首页
登录
职称英语
Affirmative action may not be the most divisive issue on the ballot, but it r
Affirmative action may not be the most divisive issue on the ballot, but it r
游客
2023-12-18
28
管理
问题
Affirmative action may not be the most divisive issue on the ballot, but it remains an unending source of conflict and debate at least in Michigan, whose citizens are pondering a proposal that would ban affirmative action in the public sector. No one knows whether other states will follow Michigan’s lead, but partisans on both sides see the vote as crucial--a decision that could either help or hinder a movement aimed at ending "preferential treatment" programs once and for all.
Ward Connerly has no doubts about the outcome. "Them may be some ups and downs.., with regard to affirmative action, but it’s ending," .says Connerly, the main mover behind the Michigan proposal, who pushed almost identical propositions to passage in California 10 years ago and in Washington state two years later. His adversaries are equally passionate. "I just want to shout from the rooftops, ’This isn’t good for America’," says Mary Sue Coleman, president of the University of Michigan. She sees no need for Michigan to adopt the measure. "We have a living experiment in California, and it has failed," says Coleman.
Wade Henderson, executive director of the leadership Conference on Civil Rights, sees something deeply symbolic in the battle. Michigan, in his eyes, is where resegregation began--with a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that tossed out a plan to bus Detroit children to the suburbs. Henderson sees that decision as a prelude to the hypersegregation that now defines much of Michigan. The Supreme Court is currently considering two new cases that could lead to another ruling on how far public school systems can go in their quest to maintain racial balance.
All of which raises a question: why are we still wrestling with this stuff? Why, more than a quarter of a century after the high court ruled race had a legitimate place in university admissions decisions, are we still fighting over whether race should play a role?
One answer is that the very idea of affirmative action--that is, systematically treating members of various groups differently in the pursuit of diversity or social justice--strikes some people as downright immoral. For to believe in affirmative action is to believe in a concept of equality turned upside down. It is to believe that "to treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently," as the idea was expressed by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun.
That argument has never been an easy sell, even when made passionately by President Lyndon B. Johnson during an era in which prejudice was thicker than L. A. smog. Now the argument is infinitely more difficult to make. Even those generally supportive of affirmative action don’t like the connotations it sometimes carries. "No one wants preferential treatment, including African-Americans," observed Ed Sarpolis, vice president of EPIC-MRA, a Michigan polling firm.
In 2003, the Supreme Court upheld the University of Michigan’s right to use race in the pursuit of "diversity," even as it condemned the way the undergraduate school had chosen to do so. The decision left Jennifer Gratz, the named plaintiff, fuming. "I called Ward Connerly... and I said, ’We need to do something about this’," recalled Gratz, an animated former cheerleader. They decided that if the Supreme Court wouldn’t give them what they wanted, they would take their case--and their proposition--directly to the people.
Californians disagree about the impact of Connerly’s proposition on their state. But despite some exceedingly grim predictions, the sky did not fall in. Most people went about their lives much as they always had.
In a sane world, the battle in Michigan, and indeed the battle over affirmative action writ large, would offer an opportunity to seriously engage a question the enemies and defenders of affirmative action claim to care about; how do you go about creating a society where all people--not just the lucky few--have the opportunities they deserve? It is a question much broader than the debate over affirmative action. But until we begin to move toward an answer, the debate over affirmative action will continue--even if it is something of a sideshow to what should be the main event. [br] The expression "an easy sell" in the sixth paragraph probably means ______.
选项
A、being ended without controversy.
B、being sold at a cheap price.
C、being accepted by others lightly.
D、being accepted without doubt.
答案
C
解析
语义理解题。由题干定位至第六段。首句中的argument指前一段提到的对affirmative action的争论。第二句提到“Now the argument is infinitely more difficult to make”,这与首句中的“That argument has never been an easy sell”构成比较关系,由more difficult可知,人们很难判断争论的双方孰是孰非,故[C]为答案。该短语上下文处没有提到争论是否休止,更不要说没有任何争议地停止了,[A]不符合该处语境,排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3282803.html
相关试题推荐
Itcanbeinferredfromthetextthatoneofthemajorobjectivesofaffirmative
Itcanbeinferredfromthetextthatoneofthemajorobjectivesofaffirmative
Opponentsofaffirmativeactionsaythebattleovertheuseofraceincolle
Properarrangementofclassroomspaceisimportanttoencouraginginteraction
Properarrangementofclassroomspaceisimportanttoencouraginginteraction
1 Whenaninventionismade,theinventorhasthreepossiblecoursesofaction
Credit,incommerceandfinance,termusedtodenotetransactionsinvolvingt
Credit,incommerceandfinance,termusedtodenotetransactionsinvolvingt
Inareactionagainstatoo-rigid,overrefinedclassicalcurriculum,someed
Inareactionagainstatoo-rigid,overrefinedclassicalcurriculum,someed
随机试题
(1)Thelevelofdiscriminationhasvariedenormouslyinthehistoryofhuman
某单位拟在椿树、枣树、楝树、雪松、银杏、桃树中选择4种栽种在庭院中。已知:(1)
A.食管下段静脉曲张 B.食管炎 C.食管息肉 D.食管平滑肌瘤 E.食
关于“疑义的利益”的解释原则,下列说法错误的是()。A:该原则要求当保险合同条款
下列哪项不是羊水过多的体征A.腹部膨大 B.子宫大小与孕月相符 C.胎心遥远
系统性红斑狼疮是指<P>A.病变累及骨、关节及肌腱、滑囊、筋膜等周围软组织的一组
下列关于声明不保证的表述,不正确的是( )。A.声明不保证是指由于委托人、拍卖
下列属于回归模型特性的是()。 A.一元线性冋归模型是用于分析一个自变量Y
下列不属于营业收入的可靠性分析的是( )。A.营业收入的现金含量分析 B.营
(2020年真题)根据《建设项目环境影响评价报告书(表)编制监督管理办法》,关于
最新回复
(
0
)