mr sticky

Its been an American ideal that equality is assured in our country. However, we've all seen the racial and social injustices...but that's not quite what I'm getting at.
How do we balance the belief in equality when it's obvious as individuals we are not equal? We each have individual talents as well as different weaknesses.
No one plan, or program, nor school of thought could encompass each as individuals...so where in the hell did this equality stuff come from? And, is it really just crap?

__________________
The sad thing is... as you get older you come to realize that you don't so much pilot your life, as you just try to hold on, in a screaming, defiant ball of white-knuckle anxious fury

prosequence

I don't believe all we are all equal.
That doesn't mean one is better than another.... just not equal.

__________________
And now here I stand because of you, Mister Anderson, because of you I'm no longer an agent of the system, because of you I've changed...

Easytiger

I think that the idea is that even though we are plainly NOT equal, the best kind of society is one in which we can all be treated as though we are- i.e. we all get a vote, we all get a say and we can all feel as though we are equally important inside that society.
That is the theory. Now the practice, on the other hand...

rogue49

Equal under the law.

We'll just have to deal with everything else.

The key is to have the freedom & chance;
after that it's up to you, and a bit of luck.

Mr. Spacemonkey

Of course we're not all equal. We each have different talents and we can each do different things with those talents. Some people have little to no talent. Some people can have a major influence on the world with their talent and some people sit and accomplish nothing all their life. People who think we are all equal and think we should be treated equal, i think, are very, very wrong.

__________________
"I hope that when the world comes to an end, I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to." -- Donnie Darko

bermuDa

I think we're all pretty much born with similar potentials, and in that sense we're all created equal... despite my relatively nietzschean views on genes and selective breeding. Genetics is rarely a factor in choosing a mate in our society (do we really choose who we fall in love with anyways?), but i think modern medicine and society's proclivity for morons is helping to weaken the gene pool.

However, we all grow up in different environments and the people we grow into are definitely NOT equal. We are all equally protected by law, although that hasn't always been the case (and there are still exceptions).

__________________
I am the very model of a moderator gentleman.

Darkblack

I think we are all equal. No one man is better than another. You may have a few things you can do better than me but I can guarantee I have a few things I can do better than you.

I think we are all equal as humans. Race, sex, sexual preference, ethnicity, size, religion, and political stance, none of that really matters. What matters is that we are all human, we are all the same, and we should all be treated as such. Not just here in America, but the entire world.

jimk

i think people are born with certain talents, so maybe equal with different emphases?

all SHOULD have equal rights, but i can't deny that someone born in cabrini green had at least one wheel in the ditch vs. someone from lincoln park.

__________________
raw power is a guaranteed o.d.

raw power is a laughin' at you & me

-iggy

TIO

There's a distinction between 'equal' and 'same' that must be made, and a lot of people don't make it. For example, I believe that black americans are my equals. However, I also believe that the average black american is also a better sportsperson than me, due to subtle differences in his biology.
I believe that my female colleagues are my equals. However, I also realise that most men are better at mathematics and spatial reasoning than most females. Likewise, women have better interpersonal skills and high-range hearing and long sight.
To sidetrack a bit: Stop trying to get women into engineering. Most women aren't good at it. In the days of yore, when men were the hunters, they developed the ability to quickly figure out how that animal was moving, so they knew where to throw the spear. So we have the spatial reasoning skills a good engineer needs. Since the babies the women were watching, and the berries and fruits they were foraging for, didn't move very fast, women did not develop that ability. There are exceptions, but they are few. So please, stop telling me that the low female enrolments in engineering are bad, and please stop telling me that my gender is to blame. We're not. By and large, women are better lawyers, diplomats and linguists than they are mathematicians, engineers and computer scientists, and there's nothing to be done about it.

Sorry, but if I have to write one more man-bashing essay about the poor female enrolment in engineering, I'm going to go postal.

__________________
Strewth

spectre

Exactly. People will always be better at some things or born into better situations than others, which will give them more opportunities, but that doesn't make them better. I just hope we don't end up going in a Harrison Bergeron sort of direction.

