What does equal rights mean to you?

[Pogo]

You had it right the first time. Equal treatment by government.

"Society", by which you must mean "cultural mores" are not, and cannot be, legislated. That's done by social taboos and value reinforcements. And it'll vary within subcultures, so it would be folly to equate the government of a nation with the subcultures therein as if they were all one thing.

Oh really? then why did you turds force some bakers to bake a wedding cake for a couple of queers?

I didn't.

Go ahead Finger Boy --- prove me wrong.

Your ilk certainly did, and you defended it.

Once again Fingerboy lies. Maybe you should turn on the "Narrator " function to read for you, seeing as how you're incapable.

What I said was, PROVE ME WRONG.
You need an explanation for what the word "prove" means or what?

Better get busy, lying fuck.

No need to prove anythng. Everyone in this forum knows it's true.

Then why can't you find an example thereof?

Huh Fingerboy? Why is that?

Could it be because you pulled it out of your ass? The ol' 'reliable source'?

 

[Pogo]

Social justice takes equal rights and scatters them to the wind of opinion.

Eloquent.

 

[Anathema]

As I see it "equal rights" is a euphemism for the Government not being allowed to promote or demote any individual based on their age, race, religion, sex, or a multitude of other personal characteristics.

To that end it is no more legal to GIVE anything to an individual based on any of those criteria than it would be to TAKE AWAU anything based on them.

 

[sparky]

Pretty much everyone agrees that government should be responsible for protecting "equal rights". But if we can't agree on what "equal rights" means, it's hardly a consensus.

I've always understood equal rights as a mandate on government to treat everyone equally. The idea being that everyone has equal status in the eyes of the law. Everyone, regardless of status, fame, wealth, race, etc.. , enjoys the same freedoms and follows the same laws. Essentially, it means government can't play favorites.

But there's a competing definition that is largely incompatible with my understanding. This conception of equal rights focuses on how people are treated by society rather than by government. It claims that society shouldn't play favorites and tasks government with making it so.

Well put.

I agree that the term equal rights refers to 'equal in the eyes of the law'...and only the law can deliver on that promise. Which sometimes means non-interference based on gender, race or creed.

In society the term equal rights has been replaced by social justice. Social justice and blind justice are not always compatible. The former is acutely aware of gender, race and wealth...and seeks to mitigate diversity of outcome through legal channels if possible (which destroys all pretense of a belief in equal rights), - the latter only guarantees opportunity.

An example of the injustice of social justice - a baker who was vilified for refusing to bake, and a coffee shop owner who was applauded for refusing to serve. Social justice takes equal rights and scatters them to the wind of opinion.

Bravo

chaulk one up for 'society'

S~

 

[danielpalos]

Men strive to fix Standards as a form of equal rights among Persons.

 

[dblack]

Men strive to fix Standards as a form of equal rights among Persons.

Official poveRty.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Pretty much everyone agrees that government should be responsible for protecting "equal rights". But if we can't agree on what "equal rights" means, it's hardly a consensus.

I've always understood equal rights as a mandate on government to treat everyone equally. The idea being that everyone has equal status in the eyes of the law. Everyone, regardless of status, fame, wealth, race, etc.. , enjoys the same freedoms and follows the same laws. Essentially, it means government can't play favorites.

But there's a competing definition that is largely incompatible with my understanding. This conception of equal rights focuses on how people are treated by society rather than by government. It claims that society shouldn't play favorites and tasks government with making it so.

Society does play favorites and it always will. Govt plays favorites also.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Men strive to fix Standards as a form of equal rights among Persons.

Man is imperfect in regards to rights so it will always fail when it contrives rights that it thinks are righteous.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I went with "society". A prime example of equal rights as I view it is allowing a person to buy whatever house they can afford and not being blocked by a bank or realtor because of the color of their skin.

Would have picked "both" if it were an option.

That's sort of the point. It's not an option. The two approaches aren't compatible.

I see them as incompatible only if you believe that one or another should be allowed to discriminate.

What if I believe in fair housing (society) then why can't I also believe in the voting rights act (government)?

You can believe in both, so long as you don't believe they are the same thing.