The Supreme Court once again reveals its penchant for the game of kick-the-can-down-the-road (emulating the United States Congress no doubt) once more failing in their responsibility of interpreting the Constitution. If that's still their purpose, it's hard to tell.
Abigail Fisher (Fisher v. University of Texas - Austin) is the most recent victim of blatant and unconcealed reverse discrimination. Exactly why these cases end up in the High Court is utterly unclear to me. Everyone knows the Supremes are not about to consider or decide in accord with the Constitution, so why these continuous drills? They deliberated 257 days before ruling 7-1 to send the case back to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals for "review."
So much for the better qualified Abigail Fisher, she'll have to find a school that has already met its quota. Oh, sorry, that has already reached its racial diversity objectives.
Well, Abigail, I know it's not much consolation but at least you can enjoy the prestige of having been discriminated against by a first-class university whereas I allowed a small backwater university in Cullowhee, N.C., get the better of me and shorten my career in education. I must be getting old, or senile, or both.
A white male being the victim of discrimination, how silly is that? It's not silly if you have sons, and I have two. It's not silly if you have grandsons, and I have three. And it's not silly if you have great-grandsons, and I have ten.
I had the good fortune to grow up in an era when hard work, reliability and integrity were important assets and boys and girls who had them were rewarded. My great grandsons will not grow up in such a world. They will compete on the basis of gender or race or some other intangible measure future moronic liberals will conjure up.
The Supreme Court wrongly concluded that racial preferences can be used to advance educational benefits that come from a diverse student body. Actually that's two wrong conclusions in one.
Abraham Lincoln (who lived during very difficult years in our nation's history) is credited with the principle that "you cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong." But that's exactly what affirmative action, equal opportunity, and reverse discrimination hopes to accomplish. It can't be done but we'll give it the ole college try (no pun intended). Reverse discrimination is every bit as wrong as discrimination against minorities was in the beginning and no amount of tinkering with the Constitution is going to make it right.
Equal rights advocates will continue to push forward the wrongheaded notion that achieving some vague theory called "diversity" (allowed by the improper reading of our Constitution) justifies discrimination.
Well, it does not and these race and gender-based decisions critically endanger our freedom, our sovereignty, and our way of life.
David L. Snell — Dillsboro, N.C.