(01-31-2022 01:18 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 01:16 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 01:14 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 01:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-31-2022 01:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  It is literally -- all things being equal, lets hire a white. You are seemingly arguing for an arbitrary appropriateness for separation on nothing more than skin color. Criminy, when pressed, all you can say it is 'context driven'.

As opposed to your 'if I see it I can recognize it' version, I am going to denote a not so well known passage in a very well context.

"The arbitrary separation of citizens on the basis of race [is] wholly inconsistent with the civil freedom and the equality before the law established by the Constitution. It cannot be justified upon any legal grounds."

My construct above, no matter the tap dance on 'intent' and what not brought forth by you is massively in congruence with that passage above.

My construct on Biden limiting a selection to a black female is also massively in congruence with that passage above.

Progressives? Cripes, who knows what the fk they think -- in one case such arbitrary separation on the basis of race is wholly justified; in others it is bad; and when pressed they get all flummoxed and defensive noting a bunch of jibber jabber while they tap around the issue.

Not just progressives. Also OO and #'s...

Examples?

You think the policy of affirmative action is cool in some cases (inequality exists in your eyes) and it is not cool in some cases (no inequality exists in your eyes).

what cases?

Back in the day when things were obviously unequal and you seem to agree that AA was a good thing at that point.