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
2025-01-03
17
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] Which of the following is Wade Henderson’s attitude towards Michigan’s movement?
选项
A、Approval.
B、Disapproval.
C、Objective.
D、Difficult to tell.
答案
D
解析
态度题。由题干中的Wade Henderson定位至第三段。首句指出:Wade Henderson...sees something deeply symbolic in the battle.接着具体说明该事件的深层含义;他认为密歇根州是种族主义重新抬头的领头羊。但是作者并未说明或暗示他对于密歇根州要投票决定是否终止大学入学中的“优先待遇”是何态度,故[D]为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3897358.html
相关试题推荐
Inareactionagainstatoo-rigid,overrefinedclassicalcurriculum,somee
Inareactionagainstatoo-rigid,overrefinedclassicalcurriculum,somee
Notsurprisingly,interactionamongpeoplesofdifferentculturesisoftenfi
Notsurprisingly,interactionamongpeoplesofdifferentculturesisoftenfi
Affirmativeactionmaynotbethemostdivisiveissueontheballot,butitr
Affirmativeactionmaynotbethemostdivisiveissueontheballot,butitr
PresidentFranklinD.Roosevelt’sactionstogetAmericaoutofthedepressionwa
Thewaysofhistoryaresointricateandthemotivationsofhumanactionss
Thewaysofhistoryaresointricateandthemotivationsofhumanactionss
Thewaysofhistoryaresointricateandthemotivationsofhumanactionss
随机试题
Whatarepollinators?[br][originaltext]Rowersareknowntoemployallmanner
Timesamplingmeansthatresearcherschoosevarioustimeintervalsfortheir
Itsinfluenceiseternallymysterious.Exposuretoithasvariouslybeencr
中华老字号(Chinacenturies-old/time-honoredbrands)是指那些历史悠久并拥有良好信誉的中国企业。这些企业往往具有鲜
大部分血液进入心室是在( )A.等容收缩期 B.等容舒张期 C.快
关于可转换债券要素的叙述,正确的是()。 Ⅰ.可转换债券要素基本决定了
(2020年真题)根据《国务院关于建立企业职工基本养老保险基金中央调剂制度的通知
小红从冰箱里拿出一瓶纯果汁,一口气喝了五分之一后又放回了冰箱。第二天妈妈拿出来喝
刘家村在本村“四荒”土地发包过程中的下列哪种做法不符合《土地承包法》的规定?A、
以下有关慢性心力衰竭其他药物治疗中描述错误的是A、在心力衰竭合并心房颤动避免使用
最新回复
(
0
)