[inquest]

I'm definitely not about to defend death taxes, as they are one of the most repugnant creatures known to man, but I do have to take issue with the author's reliance on the "equal protection" clause of the USC. Of all the provisions within the Constitution, that one has been just about the most abused - and abused in such a way as to cause the most abuse of power. "Protection" of the laws simply means that if someone violates your rights, he will be punished. "Equal" protection means that he will be punished regardless of whether you're black, white, indigo, immigrant, criminal fugitive, whatever. It does not say that all laws must oblige everyone equally. Child labor laws, indecent exposure laws (which vary according to gender), legal qualifications for drivers' and other licenses - all these operate on some people differently than others without serious challenge, and in any case do not conflict with the phrase, "equal protection of the laws".

[Dukie]

Thanks for your input, inquest. The examples you cite all relate to some objective criteria concerning the law's applicability. Driving and child labor laws are based upon attainment of a certain age as indicative of physical ability and responsibility. The same with airman's certificates and physical performance standards for positions in public safety occupations. What the author is questioning here is the relation ship based rates which are discriminatory along the same lines as would be the case if tax rates were age or race based.