I may have spoken too soon — apparently Franklin was involved in editing the Declaration. Maybe he did in fact coin the famous phrase… I’ll feel like an idiot if that detail is set forth in Campolo’s book.

1. You’re editing Tony Campolo? I’m totally impressed!!

2. I’m pretty sure it was Jefferson who wrote the “all men are created equal” line (along with the rest of the Declaration of Independence), rather than Franklin.

3. We’ve had lots of arguments around our house about the proper use of the words “lie” and “lay.” I hope we can do thinky thoughts about these three-letter guys. And how about “flammable” and “Inflammable” meaning the same thing — what’s with that?

Sorry, it’s late…

Maybe I’m not in a very thinky place these days (probably), but I’m having a hard time getting the distinction between equity and equality in the way you’re talking about them. Can you take it out of the thinky realm and make it practical for me? What’s an example of an inequality vs. an example of an inequity in the way you’re delineating them? I think that would help me make sense of the distinction.

Writing syllabi. Writing code. Filling out loan applications. Not thinking lofty thoughts. Brain stuck in binary mode. Help. Please help. 0010 1101 1000 0101

As I said, I think we’re using these words differently, but whether inequality or inequity is the Big Bad (here’s where the “faith and theology” tag cashes in), I strongly believe it’s Kingdom work to make stop. Yeah, we probably won’t bring heaven down to earth and see all God’s children join hands across continents to sing “We Are the World.” But if “the kingdom of God is at hand” and the new Jerusalem is even now making its belated way downtown, we oughtta start acting like citizens…even if it’s just for practice.

1. lack of equity; unfairness; favoritism or bias.
2. an unfair circumstance or proceeding.

I’m all for each of us getting paid an honest wage for an honest day. That’s equitable, to put an awfully fine a point on it. I’m also in favor of that honest wage being DOE, which is why you get paid the big bucks.

Inequity (in the sphere of work) happens when a person equal to you in intelligence, talent and determination is not afforded the same opportunity to make your pay grade, due to an inequitable — that is, unfair, biased or unjust — circumstance or proceeding. That circumstance might be an accident of birth (location, socio-economic status, race, gender) or a more insidious system of bias/favoritism (based on some, all or more of same).

I think we’re on the same team here, but that we’re using these two words in different ways.

What I don’t love, however, is the idea that we need to charge the hill against inequity. Unless we’re using the term very differently, then I don’t see how inequity is necessarily an unfair state.

Equality, as espoused by the deists and humanists who framed the constitution, is the idea that each person has the same right to ownership over their time, their energy, the pursuits of their own free will; that no person can be compelled to participate in any economic relationship except by their own consent. They were imperfect at expressing it (who knew that non-whites and chicks would get all uppity and think they had those same rights!), but the idea is fundamentally, morally, rationally defensible.

No person should be set on unequal footing in their participation within the community by virtue of race, sex, or creed. No person should be compelled to participate in economic transactions without their own consent. These are the hallmarks of equality.

Equity, on the other hand, says that not only do we have the same equal right to participate or not in any economic relationship, but that I should not be responsible for the personal consequences of that decision. Whether I work, or do not work, I ought to receive the same economic results of the choice. I should have exactly the same resources as the person who chooses to work. We should exist in a state of perfectly equal consequences, regardless of the choices that we make prior to those consequences.

Am I making too much of an assumption about how you’re using equity? Forgive me if I am, and feel free to correct my assumption.

I work. I work a lot, actually. I spend time away from my family doing things that add value to the broader community, both things that I love to do and things that I would rather not do. I am rewarded for this choice with income. This is not immoral, unreasonable, or unfair.

How is it a more moral state of affairs to say that I and my family should receive no benefit from the hours I spend away from them at work? Or to say that I ought to receive the same exact benefit as the guy down the block who works just enough hours at the AM/PM to buy his pot? That, to me, seem unequal.

I think equity and equality are incompatible states, at least here on earth, and I think equality is the more moral of the two.