Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FoolThemAll
No, it's a bit more repugnant when wrongdoing is backed by law. Whatever the motivation. It is wrong to require preferences based on skin color. Even if other people do it too. Two wrongs really don't cancel each other out. There would be a decrease repugnance, because one wrong would have ceased.
|
It's wrongdoing to convict an innocent man. It is not wrong to require preferences based on skin color to deal with the issue of discrimination based on skin color. This is not an issue of two wrongs, it is an issue of equalization. Decreasing AA will result in an increase in discrimination. AA is something we can adaptively control. Racism is something we cannot legislate out of existence if we so choose. AA is not repugnant. Racism is repugnant. You need to stop confusing the two.
Quote:
|
It's not a matter of imperfection. It's a matter of immorality. It's not a valid way to deal with the problem.
|
When there are no other ways of dealing with it, the only option that is available is the option that must be taken. It would be more immoral to remove this method of checking racism, thereby allowing racism to flourish.
Quote:
|
Show me why one can't believe that racism exists and also believe that AA is wrong. That's the claim I'm disagreeing with.
|
Because by fighting to remove AA you are fighting to increase racism. As I have already posted. Go back and read my first couple of posts in this thread if you want more information.