I'm looking at scholarship info right now, and I'd say aobut a fourth of them have being a minority as a requirement. I kind of view it as an unofficial form of affirmative action, because if there was ever a white only scholarship (actually I think the KKK gives one like that away) people would rave about racism and intolerance, while it's all fine if a good portion of scholarship money is disproportionately spent on a group representing a relatively small percentage of the population.

I've found a few other types as well. Some are available to women, Irish, Italians, and other groups. All I'm saying is that if you want to strive for equality, don't base merit on race.

Hmm... check to see who is providing the money for the scholarships. Chances are it's an Irish group, or Italian group, or a piano teacher's guild, or something similar.

When you're handing out money, I think you should be able to stipulate the recipients.

I'm perfectly fine with their being "minority only" scholarships - so long as there are "whites only" scholarships.

But something tells me that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton will hop on the ole racism train and do their best to create a national crisis about the latter.

A member from Young America's Foundation tried this at his school, his group offered a whites only scholarship and holy hell was raised about it.

If we wish ot continue affirmative action we need to take race out of it, let us based it instead on socioeconomic status. This would provide more benefits and opportunity to those who truly need it.

dmk

Ooo, there are some good comments here...

I agree with both of these things...I do think that a group should be free to hand out money to the person they choose. If a group chooses to hand out money only to a minority, then that group should be totally allowed to.

At the same time we need to realize that handing out scholarships based on race is the wrong thing to do, and groups who decide to hand out scholarships with a race requirement are making a bad decision.

The problem is exactly what Antithesis said: we can't expect racial equality if we continue to use race as a reason to treat people differently. If a group issues a scholarship available only to black children, they might be helping the single child who receives that scholarship, but they are hurting every other black person who faces inferior treatment due to his or her skin color.

Introducing scholarships only for white children doesn't solve the problem. Maybe white children have equal access to scholarships, which is good, but we're still seperating people into different groups based on their race. And even if we have leveled the playing field, we still need to answer to the deserving black child who was not given a chance to win our scholarship.

I understand the outcry in response to a whites-only scholarship. I do not understand the lack of outcry in response to minorities-only scholarships.

Yes! I agree completely. Basing our scholarships (and affirmative action) on socioeconomic status instead of race allows those who need the help to get it, and it ends the practice of treating people differently depending on their race. This is the best solution.

Remember: I am not advocating that we use the law to ban giving out scholarships to minority races. Each group should be free to use its money as it sees fit. But we should realize the immorality of this, and denounce the practice of granting preference based on race.

Since minorities are generally not provided the same resources as white students in this country I have no problem with either AA in general or scholarships for minorities only.

I have no problem, that is, until the inequity is cured.

So then you're FOR open discrimination. How nice.

I can only assume, then, that you're not opposed to the KKK establishing their own Scholarship Fund?


Hey, fair is fair.

That is just twisted. I am not for open discrimination. I am for countering the racist circumstances our society allows minorities to exist in.

That is discrimination. Thank you.

So... have you applied for your scholarship from the KKK yet? Because hey, if the NAACP can do it, their moral equivalent, the KKK can do it!

Ugh, give me a break, Jeff. Name one act of extortion, election bought, house firebombed, innocent citizen beaten, black killed, or catholic school forcibly closed by the NAACP. They're hypocritical to some extent, but seldom, if ever, violent.

I'm all for the socioeconomic status idea, though, just in case anyone was wondering.