Bardock42 is a whimpering pussy now who lost his flare to debate vigorously and just spouts senseless and thinly veiled puns here and there. You nazi pr*ck. Get your balls back from whoever you sold them to, you fat f*ck. What happened to the manly, chubby German big mouth we once knew, who'd flatten ignorance with a solid argument? Now it's like Andy Dick meets John Candy. You hybrid beefcake. Suck my c*ck
Gender: Male Location: USA, Oklahoma. Pewpy balls.
Re: Re: Re: Re: White men win a "discrimination" case.
One is caucasian, one is African American.
No, everyone is not equal. That wasn't my point. We are getting off track.
To make it more literal for you, I was not referring to those born with obvious mental disabilities.
So was I. I was being both sarcastic and cynical.
This is a given.
But how does that change that humans, regardless of race, have the same average potential?
Find the "least intelligent" tribe in Africa or South America. Take one of their babies at birth, raise it with an excellent Western education, and it should come out more intelligent than the average white person in America. Agreed?
Indeed. You should have used a smilie.
This is my belief, as well. Handicapping requirements to accomodate others brings down everyone to their level when the opposite is necessary. They need to come up and be on level.
Gender: Male Location: USA, Oklahoma. Pewpy balls.
Re: Re: White men win a "discrimination" case.
Agreed. I'm off the opinion that nurture plays a much larger role in "intelligence" and educational motivation, on the whole, than does genetics.
No, I understand. I agree. Had the Civil Rights movement not occurred at all and we were still segregated and you "just had to tak it", you wouldn't have gotten an education as nice as yours is.
I agree, somewhat.
I think that the standards should be raised and no exceptions should be made for anyone. While this occurs, we could dissolve Medicare/Medicaid/SS and use a third of the money for those programs to help with education in many forms. (Public, charters schools, grants, etc.)
This could be true. However, with cybernetics and neural interfaces being a literal reality, now, an education will no longer be necessary, before long. You'll just purchase knowledge. This is highly likely to occur in our lifetimes. (You and I are about the same age.) This will null the race problem, for the most part, when these technologies become cheap. Yes, I'm referring to "The Matrix" type of knowledge uploads.
Gender: Male Location: USA, Oklahoma. Pewpy balls.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: White men win a "discrimination" case.
Say whaaa?
Oh. OIC.
I'm not referring to retards: I'm referring to those who are average.
Does that work for you?
This is true...sort of.
Back in the day, the rich children didn't have a choice. They were forced to learn, "or else". Some rebeled and wallowed in ignorance, but it was quite forecful in the "edcuation" received.
Stupid laws in place don't allow us to flog our stupid children.
Bardock42 is a whimpering pussy now who lost his flare to debate vigorously and just spouts senseless and thinly veiled puns here and there. You nazi pr*ck. Get your balls back from whoever you sold them to, you fat f*ck. What happened to the manly, chubby German big mouth we once knew, who'd flatten ignorance with a solid argument? Now it's like Andy Dick meets John Candy. You hybrid beefcake. Suck my c*ck
How this ruling changes the law and precedent:
Before-There's a test or some employment standard wherein over 90% of an ethnic or racial or gender group fail despite coming from diverse backgrounds. A court can strike down the test as illegal and prejudicial.
Now-The court can only strike down the test or standard based on the following burden of proof. That someone could file a civil lawsuit AND that the person would win. In other words, no one cares about discrimination or principles, they just don't want to pay out damages. hence why the court voted along party lines and was split 5-4, not 9-0 like Beck and Limbaugh are reporting it.
__________________ Land of the free, home of the brave...
Do you think we will ever be saved?
In this land of dreams find myself sober...
Wonder when will it'll all be over...
Living in a void when the void grows colder...
Wonder when it'll all be over?
Will you be laughing when it's over?
If the test is actually essential to the job to be performed though, it shouldn't matter how many of which race fail it, don't you think?
__________________
Bardock42 is a whimpering pussy now who lost his flare to debate vigorously and just spouts senseless and thinly veiled puns here and there. You nazi pr*ck. Get your balls back from whoever you sold them to, you fat f*ck. What happened to the manly, chubby German big mouth we once knew, who'd flatten ignorance with a solid argument? Now it's like Andy Dick meets John Candy. You hybrid beefcake. Suck my c*ck
if the failure rates are that disproportionate, it has nothing to do with the job and there's obviously something rotten going on. and even then, this precedent means the suite has nothing to do with how well they perform the job.
