T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Are you in favor of:
Affirmative action?
Critical Race Theory?
DEI?
Disparate impact theory?
Voting districts for minorities?
Well...
Judge dismisses criminal charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported
- Thread starter signalmankenneth
- Start date
Affirmative action?
Critical Race Theory?
DEI?
Disparate impact theory?
Voting districts for minorities?
Well...
Matt Dillon
Retardium User
Post a pic of a gun you've got with your handle on a written piece of paper in the pic. 
Post it up now, dickface! Let's see whatcha got!
Ooo...what do you know about me, Dutchy? Whatever it is , I bet I DGAF.
Post it up now, dickface! Let's see whatcha got!
^And just like that, Dutch ran like a scalded dog.I'll say you're not bullshitting, because I think you are right now.
Last edited:
Your opinion is worthless, Mattie. Less so because you put no value on it.I'll say you're not bullshitting, because I think you are right now.
All MAGAts are white nationalists*....yes, even the black ones. They're also cultists with a herd mind.
One reason the Democrats are so fucked up is because they always listen to the squeaky wheels instead of common sense and duty.
FWIW, I consider every MAGAt who to an oath to the Constitution to be both an oath-breaking traitor, but also a domestic enemy.
*a kindler, gentler way of saying white supremacist.
Last edited:
evince
Truthmatters
Crazy people can be that way when their brains are captured
You are arguing with a guy that followed the moron who took 8 China virus shots and followed arrows on the floor of the grocery store.Post a pic of a gun you've got with your handle on a written piece of paper in the pic.
Ooo...what do you know about me, Dutchy? Whatever it is , I bet I DGAF.
Post it up now, dickface! Let's see whatcha got!
^And just like that, Dutch ran like a scalded dog.
evince
Truthmatters
evince
Truthmatters
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Then you are a bonified and certified through and through RACIST. Every one of those depend on racism to work.
ra·cism
[ˈreɪsɪz(ə)m]
noun
racism (noun)
- prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized
Every one of those favors some race or another over another race and discriminates on the basis of race. That makes you a RACIST.
evince
Truthmatters
AI Overview
Affirmative action refers to policies and practices designed to eliminate unlawful discrimination, remedy the results of past discrimination, and prevent future barriers in employment and education. Originally emerging from the U.S. Civil Rights Movement, these measures ensure historically underrepresented groups—such as racial minorities and women—have equal opportunities.
Core Concepts
The legality of race-conscious admissions has seen major shifts. Landmark rulings historically permitted race to be used as a factor to promote diversity. However, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively outlawed the use of race-conscious affirmative action in college admissions.
Resources & Perspectives
Looks great to me
Affirmative action refers to policies and practices designed to eliminate unlawful discrimination, remedy the results of past discrimination, and prevent future barriers in employment and education. Originally emerging from the U.S. Civil Rights Movement, these measures ensure historically underrepresented groups—such as racial minorities and women—have equal opportunities.
Core Concepts
- Purpose: To counteract systemic discrimination, promote diversity, and provide equitable access to jobs and educational institutions.
- Types of Programs: Ranges from proactive outreach, targeted recruitment, and diversity training to (in some countries) strict quota systems.
- Employment: In the U.S., federal contractors are legally required to enact affirmative action programs to prevent discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
The legality of race-conscious admissions has seen major shifts. Landmark rulings historically permitted race to be used as a factor to promote diversity. However, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively outlawed the use of race-conscious affirmative action in college admissions.
Resources & Perspectives
- Legal Context: Review the Cornell Law School Wex Definition for an in-depth breakdown of modern jurisprudence.
- Debate & Analysis: Explore the Pew Research Center Topic Overview for statistics and historical data on the evolution of college admissions policies.
- Employment Guidelines: Federal contractors can utilize the DirectEmployers Association Glossaryfor details on specific workplace
Looks great to me
evince
Truthmatters
AI Overview
Critical Race Theory (CRT) is an academic and legal framework originating in the 1970s and 1980s. It posits that racism in the United States is not merely a product of individual prejudice, but is systemic—embedded in legal systems, institutions, and policies that uphold and reproduce racial inequalities.
