Liberty necessarily leads to inequality: all peoples have a unique set of physical and mental skills (and limitations). Given complete freedom of opportunity, the number of resulting outputs would be as diverse--and unequal--as those skill sets.

Though they can never be fully attained, both equality of opportunity and equality of result are admirable goals. Although on the surface these goals seem to be closely realted, in fact, they are not. The two conditions are wholly incomparable, producing radically different results and requiring radically different policies to advance.

Equality of outcome can only be achieved through the coersion of a powerful, omnipresent, controling government, the policies of which would necessarily result in a universal decimation of individual liberty.

Equality of opportunity, on the other hand, is the natural outcome of a capitalist, free enterprise system in which all participants were nonprejudicial. The "nonprejudicial" requirment is, of course, the major stumbling block in this system's superstructure. This major flaw can only be overcome by a citizenry that has a highly moral character. Hence the need, in a society that emphasizes individual freedom, for a social order in which morality is central.