What argument is made against the need for special legislation for minority groups?

What argument is made against the need for special legislation for minority groups?

• A. Minority groups and women still face severe economic hardships
• B. Economic progress has diminished the need for special protections
• C. Special protections are always necessary
• D. Legislation should be universal and not group-specific

Answer: (B)

The argument made against the need for special legislation for minority groups, which holds that economic progress has diminished the need for special protections, is based on the belief that as minority groups achieve higher levels of economic success and representation, the necessity for targeted legal protections becomes less pressing. This viewpoint suggests that when individuals from minority groups begin to thrive economically and socially, the rationale for maintaining specific legal measures or interventions dissipates. The assumption here is that economic empowerment equates to equal treatment and opportunity under the law. Some may argue that as society progresses and individuals from minority groups become more integrated in the economic landscape, existing disparities may lessen naturally, making special legislation redundant. This perspective often emphasizes the importance of broad societal changes rather than specific legal safeguards tailored to minority needs. In contrast, the other viewpoints imply that economic hardships continue to affect minority groups, that special protections are essential at all times, or that legislation should create uniform standards rather than group-focused provisions. Each of these emphasizes ongoing challenges or philosophical approaches to equality and fairness that counter the argument stemming from diminished need due to economic progress.

The argument made against the need for special legislation for minority groups, which holds that economic progress has diminished the need for special protections, is based on the belief that as minority groups achieve higher levels of economic success and representation, the necessity for targeted legal protections becomes less pressing. This viewpoint suggests that when individuals from minority groups begin to thrive economically and socially, the rationale for maintaining specific legal measures or interventions dissipates. The assumption here is that economic empowerment equates to equal treatment and opportunity under the law.

Some may argue that as society progresses and individuals from minority groups become more integrated in the economic landscape, existing disparities may lessen naturally, making special legislation redundant. This perspective often emphasizes the importance of broad societal changes rather than specific legal safeguards tailored to minority needs.

In contrast, the other viewpoints imply that economic hardships continue to affect minority groups, that special protections are essential at all times, or that legislation should create uniform standards rather than group-focused provisions. Each of these emphasizes ongoing challenges or philosophical approaches to equality and fairness that counter the argument stemming from diminished need due to economic progress.