Equality and Discrimination

In theory, it can be said that the work or the job of the God is that He is always able to get hold of the Monster. It can be analyzed as presuming for the humans that the government’s policies and practices can be regimented by sophisticated authorized characteristics contrived by human pretence. The arguments given by McConnell are discussed everywhere without difficulty. It will be tried in the further context that how the Fourteenth Amendment, in the areas where it is applied, goes against all rules regarding races, relatively the ones race-respecting that treat people without discrimination equally.

If there is some truth in this statements and that state citizenship provides for the privilege of free education, then this could strongly be in favour of Brown. However the taken here will be a little detracted one but it will result in some essential findings. (Harrison, p1, 1996) Equality and Discrimination There are two different aspects of the constitutional laws, the first being the one which maintain equality among all citizens and the second being the ones that are against discrimination.

However, they turn out to seem similar but it will be found in the following discussion that how they differ. (Harrison, p1, 1996) Equality As A Consequence Of Regulations The question here arises that how is the Constitution able to maintain that all of the citizens in a particular society must be dealt with equality? One approach to this could be that by simply providing that such rules be prepared that provides a statement which says that everyone is equal under the government’s eye.

For example, if any authority states that every single person in a particular city is to b e given an equal amount of apple then here everyone means every single person the need to comply by the rule is not a loosened one, therefore everyone must get same number of apples, or if any body says that no one is supposed to sleep under the bridge then everyone must abide by this and if any individual is found to be sleeping under the bridge then he will be guilty, the point here is not that if someone says that what difference it makes if only one person was found to be sleeping under a bridge, but the point is this that it applies to every single person. Therefore in the context of the above discussion every one is subject to same trial by the court irrespective of race, ethnicity and color etc.

(Harrison, p1, 1996) However there do arise discrepancies when we refer to sameness, we can relate it to the above example in a way that if government provides equal number of apples to every person it may not be possible to equally satisfy the hunger of every single person. In the other example as well there is degree of dissimilarity, this is because although the government has provided that one should not sleep under the bridge, but all of the individuals may not be same in compliance to the government’s statements, some may take it seriously or some may deliberately go against the law. This difference results due the ways people have lived until today.

In addition to this differences may arise on the government’s part as well, as people may get apples of different sizes and this problem is natural and further dissimilarity arises if Mr. X is given a full apple whereas Mr. B is provided with two halves of different apples, this then, may not be clear as if both of them got an apple or not. The whole discussion may not seem particle, but the point to which it tries to attract one attention is this that it is important to point out that laws and regulations are able to create equality and sameness, with some description, however without any statement of equality or fairness. (Harrison, p1 1996)