Free Essays on Affirmitive Action

Affirmative Action is absurd. If a white male, who was five feet tall, tried out for the Los Angeles Lakers, would the government have the right to tell the team’s owner that he had to sign the player, simply because traditionally there has been a higher percentage of blacks than whites in the game of basketball? Of course not, that would be totally wrong. Playing on a professional sports team is based on talent and merit, and thus it should be with every other profession. In fact, according to the NIF booklet on this topic, the majority of affirmative action policies do not target the lower-class minorities that actually need help breaking into the workforce. Instead, middle-class minorities and women, who have had relatively the same educational opportunities as white middle-class males, are given preference. While the government should make sure that discriminatory hiring practices are not used, it should not give an unfair advantage to equally qualified students or applica nts simply because of their race or gender. The only viable way to create a truly equitable society is to expand programs that give assistance to the economically disadvantaged. Though these measures, the lower-class, which has traditionally been composed of a large percentage of minorities, will be able to compete fairly with white males for educational and employment opportunities. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said that people should be judged â€Å"not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character†. This statement is true in every aspect of American society. Morally, discrimination is wrong whatever the color of a person’s skin. No matter what advocates of affirmative action say, it does discriminate against certain people. Usually those people are wealthy white males; however, lower-class white males are also discriminated against under the guise of affirmative action. People should only be judged for employment or educational opportun... Free Essays on Affirmitive Action Free Essays on Affirmitive Action Affirmative Action is absurd. If a white male, who was five feet tall, tried out for the Los Angeles Lakers, would the government have the right to tell the team’s owner that he had to sign the player, simply because traditionally there has been a higher percentage of blacks than whites in the game of basketball? Of course not, that would be totally wrong. Playing on a professional sports team is based on talent and merit, and thus it should be with every other profession. In fact, according to the NIF booklet on this topic, the majority of affirmative action policies do not target the lower-class minorities that actually need help breaking into the workforce. Instead, middle-class minorities and women, who have had relatively the same educational opportunities as white middle-class males, are given preference. While the government should make sure that discriminatory hiring practices are not used, it should not give an unfair advantage to equally qualified students or applica nts simply because of their race or gender. The only viable way to create a truly equitable society is to expand programs that give assistance to the economically disadvantaged. Though these measures, the lower-class, which has traditionally been composed of a large percentage of minorities, will be able to compete fairly with white males for educational and employment opportunities. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said that people should be judged â€Å"not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character†. This statement is true in every aspect of American society. Morally, discrimination is wrong whatever the color of a person’s skin. No matter what advocates of affirmative action say, it does discriminate against certain people. Usually those people are wealthy white males; however, lower-class white males are also discriminated against under the guise of affirmative action. People should only be judged for employment or educational opportun...

No Embassies - Countries Without Diplomatic Relations

No Embassies - Countries Without Diplomatic Relations These four countries and Taiwan do not have official diplomatic relations with (nor an embassy in) the United States. Bhutan According to the Unites States Department of State, The United States and the Kingdom of Bhutan have not established formal diplomatic relations; however, the two governments have informal and cordial relations. However, informal contact is maintained through the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi to the mountainous country of Bhutan. Cuba Although the island country of Cuba is a close neighbor to the United States, the U.S. only interacts with Cuba via a U.S. Interests office at the Swiss Embassy in Havana and Washington D.C. The U.S. broke diplomatic relations with Cuba on January 3, 1961 Iran On April 7, 1980, the United States broke diplomatic relations with theocratic Iran, and on April 24, 1981, the Swiss Government assumed representation of U.S. interests in Tehran. Iranian interests in the United States are represented by the Government of Pakistan. North Korea The communist dictatorship of North Korea is not on friendly terms with the U.S. and while talks between the two countries are ongoing, there is no exchange of ambassadors. Taiwan Taiwan is not recognized as an independent country by the U.S. since the island nation claimed by the mainland Peoples Republic of China. Unofficial commercial and cultural relations between Taiwan and the United States are maintained through an unofficial instrumentality, the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office, with headquarters in Taipei and field offices in Washington D.C. and 12 other U.S. cities.