Core Tenets
Scholars like Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado pioneered this framework based on a few fundamental ideas:
To understand CRT in practice, theorists analyze historical and contemporary policies that created unequal outcomes. A widely cited historical example is "redlining" in the 1930s, where government officials drew lines around neighborhoods deemed "poor financial risks" based explicitly on the racial composition of the inhabitants. This effectively barred Black Americans from obtaining mortgages and building generational wealth, establishing systemic inequities that persist today.
The Public Debate
While originally a niche legal theory taught primarily in universities, CRT became a massive flashpoint in the culture wars.
Proven by history its self
Critical Race Theory (CRT) is an academic and legal framework originating in the 1970s and 1980s. It posits that racism in the United States is not merely a product of individual prejudice, but is systemic—embedded in legal systems, institutions, and policies that uphold and reproduce racial inequalities.
Core Tenets
Scholars like Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado pioneered this framework based on a few fundamental ideas:
- Systemic Racism: Racism is woven into the very fabric of society and institutional structures (e.g., housing, employment, and the justice system), rather than just the result of bad actors.
- Social Construct: Race is recognized as a culturally invented category rather than a biologically grounded fact.
- Intersectionality: The framework emphasizes how different forms of inequality and identity intersect, such as race overlapping with class, gender, and disability.
- Interest Convergence: The idea that legal advances for racial minorities only happen when those advances align with the interests of the white majority.
To understand CRT in practice, theorists analyze historical and contemporary policies that created unequal outcomes. A widely cited historical example is "redlining" in the 1930s, where government officials drew lines around neighborhoods deemed "poor financial risks" based explicitly on the racial composition of the inhabitants. This effectively barred Black Americans from obtaining mortgages and building generational wealth, establishing systemic inequities that persist today.
The Public Debate
While originally a niche legal theory taught primarily in universities, CRT became a massive flashpoint in the culture wars.
- Critics argue that the framework promotes "racial essentialism," teaches individuals to feel guilt for historical actions based solely on their race, and divides society. Many conservative lawmakers and activists have used it as a catch-all term to ban or limit discussions of systemic racism, diversity initiatives, and specific historical events in public schools.
- Proponents maintain that CRT is simply a tool to tell a more complete and accurate story of American history and current events. They argue that examining systemic issues is necessary to understand and address modern disparities, such as racial wealth gaps, disparate incarceration rates, and unequal healthcare outcomes.
Proven by history its self
evince
Truthmatters
DEI stands for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion—an organizational framework designed to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly groups that have historically been underrepresented or marginalized based on identity, background, or ability.
The concept is broken down into three core pillars:
Why would anyone have a problem with this?
The concept is broken down into three core pillars:
- Diversity: The presence of differences within a given setting. This encompasses a wide spectrum of human identity, including race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and physical or mental abilities.
- Equity: The guarantee of fair and just treatment, access, and opportunity for all. Equity acknowledges that individuals have different needs and circumstances, and intentionally works to dismantle systemic barriers that prevent marginalized groups from succeeding.
- Inclusion: The practice of ensuring that all individuals—especially those historically excluded—feel welcomed, respected, and supported. Inclusion goes beyond simply having a diverse group of people; it means actively engaging their perspectives and making them feel valued.
Why would anyone have a problem with this?
So, an Obama appointed judge with a razor thin resume mostly in employment and labor law makes a ruling against the Trump administration not on the basis of the charges presented but rather on his opinion that they were brought vindictively. For example, Garcia never had a "successful lawsuit challenging his removal." A DC federal judge decided that on his own. No trial, no evidence presented.
My bet is this moron's order doesn't stand on appeal.
Why should he be in El Salvador when there was a prior court order saying he couldn’t be sent to El Salvador?
When he is not from El Salvador?
evince
Truthmatters
AI Overview
The disparate impact theory of discrimination states that a policy or practice can be deemed discriminatory if it disproportionately harms members of a protected class, even if the policy was entirely neutral and there was no intent to discriminate.
