opportunity to advance to upper levels of executive management in corporations. But to me, the "glass ceiling" barriers toward women are nothing but an insidious form of sex discrimination. Most individuals concerned with this problem cite it as evidence of discrimination; a situation which therefore should be corrected by an application of affirmative action laws. Yet even if what such advocates of "equality" claimed about glass ceiling were true, they would not be justified in using immoral means to achieve a purportedly positive end.
             Like some magical object in a fantasy novel, the idea of "affirmative action" has shaped-shifted with chameleon-like facility over the past three decades. At first, the goal sought was equality under the law. This is the first and only legitimate use of this concept in a society founded upon justice, that is, the idea that the law should not take cognizance of someone's race, sex, color, ect., but should instead apply equally and impartially to all. Such a legal environment is built on the understanding that ethics and rights are based upon the individual; that a person is responsible only for the actions and subsequent effects which he personally initiates. Unfortu-nately, that admirable goal was cast in clay rather than stone. Slowly, almost imperceptibly, "affirmative action" melted from recognition of equality under the law to a desire for equality of opportunity. Even when the Federal government acceded to this transformation by enacting new regulations and laws, the champions of affirmative action remained dissatisfied.
             In 1993, women were earning 77.1 cents for every dollar earned by a man. In 1994 and 1995, women's earnings as a percentage of men have declined. By 1996, women were earning only 75 cents for every dollar earned by men, and this year, the figure looks like it will slip even lower. A careful analysis indicates tha...