Well, I know it’s not politically correct to say so, but there’s no other way to describe the organized campaign in Michigan to scare women into voting against equal treatment than to call it what it is: hysterical.
Here’s one more example, from a column in the Detroit Free Press by Nicole Christian:
If MCRI passes, women can forget about programs such as breast and cervical cancer screening, breast-feeding promotion, domestic violence treatment and prevention programs, and summer and after-school programs such as technology camps for girls.
Are there any state-funded “technology camps for girls,” i.e., that exclude boys? I doubt it, but aside from this possibility the remainder of Ms. Christian’s list is pathetically laughable. But then shoveling such horse manure is presumably justified because, as she writes,
In the case of [Ward] Connerly and the ballot proposal known as the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, … the only way to stop him is to convince affirmative action’s silent beneficiaries, white women, to come out of hiding and help defeat MCRI.
Ms. Christian also writes:
For those who already assume from my picture that I have benefited from affirmative action, I have. I’m sure it has helped to pry open as many historically locked doors in my life as it has for Connerly. I have no problem admitting this, and neither should white women.
Based on the lack of relationship between argument and fact in this column, I’d say the fact that Ms. Christian benefited from affirmative action presents a pretty good argument against it.
No more breast and cervical cancer screenings? Damn, that’s cold. Given the “logic” here, I guess all obstetric treatments would be outlawed too? I guess her contention is that the MCRI organizers want as many people to die as possible?
Is this a parody planted by the MCRI camp?
I guess prosecutions for rape will have to go too (I mean, it’s almost always a female victim and male perpetrator–how sexist of the criminal justice system!)
Snarkiness aside, I doubt this tactic will work.
Consider that the daughers of suburban white women were those most adversely impacted by the previous “separate and unequal” admission program at the University of Michigan, then white women should be leading the charge to end biased programs. In addition, white women are no longer eligible for most 8A contracting, they should also lead the charge to end that program.
Federal Dog,
Oh no. Affluent people and those with access to health care can freely continue to have all the preventative care they can avail themselves of, that is, if they aren’t DISCRIMINATED AGAINST along the way.
The City Council of Lansing Michigan had an opinion on this very issue:
>>>”Mon. Feb. 20. The Lansing City Council unanimously reaffirmed its support of diversity and affirmative action programs Monday night, by passing a resolution opposing the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI).
“It is imperative Michigan citizens realize exactly what impact Ward Connerly and the misnamed Michigan Civil Rights Initiative could have on our state,” said Mary Pollock, Lansing regional coordinator for Michigan United. “The support of the Lansing City Council takes us one step further in our fight to protect equal rights for everyone in Michigan. The more people understand and recognize the damage the MCRI can do in Michigan, the better.”
The City Council’s resolution recognizes the MCRI would likely cripple efforts to resolve gender and racial inequalities in key areas such as health care, education and law enforcement, as well as remove the ability of locally elected officials to bring about diversity within the operations of local government.
“The support of the Lansing City Council shows just how committed the residents of Lansing . . . are to protecting vital programs and services enabled by affirmative action,” said James Gill, president of the Lansing chapter of the NAACP. “We congratulate the Council members on their forward-thinking actions, aimed at helping all Lansing-area families.”
Michigan United is a wide-ranging, bi-partisan coalition of organizations working together to protect equal rights for all Michigan residents. For more information about Michigan United, or how to become involved in the campaign, please visit One United Michigan.”
Lansing sings MCRI protest song
So I guess Ms. Christian isn’t alone in her opinion, is she?
–Cobra
So I guess Ms. Christian isn’t alone in her opinion, is she?
Alas, no. There are lots and lots of people in Michigan consciously or unconsciously putting out false information.
Take a look at his statement, which you quote:
The City Council’s resolution recognizes the MCRI would likely cripple efforts to resolve gender and racial inequalities in key areas such as health care, education and law enforcement, as well as remove the ability of locally elected officials to bring about diversity within the operations of local government.
Now keep in mind one thing: all MCRI will do is bar racial preference “in public employment, public education and public contracting.” O.K., got that? Now we all know how racial preferences are used in college admissions. Now, what are the examples of what would be barred in “health care,” assuming for the sake of argument that “health care” is covered at all? Give me examples. Find women’s health care programs that were closed down in Calif. and Washiington as a result of bans identical to MCRI being passed.
It is quite telling that opponents of MCRI feel they have to lie about its effects in order to oppose it.
