[festus]

It would seem to me that a law that allows certain classes of people to be actively killed but didn't allow the killing of everyone would be a flaming violation of the equal protection clause.

[NJ_gent]

"It would seem to me that a law that allows certain classes of people to be actively killed but didn't allow the killing of everyone would be a flaming violation of the equal protection clause."

Sounds like a good anti-capital punishment argument...

[Askel5]

It would seem to me that a law that allows certain classes of people to be actively killed but didn't allow the killing of everyone would be a flaming violation of the equal protection clause.

That's a good question.

But I'm certainly the one to ask ... having totally struck out trying to understand the letter of "constitutional" law. (A pity folks like constitutional scholar Ann Coulter are too busy bashing Old Arab wenches and pulling Whoreowitz stunts on campus these days to address such questions.)

I guess we'll have to ask the folks who introducted the concepts of "down breeding", "Genetic Quality", "Hereditary Quality", and the burdensome nature of non-productive individuals (particularly excess children and elderly) to the Congressional Record.

Maybe they are best positioned to explain why some human beings are superior to others.