Do you treat everyone equal?
yes.. always.. I get along well with everyone.. lol
Is holding the belief that everyone is created equal a sign of social privilege?
Well now, let’s not do the Margaret Sanger dance! Even if your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries, has there ever been a human being CREATED greater than another? NO!...but hold on…The inequality arises not in being created equal (Edit: in dignity), but in the probable opportunity of equal outcomes? Assuming we’re speaking of economic mobility, that is tied pretty close to the wealth of the parents. So, according to a Pew study, if “the analysis finds that children born into lower-income families can expect very different futures compared with those from higher-income families,” then social privilege is also tied to that economic status.To want to ‘fix this’ is not to advocate for wealth-distribution…that’s another post and a dynamic issue. But there should arise a realization that economic success is largely dependent on something outside of one’s control. That should take the wind out of the bloated sails of the rich, and offer some solace to those who comprise the lower economic status; their unfortunate state is not simply due to a lack of effort, but they are denied opportunities common among the top 10%.It is true that some people ‘started from nothing’ and are very financially successful. But those are inspirational stories only because they are rare, otherwise they would have no impact.So, if I were to rephrase the question to ask, “Is holding the belief that equal opportunity for everyone is a sign of social privilege?” The answer would be a resounding YES!!
If equal rights exist then why are extra rights needed?
Phrases like "women's rights" or "LGBT rights" are broad terms that are really meant to convey the fact that women or LGBT people do not already have equal rights. That certain minority groups face certain specific challenges that people who are not a part of those groups don't face.For example, male politicians aren't subjected to the same intense media scrutiny female politicians are regarding their appearance. Politicians like Bernie Sanders can look disheveled and not be criticized for it. And yet, if a female politician went with a disheveled look, she would be torn to shreds by the scrutiny.In many states in America, gay people can get married on Saturday and fired from their job on Monday. People who are solely different-sex-attracted do not experience this kind of injustice when they get married.A 12-year-old African American boy can be playing with a toy gun in a park, unknowingly scare a woman who calls the police believing he's armed and much older than he is, and be shot on sight by cops--which is exactly what happened to Tamir Rice of Cleveland, Ohio. Would this situation have ended the way it did if the kid had been white? Most likely not.So you see, "women's rights", "gay rights", and "black rights" aren't extra rights. These phrases merely convey the fact that these people don't already have the equal rights than many already deserve.
Is it true that not everyone is born equal? If so, shouldn't that mean that not everyone is treated equally?
Not everyone is born socially or physically equally, sure. Some people are born with disabilities, special needs, or diseases; some people are born in different social and\or economic classes. Some people are born with white, brown, yellow, or whatever other colored skin you can think of and a bunch of combinations on top of that. Some people have blonde hair and blue eyes, others have black hair and brown eyes. Some people are born in a specific place in a specific country in a specific time.You literally cannot control how, when, where, or to whom you are born, nor the circumstances surrounding that birth or the childhood that follows. Unless Buddha is holding out on us and we get a really cool character creation screen before we’re born, I suppose.The whole point behind egalitarian societies, which, so far in recorded history, are the only ones that actually survive in one piece for very long and prosper in any meaningful capacity for very long, is that everybody is equal before the law in their rights and opportunities; the unspoken reason for it is probably the aforementioned fact that this is one of the most majors things that you have no control over. That could just as easily be you in that situation - you didn’t do anything to “earn” the silver spoon in your mouth, or your white skin, or the dick between your legs. Why should you get to punish other people for things that they either can’t control or that don’t actually matter in the first place?In order for society to function, it requires empathy, transparency, and equality in various capacities. This means giving everybody the chance to achieve their highest potential and have a full range of experiences; treating people with prejudice or general assholery, much less constructing a society which encourages and allows people to do so, only serves to make the society you live in a fundamentally worse place on quite literally every ethical, pragmatic, and existential level.
"Equal Rights" for gays? More like special rights.?
Has anyone else noticed that gays dont want equal rights? They want to be treated special. They dont want to get made fun of, but guess what? there not the only people in the world getting made fun of. And gay marriage? Please. Its not like were saying that only gay people shouldnt get married to each other, nobody of the same sex should, its just stupid. If everyone in the world was gay, it would end the world, the population would cease to grow. I support gays, but I dont think they should get any special treatment, and why do they feel like they have to have "gay pride"? That annoys me. I dont go around saying I have "white heterosexual male pride." Ok, your gay, who cares? nobody cares if your gay. It just annoys me when they try to rub it in your face so youll treat them differently.
Instead of fighting for rights based on color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability etc, wouldn't it be far more effective for everyone to cooperatively fight for human and civil rights as that is what (reasonable) groups ultimately want?
So you mean “All Lives Matter” instead of “Black Lives Matter”?First of all, if “everyone” was cooperatively fighting for human and civil rights, there wouldn’t actually be anything to fight for. The ONLY reason why there is a fight is because some people continue to fight AGAINST human and civil rights. So by definition, it’s not “everybody.”So who are the people who are fighting against human and civil rights, and on what basis? Guess what? They are fighting against human and civil rights for PARTICULAR GROUPS AND CLASSES OF OTHER PEOPLE. Usually based on color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, etc.You haven’t given any specific examples of a universal human/civil right we could all fight for together. Let’s imagine one: the right to vote.Say you have a society where everyone has the right to vote except women. I say “Let’s fight for the right for women to vote.” You say “No, let’s just fight for the right for EVERYONE to be able to vote.” But what does that mean? Everyone except women ALREADY has the right to vote. It’s a semantic ploy that doesn’t really say anything. Even if we pretend to be fighting for the right of everyone to vote, it’s really women whom we are fighting for. Nobody else needs help.But in fact, if you look at most non-discrimination law, they almost never mention specific groups (The Americans With Disabilities Act is an exception). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlaws discrimination based on color, race, religion and sex - NOT based on being black, Jewish, Catholic or female. The law is neutral and protects everyone equally.Similarly, it’s not “gay marriage,” it’s actually gender-neutral marriage.So what are these “human and civil rights” you are talking about that have nothing to do with discrimination based on the categories you listed?