More specifically, equal opportunity. Creation Date Thursday, 03 May 2012. Hits 1856
Equal is a simple word. Chances are, you are very familiar with it. You probably use it on a regular basis. If you are a student, you may often use the word when verbalizing a math problem. If you are an expert in your field, perhaps you remind people from time to time that they are not your equal. If you are on a diet, you may even put some of it in your coffee, but that is a topic for a different discussion. If you are a liberal, you have no earthly idea as to the real meaning of the word. You think you do, but you have screwed this word up so badly that there is no possible way that you could understand it. That's why it has become the first entry into our Liberal Lexicon. Equal. Dictionary dot com describes it as follows.
1.as great as; the same as (often followed by to or with ): The velocity of sound is not equal to that of light.2.like or alike in quantity, degree, value, etc.; of the same rank, ability, merit, etc.: two students of equal brilliance.3.evenly proportioned or balanced: an equal contest.4.uniform in operation or effect: equal laws.5.adequate or sufficient in quantity or degree: The supply is equal to the demand.
Now at this point, most liberals are saying "See? I knew that." No, you didn't. And I can prove it.
Any time a government entity is seeking to hire people and they advertise the positions on radio or television, they run a legal disclaimer at the end that goes something like this. "The United States Postal Service is an Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Employer. Women and Minorities are encouraged to apply."
So, what is an equal opportunity employer? "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the first federal law designed to protect most U.S. employees from employment discrimination based upon that employee's (or applicant's) race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." And what is an Affirmative Action Employer? "Affirmative action refers to policies that take factors including "race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or national origin" into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group "in areas of employment, education, and business", usually justified as countering the effects of a history of discrimination."
Now I ask you, is it possible to simultaneously protect against discrimination based on race and enforce hiring to benefit based on race? Absolutely not. If two applicants are equal, yet one is chosen over another because they belong to an "underrepresented group", then by definition the other candidate was discriminated against based on race.
So since we have established that liberals do not mean equal when they say equal, we now have to define what they actually mean. I hereby present you with that definition.
1. Similar enough to get it passed, and different enough to appease your base. (3.5 gpa plus minority status is equal to 4.0 and white)
2. The same as only in cases where two or more minority statuses appear in the form of one individual person. (hiring a black woman is equal to hiring 2 black men)