I remember how it was -- JR
Monday, July 10, 2023
I got into medical school by pretending to be black: We must enforce Supremes’ ruling
The Supreme Court’s decision banning college-admission based on race was a good first step, but the challenge now is to see that schools abide by it.
Indeed, no sooner did the court rule than President Joe Biden vowed not to let the decision “be the last word.”
I know first-hand why Americans should make sure it is.
Back in 1998, I knew my odds of getting into medical school, as an Indian-American, would be better if I were black. So, being dark-skinned, I pretended I was black — and got accepted, despite a mediocre 3.1 GPA.
Once there, though, I found the going rough and dropped out. That made me realize that affirmative action really doesn’t really do anyone any favors.
And it’s unfair to those who are excluded even though they were more deserving than those admitted on the basis of race.
Outside the courthouse in October, during deliberations in the recently decided case, I asked Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions (the plaintiff), about the potential consequences of a victory.
He replied with a twist on Winston Churchill’s famous words: It would be “the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end.”
After the decision, colleges and universities displayed a range of reactions — from reluctant acceptance to outright defiance.
More than a 100 colleges and universities, including the entire Ivy League, had filed amicus briefs backing Harvard and University of North Carolina’s admission practices, which the court now deemed discriminatory.
These schools have collected tens of billions in taxpayer dollars and sent millions of rejection letters to applicants whose only fault may have been their race.
In the case against Harvard, SFFA’s attorneys unearthed the school’s use of “positive personality traits” as a guise for Harvard’s affirmative-action admission practices.
Theoretically, schools that had endorsed affirmative action could continue to cloak such discriminatory practices in defiance of the court.
They could employ stealthy, complex admissions algorithms that make it hard to identify their illegal scheme.
Gauging the sincerity of commitments to comply and scrap these practices will indeed be a formidable task.
Anyone hoping for colorblind admissions will need to support individual and class-action lawsuits against institutions that refuse to adopt race-neutral admission policies.
This means identifying victims of such biases, gathering expert testimony, subpoenaing relevant admissions data and enduring lengthy legal battles.
They should not be afraid to threaten stiff financial penalties — via legal settlements or awards or new legislation — for defiance.
Former President Donald Trump has suggested consequences large enough to erode endowments. Though legislation or court settlements might not go as far he’d like, he’s got the right idea.
The local, state and federal government must all be involved: Scores of congressmen and virtually every major Republican presidential candidate publicly supported SFFA’s cause.
With the court’s ruling, these leaders can now move to withhold federal funding from the Department of Education, Department of Justice and the universities themselves if they fail to enforce the court’s ruling.
Officials might also look to devise additional punishments as well, for school officials and the schools themselves, including loss of accreditation, a powerful weapon.
Recall that, years ago, Bob Jones University lost its tax-exempt status due to its discriminatory policies.
Further back, Washington dispatched federal marshals to see that black students were allowed into schools like the University of Alabama.
Surely officials can come up with other ways, too, to enforce compliance and design a routine for regularly examining, supervising and auditing these institutions until this scourge is truly behind us.
I am hopeful that this is the beginning of the end of affirmative action.
I’m desperately crossing my fingers that we’re entering a new era, with nationwide lawsuits and civil-rights campaigns dedicated to upholding race-neutral admissions policies when universities refuse to comply.
I’m encouraged not only by the Supreme Court’s ruling, but by the successful 2020 effort (in which I participated) to defeat California’s Prop. 16, which sought to allow affirmative action at California state institutions, including my beloved alma mater, UCLA.
Despite our staggering financial disadvantage, our efforts yielded a remarkable triumph, as 57% of voters sided with us.
These recent successes show that the nation is on the right track.
Americans will be better off when we no longer have to worry about legally sanctioned discrimination — against people of any race.
************************************************************
Interfaith parents demand Maryland schools allow students to opt out of LGBTQ curriculum
Parents of all faiths joined together to oppose a Maryland school district’s gender ideology instruction, saying they will not be silenced.
Shaykh El Hadji Sall, a Muslim immigrant from Africa, joined the demonstration and spoke out against Montgomery County Public Schools’ decision to no longer allow students to opt-out of lessons on gender identity and sexual orientation.
In a Fox News op-ed, Sall explained that the instruction conflicts with his religious beliefs.
“Our simple request to restore the most basic of our rights — the right to opt out — received a surprising backlash. The opposing side lacks an argument as to why they should deny us our basic freedoms and parental rights, and so they have smeared us as bigots,” he wrote. “Yet none of these smears are going to silence me or other parents in Montgomery County from the Muslim and other faith communities. The stakes are too high, and our children are paramount.”
MCPS announced last year efforts to include an LGBTQ-inclusive reading list as part of its English language arts curriculum for the 2023 to 2024 academic year.
Sall told “Fox & Friends” Friday that it is parents’ right not to adhere to the curriculum, which is “completely against” their theological principles.
He said the school is trying to change his children’s values to something that is considered “sinful” in his religion.
“We are just not being treated properly because these are a small group of liberals in the Board of Education [who] just want to do what they want to do against all of us, which is not right,” he told host Brian Kilmeade.
