Difference between SJW and Social Justice in CCC

  • Thread starter Thread starter anrmenchaca47
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I talking about government funding of companies and non-profits who offer abortion rather than federal laws declaring illegality of abortion.

I should have made that clear. My apologies.
 
Vonsalza said:
The power of all government grows with population. It’s a necessity.
Click to expand...
If that is the case then it time for this country to divide itself. The federal government has a very small role to play. Such as national defense, resolve disputes between the states, approve treaties that don’t harm. the USA. Other than that it should up to the states.
 
By “social justice warrior” are you referring the people who are angry there are rich people in the world? In my experience, that’s usually what it means.
 
Last edited:
That is distinction that cannot be know, and an rather novel definition, but I kind of like it. SJW can be those motivated by envy, and Social Justice is motivated from love of neighbor.
 
I actually have no problem with people making money, provided it’s done ethically. I’m angry that there are people who get rich unethically.

Christ wasn’t kidding when he reference rich people vs the eye of the needle. It’s really hard to keep your soul and your spirit in tact when greenery is dangled in front of you.
 
Then why are quotas so important when employers hire, when those quotas don’t consider qualifications?
And I’ve read a headline of a Hollywood actress who demanded actors should have their pay cut to bring equality. These are outcomes rather than opportunities.
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
They would argue that quotas provide equality of opportunity to rise within a given profession
Click to expand...
Which would pose a problem if they aren’t qualified. For example, doctors or civil engineers. If the pool isn’t diverse, employers shouldn’t be forced to meet such quotas since that would be dangerous. But it’s quite dogmatic for many on the Left. Or firefighters. Some have had demanded quotas for 40% women if I recall correctly.
blackforest said:
Much of the Left is against it
Click to expand...
I don’t know about that if the ‘spokespeople’ of the Left are a measure.
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
Not equality of circumstances but equality of opportunity.
Click to expand...
Aren’t they actually the same thing?

Will never have equality of opportunity specifically because of different circumstances, but we can work to give opportunity to all/most. Some will always have to struggle more to take advantage of the opportunity available to them.
 
Last edited:
Theo520 said:
Aren’t they actually the same thing?
Click to expand...
No.
Equality of circumstances has pure equality as its end, but equality of opportunity has fairness as its end.

Fairness and equality are two very different principles. Fairness, more often than not, requires inequality.
 
mrsdizzyd said:
Equality of circumstances has pure equality as its end, but equality of opportunity has fairness as its end.

Fairness and equality are two very different principles. Fairness, more often than not, requires inequality.
Click to expand...
what you described is completely subjective, nobody ever agrees on what is ‘fair’.

Some people because of their circumstances will always have more opportunity.
We will never have equality or ‘fairness’ of opportunity, though it is a good directional goal
 
Since when was anything in life or in nature ever fair?
 
Last edited:
Indeed, it is subjective!

This is a source of constant disagreement in my field (education) because every child in the United States is guaranteed a fair free and basic education. People constantly disagree and there is constantly litigation. It is not possible to be objective about everything.
 
mrsdizzyd said:
Indeed, it is subjective!

This is a source of constant disagreement in my field (education) because every child in the United States is guaranteed a fair free and basic education. People constantly disagree and there is constantly litigation. It is not possible to be objective about everything.
Click to expand...
It’s a good example, we can give all citizens the opportunity for an education, even an unequal education is life changing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top