The following is the Gettysburg Address which President Abraham Lincoln gave on Thursday November 19, 1863 at the dedication of the Soldiers National Cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania:

“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

The following is the URL of the Wikipedia website which describes the “Gettysburg Address”:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettysburg_Address

Unfortunately, the political establishment of the United States government has forgotten the lessons of the American Civil War and the Gettysburg Address.
Rather, it continues on the path of discrimination and privilege based upon race, gender, color and national origin through affirmative action and other overt and covert laws and policies.
As per the Gettysburg address, it is for men’s rights activists and other freedom loving citizens” It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

What is the legal definition of ” Reverse discrimination”?
“Employment programs required by federal statutes and regulations designed to remedy discriminatory practices in hiring minority group members; i.e., positive steps designed to eliminate existing and continuing discrimination, to remedy lingering effects of past discrimination, and to create systems and procedures to prevent future discrimination; commonly based on population percentages of minority groups in a particular area. Factors considered are race, color, sex, creed, and age.”(Free online Law Dictionary:http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Affirmative+Action)
The Free Online Law Dictionary discusses the history of “affirmative action” and it’s definition at the web page of the following URL:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Affirmative+Action

Affirmative action is not limited to employment but, also, includes education, the receipt of social services, and many other governmental, private, and other benefits, freedoms, and privileges. It can even mean the exclusion of Caucasians and/or men even if the same are better qualified by reason of education, expertise, or temperament.
Legal arguments against affirmative action include those that assert that it is in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution as well as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Do “Affirmative Action” and similar laws amount to “Bills of Attainder” and “Ex Post Facto” laws forbidden by the U.S. Constitution?
It appears to me that they do.
What is a Bill of Attainder?
“A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder) is an act of a legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without privilege of a judicial trial.”( “Wikipedia, Bill of Attainder,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Attainder)
The Wikipedia web site describing Bills of Attainder further describes how the U.S. Constitution forbids Bills of Attainder and the history of Bills of Attainder and laws against them:
The United States Constitution forbids legislative bills of attainder under Article I, Section 9. The provision forbidding state law bills of attainder, Article I, Section 10, reflects the importance that the framers attached to this issue.

“Within the U.S. Constitution, the clauses forbidding attainder laws serve two purposes. First, they reinforced the separation of powers, by forbidding the legislature to perform judicial or executive functions]]>—<![CDATA[since the outcome of any such acts of legislature would of necessity take the form of a bill of attainder. Second, they embody the concept of due process, which was partially reinforced by Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The text of the Constitution, Article I, Section 9; Clause 3 is "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed".
The constitution of every State also expressly forbids bills of attainder. For example, Wisconsin's constitution Article I, Section 12 reads:
No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed, and no conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate. Contrast this with the subtly more modern variation of the Texas version: Article 1 (Titled Bill of Rights) Section 16, entitled Bills of Attainder; Ex Post Facto or Retroactive Laws: Impairing Obligation of Contracts: “No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall be made”. (Wikipedia, “Bills of Attainder”,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Attainder)

The following is the URL of a VDARE website entitled: ” When Quotas Replace Merit, Everybody Suffers”:

http://www.vdare.com/articles/when-quotas-replace-merit-everybody-suffers

This article, by Peter Brimelow, describes the deleterious affects of “affirmative action” on our society, culture, economy, and body politic.

Here is a partial quote from the same:

” If quotas are clogging the Clinton transition, what are they doing to the economy? The subject went unmentioned, needless to say, at Clinton’s two-day economic summit in Little Rock. In fact, it has gone virtually undiscussed throughout the quarter-century of bureaucratic and judicial decrees that have effectively transformed the color-blind 1964 Civil Rights Act into a pervasive quota system.

Ironically, just as socialism has collapsed across the globe, the leading capitalist power has adopted a peculiarly American neosocialism, putting politics (and lawyers) in command of its workplace, albeit on the pretext of equity rather than efficiency. Says Edward Potter of the Washington, D.C.-based Employment Policy Foundation: “We have, without doubt, the most far-reaching equal employment laws found anywhere in the world.”

Before applauding Potter’s sweeping statement, stop for a minute and ponder this question: What does the replacement of merit with quotas cost the American people? The answer is: plenty. The impact may easily have already depressed GNP by a staggering four percentage points]][about as much as we spend on the entire public school system.

Quotas are not the law of the land, exactly. They are explicitly banned in both the 1964 and 1991 Civil Rights Acts. Nevertheless, corporate America has been terrorized by the legal legerdemain whereby any statistical disparity between work force and population is equated with intentional discrimination. Throughout American business, newly entrenched affirmative action bureaucrats are enforcing discrimination by race and sex in favor of the “protected classes” (women, minorities and, most recently, the disabled)as decreed by Washington.”