure that I understand your statement. Declaring that a person is only 3/5ths of a human being was a GOOD thing in your opinion? Really?

Better than counting slaves as a whole person.
 
John E, just so we can better understand your position, are you for or against Proposition 107? What reasons do you give for your position on the matter?
 
I wonder if you could share some concrete examples of cases where "plenty of whites were discriminated against in history" where that discrimination was based on their skin color and not to their country of origin?

I had a nice long reply, but I didn't want my main point to get lost, and I want to see your reply to it:





It is what it is. Plenty of rich blacks, plenty of poor whites. Why do we have to separate it in to racial lines instead of socio-economical ones, where we help the less fortunate instead of the less-pale?
 
I had a nice long reply, but I didn't want my main point to get lost, and I want to see your reply to it:





It is what it is. Plenty of rich blacks, plenty of poor whites. Why do we have to separate it in to racial lines instead of socio-economical ones, where we help the less fortunate instead of the less-pale?

Ideally, give the less fortunate the tools and opportunity to help themselves, rather than handouts and hookups.
 
I'm against affirmative action. The idea of treating people like collectibles bothers me very deeply, and I like to think that merit really does matter more than demographic details. I say this as someone who falls into a protected class but declines to check the box.

That being said, I've seriously questioning my stance. In the past few years, I've witnessed a lot of open racism. Given that a lot of the people who express that attitude are making hiring decisions, I suspect minorities are really at a disadvantage solely because of their skin color when their files cross those desks.
 
I moved outta Jersey cause I am a white male. Never had a chance of getting a civil service job.
 
Back
Top