Do atheists fake egalitarianism?

[Jenny A]

For an theist egalitarianism is an easy concept to accept.  People should be treated the same because God created them as equals. However if there is no God then there really isn't any rational reason to actually believe that all the different races, genders, or sexual orientations are actually equivalent.  There might be rational reasons to pretend the are equivalent....social harmony and such...but is there rational reason to believe they are actually equivalent?  It is simply too much of a stretch to think that nature, as a matter of happenstance, made all these things equivalent.

Oh my, let's start with some basic definitions shall we?

Egalitarianism is not based on the assumption that all people are created with strength, height, intelligence, longevity, attractiveness, fertility, speed, endurance, will power, creativity, or any other trait you can name. Whether created by god (not proven) or nature people are not equal in any of those traits. Even twins are not exactly the same in such traits. I've never met anyone who seriously thought people are equal in such a way.

Egalitarianism is a reaction to the notion that some people should have more rights and higher status because who their parents were or some other arbitrary trait such as skin color, sex, sexual preference. In practice this leads to statements like "all men are equal before the law." It is not a godly notion. The divine right of kings, is a religious notion. Many, many religions have declared that the king was the king because god said so. The Judeo Christian god makes many distinctions on the basis of such arbitrary traits. As early as Genesis he chose one nation over all others. He chose men over women, and the first born of the first wife over all other sons. Following Jesus, the Christian god embraced all nations but still left out women, slaves, and others in the equal rights stakes.

Egalitarianism is a secular, not an atheist movement. It began as a political movement whose rallying cry was that all people should be treated equally under the same circumstances, i.e. under the law. It's in the U.S. Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." But the idea was not original to the founding fathers. That idea has been expanded to hiring practices as well. It's basic fairness, and there's no pretense about it. People who behave the same should be treated the same. Ability and industry should be rewarded the same regardless of gender or skin color.

Egalitarianism did not mean that everyone will end up equal in status, wealth, or happiness, or that everyone should have an equal right under the law to attain status and wealth based upon their mere existence. However, some socialists and/or communists would take the idea one step further and suggest that all economic outcomes should be the same regardless of ability. I wouldn't go so far as that.

In any case, egalitarianism is simply an outgrowth of the basic concept of fairness.

---

So like Chad, you're just basically faking egalitarianism.  You don't really believe people, races, genders, and sexual orientations are all equivalent do you?

I don't believe all people are equivalent no.  But I've seen no evidence of general racial inequality in abilities not adequately explained by culture and economic circumstances.  The sexes certainly are not equivalent.  I can and have given birth and I think that little skill is beyond you.  And on average women are not as strong as men, but we live longer.  And so on.  But some women are stronger than most men, and should be allowed to use that strength if they want to.

Lets suppose for a minute that the average white person is about 15 IQ points less bright than the average black person and able to lift 15 pounds less than the average black person.  Does that mean that a black man with an IQ of 105 should be given more opportunities than a white man with an IQ of 145? An egalitarian would say no. You see egalitarianism assumes we look at individuals and what those individuals can and do accomplish, not at races, sexes, or other such groups.