Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sbcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!sbcs!debray
From: debray@sbcs.UUCP (Saumya Debray)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: affirmative action
Message-ID: <152@sbcs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 16-Feb-85 09:37:15 EST
Article-I.D.: sbcs.152
Posted: Sat Feb 16 09:37:15 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 20-Feb-85 08:53:18 EST
References: <241@ttidcc.UUCP>
Organization: Computer Science Dept, SUNY@Stony Brook
Lines: 25

> 
> The "we got to put out top-quality products" is an interesting slant --
> however, you better consider that "we got to do it under the laws of
> this country", too.
  ...
> It is a _law_ in this country that blacks be served, hired, etc.,
> that women be incorporated into the workplace, and there are guidelines for
> this law.  The reasons for affirmative action are clear, and the implementa-
> tion of affirmative action are definately preferential.  And they will re-
> main preferential until the body of working persons reflects the population
> mix.  ...

I've heard good arguments and bad both for and against AA, but the "it's the
law" argument is plain downright silly (shades of Dr. Moreau!).  Laws were
made for people, and not vice versa.  The fact that some body of laws
somewhere says something justifies nothing, unless you can justify it
independently (in South Africa, "it's the law" that people with a certain
colour of skin can't enter certain public restrooms ... would you care to
comment on that?).
-- 
Saumya Debray
SUNY at Stony Brook

	uucp: {allegra, hocsd, philabs, ogcvax} !sbcs!debray
	CSNet: debray@sbcs