Equality does not mean equal results.
“The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society.” - Thomas Jefferson
Let me guess, Tom...you just happen you’re part of it, don’t you.
This is neither news nor activism. Should be in chat
Equality of opportunity not outcome
This is incorrect, Christianity never taught that humans were unequal, instead it RECOGNIZED that humans had different social status'. However, we were commanded to treat each other as brothers and sisters despite our caste, or what social status we held.
There is equality in our being Children Of God. He gave us life and He loves us dearly.
That said, human nature is inherently unequal. Some people are better and some are worse. Some are good and some are evil.
I would not like to live in world of saints. We are meant to be imperfect and our humanity is the best part of us. A man is not a drone or a machine.
Every one deserves to be the person they were born to be. A society without real differences is not a society in which I would like to live.
For a long time I have said that Communism is nothing but a bastardization of the Christian principle of equality.
The fundamental difference between the political Left and Right is that Leftists believe in the Romantic notion that humans are all basically equal, that all inequality is due to unjust social institutions, and that through social engineering we can do away with inequality. In contrast, the Right believes that humans are fundamentally unequal, and that in a truly meritocratic society, you expect there to be a hierarchy among individuals and among groups.
A belief in vs. a rejection of natural human hierarchy is why you can have both left and right-wing anarchism/minarchism and both left and right-wing authoritarianism/totalitarianism. The underlying assumptions that we make about human nature rather than specific economic or political institutions are what separate Left from Right.
Someone is confusing equality of opportunity with equality of outcome.
Anyone who rejects equality of opportunity is NOT a true conservative.
The only equality I’m concerned about is equality of opportunity. Outcomes are based on God given talent and ability and a willingness to work hard for what you want.
No
Equality of outcomes, yes.
Conservatives try to conform their beliefs to the reality of nature. The left is trying to make people reject the realities of nature.
No one really believes in equality.
This:
“For I agree with you that there is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents....There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth...”
Completely disagrees with this:
“America’s founding fathers were not hostile to monarchy and aristocracy. They just opposed King George III.”
No there is not a rejection of “equality” in the sense that every individual should be able to rise to whatever level their talents and experience allow. What is rejected is the idea that people should receive an equality of result regardless of their behavior, talent, or experience. The left has increasingly demanded that fictions be enshrined in law such as ssm insisting that homosexuality be considered “equal” though it is not in form or function but of course that does not matter. The left is about denying reality and using law as projection of power to force their views on the body politic.
The worst thing the left has done to our society is to mitigate the natural outcome of bad choices in the name of equality, thereby rewarding and promoting behavior that is destructive to individuals and society.
16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
To answer the title question:
Equality of what? Equality of origin and ability has never existed.
Equality of opportunity, of laws and the rule of law can most certainly be accepted by conservatives.
The corollary is that wage inequality is derived from human inequality
Employers discriminate against applicants by picking those perceived as being most qualified.
Here’s a wrench:
“Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.”—Romans 9
Amen!