This came up in my jursiprudence class in law school. And it's a tough one. For me, equality means (ideally) equal *opportunity*, but that is just a fantasy (paris hilton will have way more opportunity than I will, for ex). And the thing is, we are *not* all equal. Some of us are extremely bright, or rich, or gorgeous. Some of us are lazy or stupid. Arguendo, compare me to teh most scum-sucking person you know. Under the law, I think we should have the same legal rights and responsibilities. But I sure as hell don't think I'm "equal" to my scum-sucker; I think I am better because I hae taken responsibility for my life, planned ahead, worked hard, sacrificed, and am not wallowing in the sewer, refusing to work, refusing to learn a marketable skill, doing drugs, and blaming the world for my problems.

I'm in a hurry; more later.

I'm hesitant to get my feet wet in this discussion, because I haven't thought this through entirely, but here goes....(!)

I think that equality fundamentally is not an issue of how people are treated, but in its essence it is the respecting of individuals' humanity and the dignity that that entails. Obviously the way people are treated is directly related to this, since validating and respecting one's humanity requires that a person be treated in a way that appropriately honors his/her fundamental dignity. Unfortunately, I think it's just such a difficult thing to pin down, and as with other things, it's so much easier to focus on externals (how one is treated, laws, discrimination) that we miss the internals.

That said, I don't think it's bad to make exceptions for individuals with certain special circumstances (physical handicaps, etc.). I think that is an obvious way of honoring that individual's personhood, and should be done with care and grace. I don't think it's always the best thing for the government to go around making laws to control behaviors and effectively create (and enforce) broad group distinctions, but I also recognize that people in general don't exercise enough personal moral responsibility to take care of these things, and so the government steps in. ( And since the government is there to protect its people, then so be it. To what extent it should, I don't know, and don't pretend to.)

I don't necessarily think that equality means we should level all playing fields. I think we need to recognize that we are finite creatures, and that no, really, we can't do anything we set our minds to, whether because of physical limitations, economic limitations, or just because we were (un)lucky enough to be born where and when we were. In the US thankfully we have a great deal of economic and social mobility, but in other places, as we all know, people don't. Call me hard-hearted, but I think that that is just one of the unfortunate realities of how human life works out. I don't think that it's a happy situation, but it is what it is. At any rate, I do think there needs to be level playing fields in terms of equal pay for equal work, equal opportunity for employment/education for qualified/talented candidates, etc., but I also think that not every person is equally skilled, talented, or gifted, and we should recognize that and work with it. Not in a demeaning, "you-could-never-hope-to-do-this" kind of way, but in a way that discerns the particular gifts and talents of people and hones those to the greatest benefit to the individual and to society. I'm not saying that I don't think there can be rags-to-riches stories, or cases of people who beat all the odds of their upbringing or circumstance, or people who work extraordinarily hard to overcome physical, emotional, mental, etc. handicaps, but I think by and large, if we Westerners could come to terms with our finiteness a little more, and work within our bounds, we might just be a little more productive. (Maybe what I'm going for is contentment. At the very least, a touch less of the kind of greedy, jealous, run-everyone-over ambition that sours so many things. So much striving.)

I think people are fundamentally equal in their dignity, humanity, and worth and beings. Not necessarily in what we are able to do, or in our circumstances. I'm not sure what the line(s) should be (if any) among different groups, or how/if they should be drawn. Some always will, because we need categories to understand things. But it sure would be nice if we could accept the categories for what they are without them affecting our view of each other, don't you think?