__________________
"Fuck these chains
No goddamn slave
I will be different" ~ Machine Head

Moonduck

Legally equal. That is all that matters. The Constitution doesn't go so much into intangibles like the Declaration of Independence does. The former is law, the latter is poetry. The symbolic language serves its' purpose though, by firing up those who choose to be aware of it. It's beautiful, egalitarian prose and it sets the stage to prevent any sort of legal restraint on your own personal advancement and success (aside from where your advancement may hamper the rights of other, of course).

Sleepyjack

legal equality. Also as TIO poitned out, we also have different biological abilites, although you can't quantify anyone as being better than the other, so perhaps they all equate to equality cause they can't be measured. Although that doens't make sense. Its also important to try to treat people equally.

I am a little dissapointed about the lack of females in engineering as well. I am studying Software Engineering and i don't really like the metaphorical barbeque (ie mainly guys) that we have.

The_Dude

we may not all be equal in every way, but we should be considered equal under the law.

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

TheKak

We *should* be equal under the law, though we arent quite there yet

__________________
Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.

irseg

HELL NO we are not all equal. Anyone who knows more than about 2 people has to realize this; if they say otherwise they're in denial. There are plenty of talentless, ugly, stupid, unmotivated, unhappy people, and there are also a lot of the exact opposite. Some people are just plain better than others. Get over it. That's why there are brilliant scientists, inventors, and business owners, and there are also people who work at McDonalds (if they work at all) for their whole life.

I do, however, agree that everybody is to be treated equally under the law. It's not the government's role to determine if someone is more worthy than another person. Laws must be based on objective standards and providing equal treatment to all is the only way this is possible.

GarthInPittsburgh

We should all be treated equally by the government... but beyond that.... it's up to you.

How else could it be?

__________________
i was going to call 911, but I was downloading a file

JBX

Of course we are all equal. Yup, that's just how it is.

__________________
"Youth and Strength is no match for Age and Treachery"

CSflim

look around you. People aren't equal.

__________________

Moonduck

CSflim, that is easily the shortest post I've seen you make. Wow.

Cedar

We are not all created equal. There's no two ways about it. Let's face it: some people are smarter than others. Some people are talented with music, or words, or with their hands...we are all inherently unequal. Society emphasizes this, much as we like to think that we're all equal under the law. Look at how much baseball players make as opposed to teachers. Athletes are given "scholar"ships. I'm elitist myself. I consider much of the population to be not as smart as I am. *shrugs* (Of course, if you had to deal with my landlord, you'd think the same thing.) We aren't all created equal, but I think the world would be kind of boring if we were.

__________________
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
I am large. I contain multitudes.

-Walt Whitman, Song of Myself

Johnny Rotten

If the question is, "Do you believe everyone has the same potential," then no, I don't. If the question is, "Do you believe everyone should be treated equally," then no, I don't. I think everyone should be treated fairly. Unfortunately, fairness is endlessly subjective.

Could you expand the question a little?

__________________
"The idea that money doesn't buy you happiness is a lie put about by the rich, to stop the poor from killing them." -- Michael Caine

BRS

I think the American brand of egalitarianism is unique. In addition to equal legal entitlements, there's a societal expectation for equal outcomes. In any case, as things stand, we're not equal, nor does everyone enjoy equal legal rights and protection.

TIO

No, it's not. No matter how legally equal you are, it does you no good at all if you're not accepted as an equal by society.

Likewise. I had 14 girls in a 180-person lecture one. That's only a 2-week supply!


It's not unique. We have the same thing here. But don't get me started on the irony of letting substandard kids into uni and then giving them great big scholarships and allowances just because they're aboriginal, and then expecting the white kids not to resent it.
I'm a white, male engineering student, and nobody in my family has ever fought in a war. I am, therefore, eligible for precisely one scholarship out of the 22 offered by the three departments I study in.