John,
Here’s an example of how the destruction of Affirmative Action can result detrimentally to the health care of African Americans.
>>>”U.S. Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher in
April 2000 issued the first oral health report produced
by a surgeon general. The report, titled “Oral
Health in America,”1 declares, “There are profound
and consequential oral health disparities within the
U.S. population.” The report further states that dental
health care has been demonstrated to be a vital
link in comprehensive health care and that research
studies increasingly document the integral relationship
of oral health and total systemic health. The report
concludes that the effort to recruit minorities to
the dental profession could result in enhanced “access
and utilization of oral health care by racial and
ethnic minorities.”
Recent American Dental Association research
shows that minority dentists overwhelmingly serve minority
patients. Additionally, the 2002 ADEA Senior
Survey2 found that significantly more African-American
students plan to practice in inner cities than do their
white colleagues. Another recent study documents practice
location characteristics of black dentists.3 In spite
of this, U.S. dental schools are graduating only 200
African American dentists every year, which will
scarcely be enough to replace the number of African
American dentists who are retiring or dying.”
Boldly going where white dentists rarely go
The SELF PRESERVATION INSTICT in myself as an African-America would DICTATE that I support a program that would result in the placement of more African-American dentists, physicians, specialists and general practitioners based upon the data provided by the medical associations themselves.
Now, I understand in the mindset of some of my fellow posters, the health care of African-Americans may not have as high a priority placement as I would, but that selectivity does not impact on the validity of my argument, and that of many Medical Professional Associations.
–Cobra
Nice try, but I don’t think this works. First, I have nothing against “recruiting” more black dentists, or affirmative action programs that do so. I do have something against admitting blacks, or anyone else, to dental school who would not have been admitted to dental school but for racial preferences, nor do I think it does the black community any favors to admit such less qualified students because, after all, they’ll probably only practice in black neighborhoods. Racial preferences, in short, perpetuate racial stereotypes.
Cobra,
Could you please cite the language in the MCRI that would bring an end to breast and cervical cancer screenings? I cannot find anything even remotely germane in the proposed legislation.
John writes:
>>>”Racial preferences, in short, perpetuate racial stereotypes.”
But that’s why we’re ALWAYS going to be at odds in this great debate. Your statement above has some validity. However, in your posts, and those of many on your side of the argument, you seem to suggest that the only “racial preferences” worth eliminating are those brought forth through Affirmative Action. That might not be your INTENTION, but that’s how it comes across.
My contention has consistantly been that AMERICA has practiced “racial preferences” since its enception, and this case is a perfect example.
The American Dental Association (not Michael Moore, Air America or Moveon.org) clearly states on that most white dentists “prefer” not to work in the inner city (read: areas where black and brown people live). We’re not going to even talk about the “racial preferences” in housing that facilitated segregated living arrangements in the first place.
The equation, as rendered by the ADEA, (not Cobra) is:
“We need more black dentists, because white dentists prefer not to operate where many black people live.”
You can believe in “recruitment” all you like. If “recruits” aren’t admitted into dental schools, then recruitment means nothing.
Poor access to dental care certainly does the “black community” (which infers the existance of a “white community”–more “racial preferences”) no favors.
Federal Dog writes:
>>>”Could you please cite the language in the MCRI that would bring an end to breast and cervical cancer screenings? I cannot find anything even remotely germane in the proposed legislation.”
Again, it’s about ACCESS. The ADEA found that white dentists by and large prefer NOT to work in large minority population centers.
The ADEA found that black dentists do, serving the needs of that population. The ADEA was specific in their language:
>>>”The report further states that dental
health care has been demonstrated to be a vital
link in comprehensive health care and that research
studies increasingly document the integral relationship
of oral health and total systemic health.”
Which means the same principles apply to other medical practioners, including those who do breast cancer screenings and gynecology.
That’s why my question to you, Jennifer Gratz or anyone else on your side of the debate is what your opinion is of the “racial preferences” held by many WHITE dentists and doctors?
–Cobra
“Again, it’s about ACCESS. The ADEA found that white dentists by and large prefer NOT to work in large minority population centers.
The ADEA found that black dentists do, serving the needs of that population.”
So? Let them.
Dentists do not carry out breast and cervical cancer screenings. And even as far as dental care goes, nothing here even suggests that white practitioners are refusing to treat minority patients. If you have evidence of that they are in fact refusing to treat minorities, post it.