system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
I believe the "we are all equal" rhetoric for equal rights for races/sexes is damaging to the movement because it falls apart when we aren't. CMV.

It is simply true that everyone isn't equal. Some people have biological advantages w.r.t. intelligence and physique. 

The reason I get behind equal rights is simply because I think everyone deserves equal opportunity in spite of their talents.

I'm not even claiming that I know the truth of how equal people are, but I can't get behind denying someone rights because they may be inferior. That is all.

To give an example - if the foundation for equal rights for blacks and whites is that they are equal - if research presents itself that they statistically aren't - it would damage the case.
gpt
They're talking about equal *rights*, not talents or capabilities, and they're talking about *groups* not individuals. The meaning of "we're all equal" is closer to "within any sizeable group you can define, you'll find the full spectrum of human capability." The "we're all equal" rhetoric is about preventing people from making blanket statements like "all black people are stupid," "no women are capable of being politicians," etc. It's not meant to say that someone who scores a 2400 on the SAT is no smarter than someone who scored a 1200, or that someone who can run a 4 minute mile is no more athletic than someone who can run a 12 minute mile.