Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!bellcore!allegra!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!orb
From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Discrimination and Affirmative Action: Reply to Sykora
Message-ID: <641@whuxl.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-May-85 09:32:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: whuxl.641
Posted: Fri May 31 09:32:15 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Jun-85 07:02:21 EDT
References: <266@unc.UUCP> <1340120@acf4.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany
Lines: 43

> >/* carnes@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Richard Carnes) / 10:12 pm  May 26, 1985 */
> 
> >But why on earth is it wrong to require that each person have a fair
> >chance to be hired, free from the handicap of racist and sexist
> >attitudes?
> 
  from Michael Sykora:
> Because such measures interfere with the employer's property rights,
> and, perhaps, the employer's right to hold racist and sexist opinions.
> 
> 						Mike Sykora

Under this argument we might as well go back to separate facilities for
blacks and whites.  We may as well return to the days when bus companies
(often publicly owned and operated) decided that one of their "rights"
was to make black people ride in the back of the bus for no other reason
than being a different color.  We might as well return to the days
when people had to pay to vote - after all their voting may interfere
with "employer's property rights".
 
This same argument could be used to justify wholesale firing of Jews:
after all, employers can do anything they want, including discriminate
against a whole group of people.
 
Employers have every right to hold racist and sexist attitudes.
That does *not* give them the right to blatantly discriminate against
people because they don't like the color of their skin.
The rule of law in a democracy calls for *equal treatment under the law*.
 
Again, I will point out that the point of affirmative action programs is
*not* to promote unequal treatment - it is to promote equal treatment for
women and minorities who have been and are currently being discriminated
against.
When the exact same resume yields the male name an interview and not
the female name, then this seems to me to be strong evidence of
unconscious prejudice on the part of employers.  It is this prejudice
that affirmative action programs are designed to compensate for.
 
I am appalled at the acceptance of rascism implied by Mr. Sykora's
argument.
I hope that he will retract it.
                tim sevener   whuxl!orb