After watching an online Harvard lecture (http://www.justiceharvard.org/2011/02/episode-09/#watch) all about whether race should or should not play a role in a an admission decision, I was left with a lot to think about. This subject was particularly relatable because I am going through the college admission process right now, and am often thinking about what is ‘fair’ or not in this process. This presentation was based on a case involving a white woman named Cheryl Hopwood who was denied admission to a Texas law school, even though she had higher grades and test scores than some of the minority applicants who were admitted. Hopwood took her case to court, arguing the school’s affirmative action program violated her rights. An affirmative action policy means that it takes into account race and background. Cheryl felt that she deserved admission more then the students, who were admitted because of their race. I do not know what position I would take, but their were certain arguments made that I agree with. The first argument made was against the affirmative action policy.  A student argued that it isn’t fair because race is an arbitrary quality, a student does not have control over it. I have to agree with this. Sometimes, when I am filling out applications, I get annoyed that I can’t do anything to be able to check a box other than ‘Caucasian’ in order to have a leg up in admissions. However, another student argued the point by bringing up legacies. Legacies, applicants who have parents who have attended that University, also have an advantage that is out of the student’s control. This made me rethink if the whole ‘legacy’ concept was fair. If one says that race is too arbitrary, than that person would have to agree that having an advantage if you are a legacy is too arbitrary. A argument made for affirmative action was that if a college is measuring the potential a student has, they also have too look at opportunity the student has had. If the student is part of a poor minority and belongs to a school that lacks funding than the grades or test scores may not be a great demonstration of the student’s potential. That is one reason that minorities having an advantage would be fair. I agree to this point. I am a student whose had great opportunities, without my opportunities I know I would not be at the point I am today. Another argument made for affirmative action is in order to have a more diverse class. I agree with this point, in a discussion if people have different backgrounds and stories the discussion becomes more interesting. If colleges only accepted privileged white students they would not have the diversity that is so important to the educational and social college experience. With this argument, it would make sense why college can prioritize different races and backgrounds over grades and test scores. The presenter explained the importance of diversity perfectly when he said, “The quality of the educational experience of all students depends in part on these differences in the background and outlook that students bring with them.” However, in the presentation a student brought up the negative aspect of judging based on race. Even if it is giving minorities an advantage, it is still discrimination. He also brought up a quote from Martin Luther King Jr. where King states that he wishes to “live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Giving advantage to a minority is judging on skin and not on character. These arguments may have not helped me make my own opinion on whether I am for affirmative action policy or against it, but these arguments made me start to really think about this topic and how there is not just one answer to the question.