Consider
(Washington Post) Writing for the 5-to-4 majority in the DOMA case, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy argued that the federal law’s “avowed purpose and practical effect are to impose a disadvantage, a separate status, and so a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages made lawful by the unquestioned authority of the states.†Congress went out of its way to devalue certain marriages that states had chosen to recognize in their capacity as arbiters of what marriage can be within their own borders. The discrimination’s “unusual character†led the majority to conclude that its “principal purpose†was to “impose inequality†and that it offended the Fifth Amendment’s requirement that all Americans deserve due process of law.
“Impose inequality”. “Separate status”. There was also discussion of “discrimination” and “equal protection under the law”. Well, if that’s the case, particularly in terms of taxation and federal benefits
- doesn’t that mean that the federal tax system imposes inequality, since some pay a higher tax percentage per the tax brackets than others?
- doesn’t that meant that any tax breaks/incentives for married people are discriminatory towards citizens who are single?
- doesn’t that mean that affirmative action imposes inequality?
- how about tax credits for hybrids/EVs? People who purchase non-hybrid/EVs do not get the same tax break. Discriminatory.
- Credits for having children? Why should childless people be penalized?
- Home ownership tax credit? Why should people who purchase homes get special treatment, when those who rent/lease often pay more than if they had a mortgage?
- Why should companies with 50 or more employees be treated differently than those with under 50 per Obamacare, vis a vis the fines/taxes?
- Men are intentionally discriminated against per federal affirmative action laws
- Women do not have to register for Selective Service
- Men are treated more harshly under the legal system
- Men are 20% more likely to die from prostate cancer vs women with breast cancer, yet federal funding for the latter is 4 times higher than the former
- Men pay twice what women pay into Social Security yet women receive 50% more in payments than men
- Smokers are forced to pay a higher rate of taxes per product
- Bigamy and polygamy are still illegal. Why does government law discriminate against multiple people that love each other?
You could probably add lots and lots to that list. If there’s supposed to be equal protection under the law, no discrimination, no separate status, then why does the federal government discriminate?
OH SNAP!!