Justice: What’s The Right Thing To Do? Episode 09: “ARGUING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION”

To register for the 2015 course, visit https:// PART ONE: ARGUING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PART TWO: WHAT’S THE PURPOSE? Part 1 Sandel describes the 1996 court case of a white woman named Cheryl Hopwood who was denied admission to a Texas law school, even though she had higher grades and test scores than some of the minority applicants who were admitted. Hopwood took her case to court, arguing the schools affirmative action program violated her rights. Students discuss the pros and cons of affirmative action. Should we try to correct for inequality in educational backgrounds by taking race into consideration? Should we compensate for historical injustices such as slavery and segregation? Is the argument in favor of promoting diversity a valid one?

It's only fair to share...Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on TumblrShare on Google+Digg thisShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on VKShare on RedditPrint this pageEmail this to someone
Flattr the authorShare on StumbleUponShare on YummlyBuffer this page

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *