Equal Rights vs Social Equity

Go:

  • Equal Rights

    Votes: 12 100.0%
  • Social Equity

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    12
It's an important question because equal rights and social equity are diametrically opposed.

To the extent that we have freedom, people will make different choices and get different results. They'll be born with different abilities under different circumstances.

To the extent that we have social equity, we lose the freedom make our own choices and reap the results.

The point is, equal rights must be sacrificed to achieve social equity.

Likewise, social equity can't be a goal (for government) if you value equal rights.
 
The biggest problem with children who go to private schools receiving federal funds is that there are always strings attached to these federal funds. This is especially true for Christian schools. I couldn't afford to send my daughters to a Christian Academy. They flatly refused to allow federal funds to go to the school because they knew that the curriculum of the school would be required to adapt to federal standards. Christians believe in creation, not evolution. Many other Christian beliefs would have to be abandoned to receive federal funds.
 
Who says? I mean really. You're kinda just making that up.

I don't actually mind my money going to help out people in need. I just don't like government making the call. It has unreliable motives and untrustworthy agents.
I’m not making it up. It’s just that you and I have very different views on the role of government.
 
The biggest problem with children who go to private schools receiving federal funds is that there are always strings attached to these federal funds. This is especially true for Christian schools. I couldn't afford to send my daughters to a Christian Academy. They flatly refused to allow federal funds to go to the school because they knew that the curriculum of the school would be required to adapt to federal standards. Christians believe in creation, not evolution. Many other Christian beliefs would have to be abandoned to receive federal funds.
Exactly. There are always strings attached. And plenty of unintended consequences to go around.
 
Last edited:
Just did in another post.

It’s something to strive for though. The greater the gap between the wealthy and the poor, and the less people are able to see a way up, the more unstable we would be imo.
It is something to strive for, some may have to work 2 jobs while other may not. But, some worked hard to get where they are, while others
kicked back smoked a blunt, and drank hooch. I just don't feel obligated other than paying my taxes for these folks.
 
It is something to strive for, some may have to work 2 jobs while other may not. But, some worked hard to get where they are, while others
kicked back smoked a blunt, and drank hooch. I just don't feel obligated other than paying my taxes for these folks.
True but some worked hard at two jobs and still died poor. Others were born with all the advantages and wealth, didn’t work hard, and still came out on top.

At any rate, I support programs that help level the playing field. Doesn’t mean you still won’t have to work hard, it just means if you do, you have tbe same chance of crossing the finish line as anyone else.
 
Not at all. It doesn’t take tyranny to improve schools, offer free community college, provide affordable health care and child care, create safer neighborhoods.
How do we accomplish all that at $30T in debt and with Libs recruiting tens of millions of Mexico’s finest?
 
Never mind college. Get an apprenticeship in the building or technical trades. Problem solved.
 

Forum List

Back
Top