__________________
Strewth

cph44

Originally, I think "equality" was taken to mean "equal treatment under the law", though even that is vague, because no one would suggest that law shouldn't be able to distinguish between different types of people (vagrants vs. nonprofit charity owners, for example.) Perhaps something more like "equal consideration of your concerns while drafting the laws", but even that isn't true, because society has an overall interest in furthering the interests of people who contribute more to society than to furthering the interests of people who injure society (criminals, say.) In the end, I don't know what "equality" can sensibly mean besides some sort of adherance to a vaguely utilitarian philosophy.

As far as "equality of outcome" visions of equality, my feeling is that it is a pretty vision, but very hard to achieve in practice. This is a factual matter for which I have little evidence on hand, but it is my feeling that people who have tried to achieve some sort of cosmic justice for society by direct social engineering meet with failure more often than not, and often end up hurting the people they were trying to help. "Society" is a really really complex thing and I think people who think that all that is needed is the "imagination" or "dedication" of a few intellectual reformers to make everything better are off their rocker. The sheer magnitude of human knowledge required to make society function is overwhelming and, more importantly, that knowledge is decentralized. There is no more than a small amount of the total lodged in any one person. And, the aggregate of "normal people" that intellectuals like to look down on contains a lot more of that knowledge than any small group of intellectuals. Example: Would the world be a better place if everyone was Einstein? No it wouldn't, because no one would have any idea how to grow wheat, grind it into flour, sanitize water, bind books, build computers, or organize sock drawers. Anyway, I'm rambling.

Conclusion: Society is too complicated for us to hope to impose absolute social justice, which is what "equality" is starting to mean in politics today. It's still important to have compassion and try to help people, but it's also important not to hurt the people you're trying to help through the unintended consequences of over-ambitious schemes.

Xell101

Barring defects, upon birth, yes. Beyond that, they are subject to their wills in the determination of their superiority or inferiority as that will be what determines that reletive to me so in essence what I am saying is that no, no one is truly equal once they begin living, for living is change, change one's self is progression along an unmade path thereby making new results that differ from all else, so it is near impossible to have two people be precisely equal.

BenChuy

The problem here is What about all humans is equal. Social value, what we actively add? Well, this would be a 'no' as some contribute more than others, some even take away.
Maybe it is our relational ties (feminist ethics)? Again, no, as we all don't give a huge amount of happiness, joy and prompt growth in the same amount of people with the same power.
Quite simply, i believe, we are equal just by being human. By the fact that we all need as much of a choice about being better or worse than each other in the previous 2 instances.

wwcd101

I think what we are shooting for here in the US of A is generally equal opportunity.

It is impossible to make everyone equal, whether genetically or in life experience. It would be a boring world if we were. The differences are what make things interesting.

Thanks for listening.

Keg-o-Grog

we're all equaly worth, but when you make personal friends that you care for, and love.. then they are worth more to you. everyones personality is truly different, so we can never be truly equal, and alike.. but we're all worth just as much, and deserve just as many oppertunities and chances to do whatever we like, every single being alive.

__________________
I stand alone without beliefs, the only truth i know is you.

FlorentinoAriza

my take on the matter is that we are all equal in the way that no persons life is valued more that another ones.

the life of a poor kid on the street has the same value as the life of the ceo of some big multinational. and as a human being they are equal, even persons who have commited horrible crimes have the same value as mother theresa.

this doesn't mean the criminal shouldn't be punished for his deeds, but this has nothing to do with equality.

nobody is beter than you, and nobody is worse. we are all equal.

__________________
--- this space for rent --- pm me

Moonduck

"No, it's not. No matter how legally equal you are, it does you no good at all if you're not accepted as an equal by society."

Actually it is. The phrase and idea obliquely referenced in the original question is from a document that was instrumental in the formation of the USA. The idea is core to much of the country's concept. It is a guideline for government, nothing more.

In essence, you're refutation is weakest because it is comparing apples to oranges. The actual idea of "legally equal" is wildly different from "socially equal", which is what you are suggesting. The reason being that the govt does not dictate societ, it merely dictates what rules interaction within society are governed by, and only to a certain point. No govt can force me or you to like or dislike anyone, nor can it force me or you to treat them fairly on an individual level. It can, however, put in place controls to see to it that no one is unfairly discriminated against for intangibles beyond their control.

