What does the story “Harrison Bergeron” suggest about “equality”? Is there a difference between equality and equal opportunity?

Vonnegut’s short story "Harrison Bergeron" begins by explaining to the audience that “the year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way.” According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, equality is defined as the state of being equal, especially in status, rights and opportunity, but is this how equality is defined in “Harrison Bergeron”--are the people truly equal in status, rights and opportunities? On the surface, it seems so, but in order to achieve this notion of equality, the government decides to handicap people,ensuring their abilities are equal, and the Handicapper General is put in charge of carrying this plan out. However, trying to make everyone the same, is a bit like running a marathon where you can only run as fast as the slowest participant. This may seem like a way to make sure everyone wins, but in reality no one does.
So how can true equality be achieved if everyone isn’t “equal in every which way?” Vonnegut is trying to draw the reader’s attention to the fact that there are different kinds of equality. His story depicts a society focused on equality of outcomes: the beautiful wear masks so that they are not more attractive than anyone else; the strong strap weights to their bodies, and the intelligent must wear headphones that blare loud and distracting noises to interrupt their focus. The equality in “Harrison Bergeron” ensures that no one runs faster than anybody else. The Handicapper General’s message is clear: be like everyone else, or else.
So what, you might ask, is the alternative? Instead of forcing everyone to have the same outcomes, a government can work to ensure that everyone in its society has equal opportunities. This is the type of equality that inspired the United States’ Declaration of Independence. Vonnegut’s story is a warning that depicts a clear, definable difference between equality and equal opportunity: the former ensures that everyone gets exactly the same thing, while the latter ensures that everyone gets the same opportunity to achieve whatever outcome they wish, but it isn't guaranteed.

In Vonnegut's short story, the United States Constitution has been amended hundreds of times and has resulted in an environment where every citizen is equal in every possible aspect. Physically talented, intelligent, and beautiful individuals have been forced to wear cumbersome weights, ugly masks, and devices that prevent them from thinking deeply about subjects in order to make them perfectly mediocre in every way, shape, and form. Vonnegut's dystopian society illustrates the dangers associated with attempting to force equality by punishing talented people instead of celebrating individual differences. Vonnegut depicts a clear difference between total equality and equal opportunity in his short story. While Vonnegut believes that society is responsible for protecting the weak and less fortunate by passing legislation that promotes equal opportunities in education, employment, and justice, he does not think society should celebrate the lazy, incompetent, and mediocre. Vonnegut also does not favor punishing individuals who are more talented, innovative, and beautiful in order to appease those who are less gifted. Essentially, Vonnegut is in favor of equal opportunity, but he rejects the idea that society should punish talented individuals while simultaneously promoting mediocrity.