Ismail Royer, a member of the Coalition of Virtue, serves as an advocate for the concerned parents. He said parents don’t want to be put in a position to choose between having their children indoctrinated or being punished by the school district.
“People of faith and people who share a moral consensus have to get together and pay attention to who’s getting elected to these school boards,” Royer explained.
“Voting has to be done by a case-by-case basis, but in this situation it would be suicidal for Muslims to vote for a Democrat unfortunately, just the way that Democrats line up on this issue.”
Montgomery County Public Schools issued a statement following the outrage from parents: “Maryland law permits students and families to opt out of ‘Family Life and Human Sexuality Unit of Instruction’ but not other curriculum such as the English language arts curriculum.”
Sall, however, said he is not satisfied by the school district’s statement.
He argued the push for gender ideology and sexual orientation in schools is an attempt to erase his culture and religious heritage.
“We’re not going to accept it,” he said. “We just want to opt out completely to this curriculum they want to impose to our children to indoctrinate them.”
He predicted this issue in education will impact the next election in a big way.
“Our God teaches to obey him, to obey the prophet, but also to obey the authority among us, meaning to be a good citizen,” he said. “And to be a good citizen is definitely to vote and to vote properly.”
***********************************************************
UK: I was hauled before a court because I challenged my sons' 'woke' school for removing urinals in the boys' toilets
A father-of-four says he was hauled before the courts for challenging what he believes are 'woke practices' in his sons' fee-paying boarding school and now faces a criminal conviction.
Martin Howard, 39, says urinals were removed from all boys toilets at Sexey's School in Bruton, Somerset, last summer leaving just four cubicles for 300 boys which he believes is a move to creating gender free toilets.
Mr Howard - whose sons aged 15 and 12 are pupils - wrote to the headteacher repeatedly to complain about the toilets and what he terms other 'extremist actions' which he says include rainbow flags in classrooms, inappropriate questionnaires on Year 7 pupils' sexual activity and an assembly likening all men to controversial influencer Andrew Tate.
It comes as the Government's long-awaited guidance to schools is set to be published imminently amid the growing debate around transgender issues. It is expected to say pupils shouldn't be allowed to use facilities designed for the opposite sex, but advice on 'gender neutral' toilets is still unclear.
After believing that his requests for clarification on why urinals and exterior toilet doors were removed weren't adequately addressed, Mr Howard went into the school to gather evidence last November.
Video recorded on Mr Howard's phone shows him visiting four toilets after school and being told to leave by teachers - several months later two cops arrived at his home and ordered him to come to the police station for questioning where he was later charged with causing nuisance or disturbance on school premises.
Mr Howard, from Shepton Mallet, Somerset, says he was banned from the school grounds for three months.
Appearing before Taunton Magistrates Court on Wednesday to represent himself, he pleaded not guilty and described the entire process as a 'waste of mine and the court's time'.
He added: 'As a parent I have an implied right of access to the school.'
But Magistrate Angela Brereton said: 'The only issue is whether or not you were being a nuisance or creating a disturbance. 'I am not sure you're allowed to video in toilets - what if there had been pupils present?'
He was released on unconditional bail but faces a trial in November, If he is convicted then will result in a criminal record and a fine of up to £500.
His case comes as women’s rights campaigners, including author JK Rowling, desperately try to stop public bodies and businesses replacing separate male and female toilets with gender neutral ones in an attempt to be more welcoming to trans people.
From the National Trust to UK theatres and even the Houses of Parliament, proposals to install gender neutral toilets have been blasted as woke and dangerous.
In May, parents at Walsall Academy, near Wolverhampton, were left fearful that new gender neutral toilets would leave 11-year-olds sharing lavatories with 18-year-olds of the opposite gender.
There were reports of pupils recording each other in the toilets, while teenage girls were refusing to drink water because they were forced to wait until they were back home before relieving themselves.
Meanwhile late last month, The Telegraph reported that a teenage boy was reportedly arrested over allegations that female pupils were sexually assaulted in the gender-neutral toilets at another secondary school in Essex.
The Essex school reportedly has a number of gendered toilets to be used by boys or girls as well as a set of 'open suite' cubicles that can be used by either sex.
Speaking after his court case, Mr Howard said: 'I am shocked it has gone this far. 'The school don't want parents finding out what they have done or challenging their woke policies.
'I tried to raise my concerns but the headteacher ignored these concerns as she continues to politicise her educational policies and the environment towards her extreme left ideologies.
'It is not a nice experience being charged and I will be writing to the school demanding compensation.'
Section 547 of the Education Act 1996 makes it a criminal offence for a person who is on school premises without legal permission to cause or permit a nuisance or disturbance. Trespassing itself does not constitute a criminal offence.
To have committed a criminal offence, an abusive individual must have been barred from the premises or have exceeded their 'implied licence', then also have caused a nuisance or disturbance.
Earlier this year Ofsted rated Sexey's school 'good' in all areas of an inspection - four years after it was judged 'inadequate'. Inspectors found pupils are 'happy and safe', 'polite' and 'thrive' there.
Sexey's - a state-run boarding school for boys and girls aged 11-18 which charges fees of up to £13,000 per year - has been contacted for comment.
******************************************************
My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
******************************************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment