But it's not really a choice, you can have both.
I think people are overly hyped up about both. Conservatives care about freedom too much, and liberals care about equality too much. They have value, to be sure, but to treat them as core values is overkill in my opinion. I picked equality because I am against inequality of opportunity, which prevents society from being truly meritocratic. Inequality of opportunity is, in turn, caused by other types of inequaltiy such as income inequality or institutional racism, so I pick equality.
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all
You can be "equal" under communism.
Its True, Communism is the solution!
Ah, the eternal debate. I have one point to make, if anyone on the left side is interested: Does equality mean equal rights, as in freedom under capitalism, or does it mean equal results, as in freedom under communism? If it's the latter, think to yourself, how is it equality to give to some and take from others?
You can't have equality if you're oppressed.
freedom is majority rules but others have a right to their own point of view and live as they too please as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others and within the basic laws of the land. I am sick of people thinking that giving power to a group of people over the majority is the way to right wrongs against them. The only way to stop rocking a boat is to disperse the weight not run to the other side!
Equal freedom to all, and that implies also the poor.
Free people are not equal: equal people are not free
If equality of results are enforced, then we cannot be free.
An individual is a mix of altruistic and selfish intentions, however it is human nature that selfishness is dominant, so government is essential for a functioning society. Selfish impulses within and without will invariably cause dissolution of a harmonious society so the monopoly of force is needed to create incentives: to follow the laws and judgement of the state and protect the people from foreign domination. So under governance the people cannot be absolutely free, but - depending on political ideology - are afforded certain freedoms, granted by a constitution, to limit or expand the force available to the state. Since we are governed by elected representatives of a fixed term of service, they can be subject to the desires of a collective within the community, and since people can never agree totally on everything, one group gains preference over another, whether it be taxes(rich vs poor), private property vs proletariat, tariffs(a select industry vs other industrial producers and consumers), suffrage(women vs patriarchy) or slavery(slave owners vs slaves) any selective restriction of freedom(of money, of trade, of vote or self determination) creates an inequality of opportunity. However, each person is born a unique individual, of varied skills and weaknesses, inherent and acquired, and so there is an inequality of talents, which consequently creates an inequality of outcome, all the more if there is inequality of opportunity. In a society where there exists an equality of opportunity but an inequality of outcome for a certain group; the outcome can only become equal if the opportunity becomes unequal, through a restriction of freedom, for all other groups, Therefore freedom takes precedence over equality if we desire to live in a prosperous and free society.