I care not one whit if I am not your social equal. You live in different circumstances than I. I may not care to be in your circles any more than you care to be in mine. We may receive differing service at restaurants or wherever. It affects me not one bit. I do care that I am your legal equal. I do care that we will receive equal basic treatment by govt services. We will both be read our rights, given access to counsel, each have an equal vote in national elections, etc. That I care about.

"Equal under the law" is equality via similar starting point and baseline. Where you go from there is up to you and your ability. "Socially equal" is equality via limitation. Everyone must be treated precisely the same regardless of who they are and what they've accomplished. The former promotes merit. The latter promotes an entitlement mindset.

TaLoN

strong + smart > weak + stupid

hobo

but most often it is:

[weak + smart] .. [strong + stupid]

sublue

How can we be equal and be different at the same time?

I am in individual which means I excel at some things an am a retard in other things

lurkette

The quotation that is causing all this discussion is from the Declaration of Independence and goes like this:

"WHEN in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation."

"WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness..."

etc.

I don't think it's wise to take that statement out of context, as seems to happen so often. Remember that the founding fathers were rebelling against a rigidly stratified system in which certain people (royalty, nobility, aristocracy, whatever you want to call it) were actually held by law to be more worthy in the eyes of god than the commonfolk, and were therefore entitled to make whatever the hell laws they wanted, and to abuse the people as they saw fit. Say, taxing them heavily, raping their lands in the colonies and refusing to give them any say in the rules governing them.

Check out the first paragraph: "to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them." Couple that with the part AFTER the famous "all men are created equal" line: "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" and I think you start to get some of the context: just because you are born to a certain family, even a royal one, does not entitle you BY NATURE to any more or fewer RIGHTS than any other person. And if the British crown can't recognize that, then screw you, we're going to form our own country where everyone has at least the same basic standing under law.

I think the comma between the "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by the creator" is significant - it's not that all men are literally created equal, but that they are created equally worthy of certain rights that are inalienable, that do not depend on station or even ability, but that are simply due to all humans by virtue of their humanity.

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

duckznutz

the purpose of trying to 'enforce' equality is to try to ensure that people do not discriminate on account of sex, race, age etc etc . . . . . . its a pretty reasonable stance to take . . . equal under the law (from President to down-and-out) . .and equal opportunities for all.

As we all know, the reality is very different . . . . . . we all prioritise, strating with our family, our faith, our nationhood etc etc . . . and just look at any job interview situation . . you are judged on your intelligence, ability, cleanliness, speech pattern, attractiveness etc etc . . but our inherent human failing in this area is no reason to abandon our attempts to strive to treat all people equally . . . . there would be no middle east problem for one thing!

__________________
Where your talents and the needs of the world cross . . there lies your vocation.

krwlz

Fuck no we arnt equal....Im better then everyone!!

Seriusly though, we arnt equal, and no one could ever make it that way. Rogue summed it up pretty well.

MacGnG

everyone is equal; it's everyone else that makes you not.

cowlick

Amen. We all deserve equal rights. Not necessarily are we all equal in skills and ability.

I don't buy that racists, sexist, crap about the white male being a demi-god. White and blacks (and yellow and brown and tan and red and...) can excell physically, mentally, spiritually, socially, politically, financialy, etc. to the same levels.

Certainly in today's structured society socio-economic status often dictates the optiona which are most easily available. But lots of people have gone from humble beginnings to great ends and lots of others have gone from auspicious birth to blasé existence.

cradeg

we should treat all people as equal , but we are not .. we need to be diffrent to advance , like nature

__________________
*****************************
For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution; and it is always wrong.
******************************

GrayWolf

Not in the slightest. Humans are created from a basic chaos. No human is the same, and thus, we are not 'equal'.

But more so than that, define 'equal'.

__________________
They are too young when you start worrying that they might be too young. 18 is my lowest limit. I'm going to be 25 next month.. No piece of ass is worth getting pounded in my own. - Johnny Rotten (I laughed for so long when I read this...)