The question then is simply to get back to the question of the notion of equality of access. Are rights really rights if people can't make use of those rights, if they do not have the ability to have those rights enacted?
Secondly, does the enacting of providing access to rights to minority groups to make use of their rights somehow come at the expense of the common good of rights? Does that come away from the majority's rights? That seems to be the argument I'm hearing brought forward. The argument is that if we allow a group to exercise its rights, and they can only access their rights if they have access to law in order to establish their rights, it somehow comes at the expense of the larger majority. Could I have your comments on that?