Posted on 04/20/2018 2:18:04 PM PDT by heterosupremacist
The April 20 editorial in the New York Times on the Equal Rights Amendment (E.R.A.) is flawed in several ways. It is not the “religious right” that is responsible for the failure of this amendment, it is liberals.
The editorial demonizes the “religious right” for “fearmongering,” when, in fact, it was liberal women who fought the E.R.A. for decades.
If the E.R.A. wins the support of two more states, it will have the 38 needed for ratification (the male-dominated Congress overwhelmingly passed it in 1972), though it may not survive a legal challenge: when advocates of the E.R.A. failed to muster 38 states in 1972, Congress extended the deadline for seven years, and then again for another three.
The clock has long run out, so it is debatable whether getting the needed three-fourths of the states to approve will count 36 years after the measure failed for the third time.
Moreover, five of the states that voted for it later rescinded their vote, thus complicating matters even further.
Legalities aside, the Times editorial fails to tell the truth about the evolution of the E.R.A. Proof of the following account is detailed in my 1985 book, The Politics of the American Civil Liberties Union, published by Transaction Press.
The idea that women should have the identical rights afforded men was first broached in 1916, and in 1923 the E.R.A. was proposed by the National Women’s Party. Working against it were feminists who objected to identical rights, led by Eleanor Roosevelt. She said women needed special protection against hazardous and “demeaning” occupations, jobs that only men should have to do. Her opposition proved to be successful, though the measure would later resurface...
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicleague.org ...
What about time limits?
The 27th amendment was circulating for 200 years until enough states ratified in in 1992.
As noted a court would have to decide if the time limit given for ERA ratification is legally binding.
As well as the issue of states which had rescinded their ratification of ERA.
Well, a bunch of idiots screwed that up.
Women sued for the right to be on fire departments and lobbied to be in combat units.
Logically they should not have these jobs but logic died a long and protracted tragic death starting in the 1960s.
The ERA amendment was an “abortion”
Thought the Left was for a woman’s choice?
Christians, led by Phyllis Schafly (she was the key anti-ERA figure at the time) and her Eagle Forum, argued that the ERA would lead to unisex bathrooms. Now because of the LGBTQEIEIO community, we already have a version of unisex bathrooms. She also argued that women would be eligible for the draft and look at the number of women who’ve joined the military anyway.
There is no complication. The clock ran out. ERA could not get a 2/3'rds vote in Congress today as it was written in 1972.
I don’t know where the author comes up with this. Phyllis Schlafly was the chief warrior in beating back the thing. Libs loved it and thought it was a done deal.
The feminists of the 1970s were more fair. They just wanted to be treated like men. Today’s feminism is unfair. They want women to be treated like men when it is convenient for them to be treated like men and treated like women when it is convenient for them to be treated like women. IOW, most want it both ways, whichever is more advantageous to them.
ERA was always a fraud like most grievance movements.
There is no complication. The clock ran out. ERA could not get a 2/3'rds vote in Congress today as it was written in 1972.
What about time limits?
The 27th amendment was circulating for 200 years until enough states ratified in in 1992.
Don’t know how a court can rule that a clause in an amendment isn’t binding, but if our courts can rule that one President cannot cancel his predecessor’s E.O.s, who knows?
I agree.
No further Supreme Court decisions are necessary. Dillon v. Gloss in 1921 settled the issue of Congress setting ratification windows.
Any further ratifications of the ERA and null and void. The Archivist of the United States will send all ratification letters back to the originating states with the explanation that the window has been closed for almost 40 years. Any and all further ratifications are nothing more than virtue signaling from liberal states.
The ERA is dead. RIP.
The ERA rights amendment was just a learning lesson for the left. They don’t need no stinkin’ amendments. The courts, the regulatory branch, the enemedia branch and the academic branch, in synch, can acccomplish anything an amendment can do. And more.
They don’t need to “repeal” the 2A with a 28th amendment.
This is yet another reason why we need a COS.
See Post #13.
Working against it were feminists who objected to identical rights, led by Eleanor Roosevelt. She said women needed special protection
Same for the perverts and all the other special groups.
The ERA is dead! Now make me a sammich!!
I remember the slander the libs threw at her and the ovations the Gloria Steinems of the Women’s Movement received.
Defeat of the ERA was one of the few conservative victories in the Cultural War.
Some Amendments have time limits built into them. Others have no time limits in them. The ERA had a time limit.Passing it now in a state legislature is just another manifestation of effectless Virtue Signaling.
Liberal men and prominent political feminists pushed it. Most women feared it. They thought it would take away the protections women already had as age old tradition and force them to compete as men. Well we pretty much have that now without any Amendment and Women have been elevated into the position of being a Protected Minority.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.