I *still* support the ERA.

[benburch]

http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

[TaleWgnDg]

1. Many do, including me . . .

[Erika]

2. The Constitution was written for and by white male landowners

There was no consideration given to slaves or to women.

[FloridaPat]

5. Actually it was written for landowners. Women landowers did vote

in the very first election. The states then proceeded to change the sex real fast.

[mcctatas]

3. Yep, me too...

I have been saying for the past few years that I cannot believe a nation that refused to adopt an ammendment that would codify the rights of 51% of the population would take up precious legislative time on the Defense of Marriage bullshit that only affects 10-12% of the population. Not to mention the fact that one is completely necessary to protect rights and the other one is legislating hate so joe six-pack doesn't have to worry about boys kissin'. I'm just so over the androcentric patricarchal bullshit that passes as patriotism, I could just spit!!! (on Phyllis Sclafley and Beverly LaHaye johnson :evilgrin: )

[Gloria]

4. Me, too, now more than ever!!! It's time to rejoin NOW...they

have always had such a great legal team and we need them to continue fighting the good fight, esp. since we see NARAL doesnj't get it about Lieberman and the Alito fight...

[havocmom]

6. My daughter is older that I was when we first tried to get it through.

I make that point every time somebody here decides a new amendment (as if it were as easy as an online petition) would solve all our problems with bushco. Keep telling them to spend their energy on honest elections for now.

Maybe the thing will pass before my daughter dies of old age. I have given up ever seeing it in my lifetime.

[Solo_in_MD]

7. Help me answer this question...

What would the ERA actually change. Been asked this several times, and outside of it being symbolic, I don't have a good answer. What laws/regulation/practices would be changed by its passage and implantation. Any help?

[Berry Cool]

8. It would be the first time women were defined in the Constitution as

persons.

That alone is reason enough for its passage.

Aside from that, it would override any state laws left that continue to treat women unequally. There may not be as many of those around today as in the '70s, but it would make sure that any of them still left were no longer constitutional.

[Katherine Brengle]

13. One quick note --

It isn't the 70s necessarily that we are talking about here. Alice Paul first drafted the ERA in 1923.

It has been almost 100 years, and we haven't really changed the way people think. We have changed some laws, and society has gone through the changes it probably would have gone through anyway... but people still hold onto those old ideas of obedience and servitude and *femininity*...

[TaleWgnDg]

9. Lemme try to give you a clear answer . . .

.
Lemme try to give you a clear answer . . .

The U.S. Constitution doesn't expressly mention "women or woman" throughout its entire text, except in the 1920 19th amendment that expressly granted women the right to vote across America.

This omission is vitally important, legally.

Why is that so? Because without any express words written in the constitution, allows U.S. Supreme Court justices and the U.S. Congress to grant women less rights and less court intervention as it would if those words were expressly stated in the constitution.* Express words are vital to those justices such as Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, Kennedy, Alito, and overall for any SCOTUS justice when they interpret federal law and constitutional law. And, there lies the rub.

The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)

"Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification" http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/overview.htm

With these simple words in the U.S. Constitution would grant women, for once and for all, solid footing for equal rights in law across America. It's as simple as that. Am I making it clear, here? As a lawyer, it is sometimes difficult to explain law in layman's terms, but I have attempted to do so.

______________________________

* All (state and) federal laws now on the books that supposedly "grant" women equal rights, are subject to the whims and vicissitudes of congress as well as by courts who may give various weight (which they do) in law to these so-called "equal rights" of women. Therefore, without expressly written words of equal protection for women in our constitution, women suffer such whims of congress and of the courts.


.

[Unleash_the_Backlash]

11. Is the ERA enough anymore?

As long as Justice Scalia is referring to people who see the Constitution as a living, breathing document as idiots, I fear that we are heading backward in time. If his view prevails, the Constitutional basis for civil rights laws that protect against discrimination based on gender, age, religion, ethnicity and disability could be in jeopardy.

In addition, the authority of Congress to enact civil rights legislation based on the Commerce Clause was something we could take for granted. As the court moves to the right, and Congressional power is diluted, will our current civil rights legislation survive?

It is time to consider an equal rights amendment that puts these issues to rest, once and for all, by establishing a permanent list of protected classes and reinforcing Congressional authority to enact enabling legislation. Such an amendment would give new support to the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The amendment could be used to finally protect the rights of all people against discrimination based on sexual orientation, as well.

Is this a farfetched idea? Maybe. But by the time we know, it will be too late.

[omega minimo]

10. oygtbk

:wtf:

[Katherine Brengle]

12. So do I.

I believe that the failure of the states to ratify the ERA, and the failure of Congress to send it to the states time and time again, is a clear sign that the women's movement has not yet achieved its goals and that we still have a massive job of work left to do.