How liberals and conservatives view fairness
It has been reported that the Kerry campaign is considering a plan to delay the official acceptance of the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. The motivation for this is that Kerry will be able to raise and spend more money if he delays accepting the nomination. This has caused controversy because it could undermine the importance of the convention, and some feel it is exploiting a loophole in the new campaign finance law.
This issue was debated on Fox News Channel's show Hannity and Colmes. The liberals argued that it wasn't fair that the Republicans had their convention 5 weeks later than the Democrats. By delaying the nomination, they contended, Kerry would be leveling the playing field.
This provides insight into how different ideologies perceive fairness. I would argue that even though the Republicans may have an advantage, the situation is still fair because both parties have to follow the same rules. Even if one party picks a better convention date, that doesn't mean the process is unfair.
Another viewpoint suggests what is important is not whether everyone follows the same rules, but whether everyone ends up with the same outcome.
The perception of fairness affects how we view problems. Instead of saying, "We made a mistake, we should have chosen a better convention date", Democrats blame the system.
These ideas aren't just about political parties, they also deal with how people should be treated. The problem with results-based fairness is that it cuts personal responsibility out of the equation, ignoring decisions made that may have led to an "unfair" result.
Update: John Kerry has announced that he will accept the nomination at the Democratic Convention in Boston.