Don't blame dei for this, blame MBAs.
Plus, you all make dei seem like some horrible thing because of the overemphasis on lgbtq. But I know of pp with disabilities, e.g. pp who cannot walk, cannot see, who count on dei to help them gain employment. So I wonder who should go to hell.
1)
Based on your logic, do you trust your life with a doctor hired based on DEI policy instead of meritocracy?
Also, do you trust your life sitting on an aeroplane built by engineers hired based on DEI policy instead of meritocracy?
This would tell us whether your argument is based on ethos, pathos, or logos.
2)
Your argument that DEI help disabled people gain employment is a red herring. It is irrelevant whether they are disabled or not. Nobody owes disabled people a living.
There is a reason why the disabled person is not able to enter medical school, or engineering school. They can try to choose a different field like Stephen Hawkings.
But if they are allowed to enroll due to affirmative action, then it is no longer based on meritocracy. The school has to lower their education standards to ensure they can graduate.
If you compare Degree Mills vs schools churning out DEI students. What is the difference? Both are unqualified students using money to buy a degree. Yes or no?
And when you have unqualified graduates hired based on DEI policy, is the company taking on unwanted risk? Such as loss of reputation, negligence lawsuits, and lost of future revenues?