my last blog was in response to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch article about me petitioning to get an initiative on the ballot that will ban preferential treatment based on race and gender in public employment, education, and contracting. This has been a problem in the past. Now I have news for you, it is not just a problem in the United States.
According to a recent British News, the Telegraph, British has banned the practice; However, there a push to repeal the ban. Similar to American proponents of these practices, British proponents argue that these practices are need to to help the disadvantaged. British opponents argue that granting preferential treatment is unfair and insulting to the disadvantage.
Ann Widdecombe, the Conservative MP and leading campaigner against all-women shortlists in Parliament, said: "In addition to being superfluous, this law would be detrimental because it suggests that women and members of ethnic minorities need special treatment."
I have a thought, if proponents of preferential treatment want to help the disadvantage, then they should help the become advantage. For example, help students of the St. Louis Public Schools learn the skills they need to go to college and get a job. The school district is in need for qualified tutors and teachers.
As for Britain, granting preferential treatment people based on race and sex could hurt their growing emigration population. Last year, Telegraph reporter Phillip Johnston reported that Britain is emigrants are moving in was Britains are moving out. Should these same proponents who want preferential treatment based on race and sex be concerned about putting the emigrants at a disadvantage?