Only entitled people would be fine with a job that they got knowing it was due to their skin color, gender or other properties not related to their professional skills.
it also implies that people get hired based on professional skills alone. so if a minority person gets lower score it must mean that they don't have enough skill. but in fact, the whole discussion is about (unconscious) bias against minorities. so you can't really assume the interview is fair.
When we have a candidate who is from a "minority" group and we treat them differently because we assume they suffered more to get where they are so they paid their due and now are entitled to the job position, isn't that an unconscious bias too?
When we look at white men and assume they had an easy ride in life, isn't that an unconscious bias too?
Look, everyone belongs to different groups at the same time so they have more privileges and advantages in some areas, while in a minority group in another. How far should we go? should we also check who has the least privilege and representation within a minority group before we hire them? Do people in minority groups ever run out of privilege once they acquire it?
This whole idea of treating people differently based on their race or other irrelevant attributes is discriminatory and racist. How the hell did we get here? I don't know.
Is there, as in actually?
Of the top of my head, the NBA, the entire of India, and all of China are crushing the competition without barely any diversity.
You should investigate the need to consider 'comprehensive evidence'. Even if it doesn't suite your conclusions.