Frith

Hang on there, Mike, it isn't equality that equals tyranny, it's favouritism and nepotism.

It should be the employer's right to hire whom he or she wishes. And it is always better to mention in the advertisement whom the employer would prefer to apply so candidates don't waste their time, or get their hopes up. But it should be the prospective employee's right, on the open market, to apply for the job on the basis of qualifications, experience and expertise.

People are not equal, either by birth or by capability. This much is obvious. The problem comes in when people who can do are shunted out in favour of people who have the politically correct credentials. Private employers should be free to hire whomever they like. But in the public sector or anywhere public finds pay part or all of salaries, then you can hardly expect women, or anyone else, to pay tax but be deprived of job opportunities.

It's not an easy problem to solve because "equality" is used out of context and the law is often not only shaped round political correctness but is employed against plaintiffs in court cases.

The situation is too far gone to take back, so it must be modified to be more reasonable and fair to everyone and not be there to bolster the armies of whatever ideology is in power. The original intention was to exact fairness. Unfortunately, the carriage has come off the rails.

Which causes me to think of the grand folly of introducing Sharia into an already overburdened judicial system and creating further havoc and unpleasantness. There should be less legislation, not more. The legislation that exists should be designed so as to create the greatest social justice for the greatest number (in a democracy, obviously, and Shariah does not emanate from any such political ideology), not the greatest confusion and waste of funds for the taxpayer, who ends up paying for something that is designed ultimately to put white men out of work.