That's because children are seen as innocent. We can blame someone in poverty of "making bad choices"... What choice is there for a newborn to make bad choices?
Yet, we have little issue,society speaking, condemning a baby and their family to a life of poverty to continue that cycle.
Or should we say that the newborn/baby deserves lack of medical care, substandard food or hunger,substandard housing, less/lacking education? If you believe they deserve that, can you explain what actions a baby can do differently?
Hard work of the parents doesn't really factor into it. It's the social standing of the parents. A single mom who works 2 jobs works harder than most of us on this board. Yet, our kids are going to have it much, much, much easier than hers would.
"Why is it not acceptable for someone that had better parents to do better?"
If your whole schtick is about "meritocracy", then having people start out better by default defeats that entire thing.
1. I didn't bring religion into this. You did.
2. I reject to what amounts to a nice story with no basis in fact. If I remember my judeao-christian studies, the woman was less than the man in those stories.
3. It is evident that even being born, not all babies are equal. And that's before we consider socioeconomic status.
Should humans be considered as equal? Of course. However its quite easily demonstrated that people aren't.
I think you can ignore the religious mention and in good-faith (ha!) take their point to be that we ultimately have common ancestors. Then respond that your family has a strong effect but it's not the only one.
Don't we then all have the same ancestors and therefore all equal opportunity?