Core Legal Framework
Unlike disparate treatment (which involves intentional, overt discrimination), disparate impact cases rely on disproportionate outcomes. The framework for a disparate impact claim typically proceeds in three steps:
Disparate impact analysis is used across various civil rights laws to root out systemic, covert barriers:
Effects are effects
Why shouldn’t the right thing be done to protect Americans rights from being harmed by bad decisions
I didn’t mean to break your arm
So it’s not my fault I broke your arm
Deal with it yourself
That’s not very American huh
The disparate impact theory of discrimination states that a policy or practice can be deemed discriminatory if it disproportionately harms members of a protected class, even if the policy was entirely neutral and there was no intent to discriminate.
Core Legal Framework
Unlike disparate treatment (which involves intentional, overt discrimination), disparate impact cases rely on disproportionate outcomes. The framework for a disparate impact claim typically proceeds in three steps:
- Establishment of Impact: The plaintiff must use statistical evidence to show that a specific, facially neutral policy has a disproportionately negative effect on a protected group (e.g., race, sex, or religion).
- Business Necessity (The Defense): If the impact is established, the burden shifts to the defending entity (like an employer or landlord) to prove that the challenged policy is a "business necessity" or job-related.
- Alternative Practice: If the defendant meets their burden, the plaintiff can still win by proving that a less discriminatory alternative policy would achieve the same business goals.
Disparate impact analysis is used across various civil rights laws to root out systemic, covert barriers:
- Employment: Governed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, plaintiffs challenge policies like standardized testing, aptitude requirements, or criminal background checks that exclude certain demographics.
- Housing: Applied under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), this targets practices like blanket bans on renting to individuals with specific types of criminal records or algorithmic credit and lending practices that negatively impact minority communities.
- Age Discrimination: Evaluated under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971): A landmark Supreme Court ruling that cemented the disparate impact doctrine. The Court ruled that employers cannot use arbitrary hiring requirements (like requiring a high school diploma for manual labor jobs) if they disproportionately exclude Black applicants and are not significantly related to successful job performance.
Effects are effects
Why shouldn’t the right thing be done to protect Americans rights from being harmed by bad decisions
I didn’t mean to break your arm
So it’s not my fault I broke your arm
Deal with it yourself
That’s not very American huh
Soooo....I have to dig out some of my guns, set them up, write you a note, take a picture of it and then post it just so I have your respect? LOLPost a pic of a gun you've got with your handle on a written piece of paper in the pic.
Ooo...what do you know about me, Dutchy? Whatever it is , I bet I DGAF.
Post it up now, dickface! Let's see whatcha got!
^And just like that, Dutch ran like a scalded dog.
Sorry, Mattie, I doubt anything will change your mind about me so what's in it for me?
Matt Dillon
Retardium User
You do not have any guns, bitch.
I say you're monitored by the state and are not allowed to. The way you post leads me to believe that.
Has to be done today if you want to prove me wrong, though. It's not difficult, few minutes is all it takes.
I never said "some guns", you must have reading comprehension problems, I said a gun, any gun.
Last edited:
Ooooh! You forgot to say "I double dare you, Dutch!"You do not have any guns, bitch.
I say you're monitored by the state and are not allowed to. The way you post leads me to believe that.
Has to be done today if you want to prove me wrong, though. It's not difficult, few minutes is all it takes.
I never said "some guns", you must have reading comprehension problems, I said a gun, any gun.
View attachment 84323
Make it worth my while, Mattie. If I can't do it, you get bragging rights. If I can, you go away for a week. Deal?
Matt Dillon
Retardium User
You can't do it, or you would, lying douche. Nope. Proof or fuck off.Ooooh! You forgot to say "I double dare you, Dutch!"
Make it worth my while, Mattie. If I can't do it, you get bragging rights. If I can, you go away for a week. Deal?
I'm getting bragging rights by the minute!
Keep doing what you're doing.
Last edited:
Oh, Mattie. I'm guessing that works with your fellow drunks and retards, but I require skin in the game if I have to go through the effort.You can't do it, or you would, lying douche. Nope. Proof or fuck off.
I'm getting bragging rights by the minute!
Keep doing what you're doing.
Put up or shut up, Mattie Mensa. If you won't put up, then this conversation is over.