Posted on 05/31/2018 9:06:09 AM PDT by stars & stripes forever
SPRINGFIELD—The Illinois House made history on Wednesday, allowing for the state to become the 37th in the country to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment designed to protect Americans against discrimination based on their sex.
Nearly a century after the amendment was drafted, the Illinois House voted 72-45 to ratify it following more than two hours of debate. Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan stood behind the speaker’s podium in the House chambers to watch the historic vote. The Illinois Senate voted to approve it in April.
While the vote may be symbolic — the country needs one more state to ratify the amendment — the state’s passage creates a window of opportunity for the embattled constitutional amendment. The state is where the efforts seized in 1982. Only 35 of the necessary 38 states ratified the amendment before the 1979 deadline set by Congress. The deadline was extended to 1982, but that made no difference as Illinois and other states remained firmly against the proposal.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicago.suntimes.com ...
Symbolic yet historic, blah blah blah...
Pray this Unconstitutional Amendment will be killed...
I don’t think a constitutional amendment can be declared unconstitutional.
The reason this failed in the first place is that it was not necessary. The constitution already protects people’s rights regardless of sex. It would have just been a cash cow for attorneys.
Gimmick for the ladies’ vote
Just like it was back in the days
Dims treat women like stupids
Just like they do minorities and Millennials
And welfare staters
“Y’all are too stupid to recognize our Con Game”
If you want to know what a nightmare this would be just look how Title IX has been implement in the university system.
Just wait until it’s an Amendment disfavored by powerful pinkos.
Another issue seldom talked about, is that some states rescinded their ratifications of the ERA during the seven year window for consideration of the amendment.
To say that Illinois is the 37th state to ratify ignores those recission votes.
That issue could be hashed out in court, as to whether a state can legally rescind a ratification of an amendment.
As Phyllis Shlafly knew—this is a removal of Right Reason and Natural Law Theory (our Constitution)—for irrational Marxism, where boys are girls, sex with children is same as sex with adults, up is down, and sodomizing others can be a virtue as using others as a means to an end (always evil in true Christianity).
It is the “God is Dead” religion of Satanism and the Lucifereans (pederasts)-—total irrationality of “radical egalitarianism” which removes individualism and identity and age from the masses, to make them all interchangeable drones-—even men are women literally.
Reason and Logic are not allowed in radical egalitarianism—Marxism. You are totally dehumanized—reduced to cattle.
I’m confused.
If the ERA was dead in 1982 how is it we’re still counting votes?
I don’t think a constitutional amendment can be declared unconstitutional
No, but it can be when the legislation starting the process had a built in deadline. That deadline was extended once but that only shows congress meant for the amendment to become void after a certain date.
Note that the Amendment prevents discrimination on the basis of sex (a biological state), not gender (a social construct).
> I don’t think a constitutional amendment can be declared unconstitutional <
Actually, there are two constitutional issues in play here. One, the proposed Equal Rights Amendment had an expiration date of March 22, 1979. Either it gets ratified by then, or it’s moot.
Then Congress, by a simple majority, extended that date. A simple Congressional majority cannot propose an Amendment. So how can it modify one?
And then there’s a second constitutional problem. Four states that ratified the ERA have since taken back their ratification. So which vote counts, the original vote, or the take-back vote?
we,ve gone from a country that makes history to one where we now3 distort history (and our constitution)
Well, this is just Illinois' vote on the proposed amendment.
It wouldn't actually be an amendment until 38 states have approved it (there's 37 now, but five states have indicated they've withdrawn their approval). Then, I believe, the amendment would be placed before a vote of the country for approval or not. Only then would it actually become an amendment.
Long before that, I would anticipate numerous lawsuits from all sides of the political spectrum to determine things such as whether the timeline could be extended, whether those five states could or could not withdraw their approval, and many many other things.
This ain't going to become an amendment for quite a long time, if ever ...
[I don’t think a constitutional amendment can be declared unconstitutional.]
I meant to say the ERA Amendment cannot constitutionally continue from when it left off the last time.
Its about time chicks get the opportunity to be sewer workers and line walkers
So, they really have to do it all over again?
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.