Law students debate afrmative action

While members of the University community have different opinions on the issue of affirmative action, many students said last night that they agree on one concept.

"We will never get beyond diversity," said Law second-year student Francois Nabwangu, an affirmative action supporter.

That is why Law second-year student George Ellis organized a student affirmative action debate held last night that attracted about 100 audience members to Hutchins Hall.

"I didn't feel there was enough balanced discussion," Ellis said about the affirmative action issue.

At last night's debate, six Law students answered questions about affirmative action posed by three Law professors and members of the audience.

EMILY NATHAN/Daily Law student Eric Moutz looks on as Law student Wayne Song participates in a panel debate in Hutchins Hall on affirmative action yesterday.

The Law students divided into two panels, one that argued in favor of affirmative action and one that argued against it.

Law second-year student Allen Graves, a panel member who argued against affirmative action, said skin color does not equate to diversity.

"A lot of this debate turns to whether or not we believe skin tone means ideological differences," Graves said. "This is really about ideological diversity."

Law Prof. Sallyanne Payton asked both panels to define race.

"I don't think being able to concretely define race is a prerequisite for affirmative action programs," said Tracy Gonos, a Law third-year student who argued in favor of affirmative action. "Race, to some extent, is socially constructed in this country."

Law first-year student Eric Moutz said race is more than just skin tone. It is an identity that includes experience and ideology, he said.

"It should be a goal to emphasize a common humanity for all people," Moutz said. "If we're after diversity, the proper way to achieve it is to ask."

The panels also debated the use of gender preferences.

Graves avoided discussing this issue because, he said, society treats gender differently than it treats race.

"Gender preferences upset us less," Graves said.

But Gonos said she did not understand Grave's statement. As a woman, she feels like an underrepresented minority, she said.

Despite the disagreement among the panelists, all six of the students agreed that affirmative action is an issue that needs to be debated.

"There is a problem with discrimination in our society," Moutz said.

Law first-year student Aba Yankah said there is a need to break down communication barriers on both sides of the debate.

"What I got out of (the debate) was the fact that there is still a gap of misunderstanding that needs to be bridged," Yankah said.

The debate was an example of how to break down these barriers, Ellis said.

"I think it demonstrated that we can talk and discuss this issue with civility," Ellis said.

Even though the discussion didn't resolve any of the panelists arguments, it gave students a chance to discuss the issue, which some attendes said is important.

"If nothing else, it is good to have people talk about this thing," said Law first-year student Matt Roskoski.

04-09-98