Equality is not treating everyone the same. It's insuring that all are provided for equally.
This is honestly one of the more shocking things I've seen written on this forum. Do you really believe that? That equality isn't about being treated the same, but about everyone getting the same outcome?
I guess I just don't see how anyone would assess that principles and not find it falling far short. Equality under the law (same treatment for everyone) works. We can reasonably treat everyone equally. Even if we don't always do so, the principle is sound. We can imagine that if we did, we'd have a workable result.
But what you're talking about as "equality" can't work. So everyone gets the same outcome regardless of their actions? Isn't that a bit impossible to manage? So the guy who robs a bank serves the same amount of time in jail as someone who doesn't? The guy who provides significant benefits to others with his labors gets the same result as a guy who does nothing at all?
I know that you mean just that the government provides everyone with some equal minimal amount of "stuff", but even that doesn't work either. And frankly, even if you did believe that, then isn't AA also still in violation of that principle of equality? Shouldn't everyone get the same AA bonus then? It just seems like you repeat the phrase, but haven't really thought through what it means. It doesn't mean anything. Or at least nothing consistently applicable as some sort of policy. It seems like people use that phrasing to justify whatever unequal and unfair rules they want to create and never stop and examine what they're doing.
Maybe I'm missing something though. Can you explain exactly what you mean by "provided for equally" and how that would work in any sort of real application? Because I just don't see it.