The aim of this paper is in part to distinguish the ideas raised in the Swedish political debate on the new discrimination law in relation to protection of groups. Is protection by law against discrimination needed for the individual or the group? If it is needed for members of groups, are these groups viewed on as static or variable. Are there any conflicts present between group interests? We link these ideas to three different theoretical perspectives: multiculturalism, feminism and intersectionality and further examine the differences and contradictions between the perspectives represented by members of parliament. Drawing on the political debate and documents formulated within the government, this paper analyzes views on identity by group through the use of idea analysis. The main conclusions of this paper are the following. All theoretical views chosen are present within the debate. The representatives of feminism and multiculturalism call for distinctive needs. However, the philosophical debate current them between is not represented in the political debate on the discrimination law. The feminist concern stands without a multicultural opponent. The perspective on intersectionality is included in the debate but the understanding is quite incoherent. The government representatives choose to propagate for the principle of equal treatment instead of a variable view on groups.