It's like, say you're working at a financial services company where to get promoted beyond a certain point, you have to be able to do 20 pull ups. It has nothing to do with the job, and it's quite possible that a disproportionate amount of people based on economic, ethnic, adn gender lines are not going to get that promotion. The new standard isn't discrimination and job relevance, it's can they sue us, so if those people can't hire lawyers to file a civil suit against the company, than in the eyes of the law, it's not discriminatory.
__________________ Land of the free, home of the brave...
Do you think we will ever be saved?
In this land of dreams find myself sober...
Wonder when will it'll all be over...
Living in a void when the void grows colder...
Wonder when it'll all be over?
Will you be laughing when it's over?
I was really just referring to cases where the test actually relates to the job. If you have some job where only 5 blacks apply and maybe 20 whites, it is statistically quite possible that the 5 actually weren't suited for the job, and if they then got a job, on the sole base of their race, I would say that, if you accept the vaidity of anti-discrimatory laws in the first base, you'll have to admit they were wronged and give them the option to sue, just as a member of another race could in the opposite case.
For your point about it just being an issue of money, I don't follow exactly the reasoning behind it, i.e. I don't know how your conclusion is reached from the case that was presented in the initial post, which might be because I am missing some information or just don't actually know anything about law, but that's why I didn't comment on that particular issue.
__________________
Bardock42 is a whimpering pussy now who lost his flare to debate vigorously and just spouts senseless and thinly veiled puns here and there. You nazi pr*ck. Get your balls back from whoever you sold them to, you fat f*ck. What happened to the manly, chubby German big mouth we once knew, who'd flatten ignorance with a solid argument? Now it's like Andy Dick meets John Candy. You hybrid beefcake. Suck my c*ck
Re: Re: Re: White men win a "discrimination" case.
Biggest problem with what you are asking is that there are many measures of intelligence or "smartness", especially in a case like this, where actual ability and IQ score may be totally unrelated.
anyways:
1. People do not have the same potential. Whatever measure it is that is used to measure intelligence, it is highly hereditary and stable. Much like some people are born with genes that allow their body to become muscular with little effort, some people have that with linear thinking or problem solving. Training may compensate to a certain degree, but all the training in the world wouldn't make me as talented a hockey player as Jerome Iginla.
2. However, this isn't to say that birth conditions are sufficient to produce intelligence. One might have the necessary genes to become super smart, though they may not nurture them, and they would never develop. So, switch any two people, and even if they had identical genetic make-ups, they would develop different intellectual capacities based entirely on their environmental interactions.
3. The way race interacts with this is, potentially, two-fold:
A. Because there are socio-economic differences between races, and these differences lead to more or less of a poverty of stimuli for a developing mind, races on the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum will have a less engaging environment for their children to be raised in, offering them less ability to develop the neurological architecture necessary for advanced intellect.
B. Also, there are potential innate differences in races with regard to their scores on the standard IQ test. The most recent study I have seen, which controlled for things like SES, education, etc, maintains something like 4 points of difference between white and black students. This is by no means definitive, and there are still many variables that were not controlled for in the study, however, it does provide some evidence that differences in IQ scores may be racial. What 4 IQ points translates to in reality, I have no idea, and based on the interactions I have with people on a daily basis, if it is true, the 4 points are negligible at best.
4. Following that last point, there are some weird psychological phenomena that come into play when measuring this stuff. If black people take a test knowing their score is being used for a racial comparison, they perform worse than they would if they didn't think that. Several things work this way, and the dominant explanation is that black people feel more racial pressure to perform, or are more anxious when they know they will be compared to members of other races.
__________________ He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
Re: Re: Re: White men win a "discrimination" case.
If we are speaking of IQ, that is highly debatable.
Nature vs Nurture is almost entirely irrelevant in modern psychology, and it is the interaction between the two that is seen as the most important for any trait, however, the hereditary nature of IQ scores is very strong. It is also very likely that one's attentional resources are "genetic", meaning that their ability to direct themselves to be motivated to learn may be something they are born with (though, like I said above, these nature/nurture distinctions are moot with regard to modern psych).
__________________ He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
Gender: Male Location: Still tired....still hiking.
What the **** are you talking about? The white people are not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude. Across this line, you DO NOT... Also, Dude, white people is not the preferred nomenclature. "English-American", please.
KMC Community Forums
Jun 30th, 2009 03:37 PM
I was being both sarcastic and cynical.
