(August 25, 2015 at 2:12 pm)Rhythm Wrote: You assume that I (or we) must defend a position of equality, and that is where you fail. But please, continue.
One must defend a position of equality otherwise be guilty of false equivalency. You must be able to make argument for why two different things are to be treated equally and may not simply assume because they are alike in one regard than they are to be alike in all regards.
This premise of equality has been readily refuted numerous times in this thread and is recognized as false in preferential (held as discriminatory in their favor) and discriminatory (which is held to be discriminatory against them) treatment of children, disabled, minorities, elderly, and criminals. All of these persons are alike in part, but are recognized as not being treated equally in all regards.
You must provide argument for why one should be treated equal to another in a specific regard since we are fully aware they are not to be treated equally in every regard without consideration of their particular qualities. Presently the argument which have been supplied either incorporate entire groups of persons which are not desired or assume equivalency without giving argument in support of that assumption.
I have repeatedly asked for an argument in their favor not based on false equivalency and I look forward to seeing one shortly.
