>Admirable principle, are you actually consistent with it?
Are you searching for a way to make an ad hominem here, or just fishing for a contradiction? Either way, this seems like a backwards to make the argument. If you believe that the principle behind affirmative action would lead to absurdities if applied consistently, why not just come out and say so?
>What if you think it's not worth your while because it's being promoted through ineffective, destructive methods?
The statement was about whether the goal was worthwhile, not the means.
Admirable principle, are you actually consistent with it? For instance, tall people get paid more (six inches = extra $4,734! [1]) and obese people less [2]. If it turns out that the combined adverse effect of being short and overweight is larger than that of being female, are you prepared to make affirmative action in favor of short, overweight people your top priority?
> to suggest that this is not a worthwhile goal essentially means that you think the status quo is fine because it affords you certain advantages that you did nothing to achieve
What if you think it's not worth your while because it's being promoted through ineffective, destructive methods?
[1] http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200310/tall-people-g...
[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8337512.stm