ERA Call to Action #2

[TAPat]

Please see ERA Call to Action #1 here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2697405&mesg_id=2697405

The Equal Rights Amendment is alive and well! :)

This is an open-ended ratification process and we only need 3 more states to ratify.

Imagine my horror when I discovered that Illinois (!) is one of the 15 states outstanding. I intend to help change that, but quick - that's one down...

In light of the recent elections we have two other states that may be *encouraged* to do the right thing: Arkansas (solid blue now) and Nevada (purple).

I simply do not have time this morning to explain why the 14th Amendment does not cover women's rights, but you can find all that information and more at http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/

PLEASE visit the site and lend your voice to make this amendment happen! We are so close - and the time is now!

For all of those who went before us...

Thank You!

[Caoimhe]

1. I still can't believe this hasn't been ratified

Here we are supposed to be such a progressive nation. Patooooey!

[OzarkDem]

2. We only need 3 more states!

If we pass the amendment in 3 of the following states, it will move to Congress

*The 15 currently-unratified states are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia.




http://eracampaignweb.kis-hosting.com/index.php

Sign up and get busy!

[TAPat]

5. Yes! Let's do get busy!

And never mind the naysayers... Just one response down the thread - :puke:

[helderheid]

6. Utah - imagine my surprise!

Will sign up NOW

[suston96]

3. I simply do not have time this morning to explain why the 14th Amendment does not cover .......

"I simply do not have time this morning to explain why the 14th Amendment does not cover women's rights..."

That's too bad, because the Fourteenth DOES cover equal rights for all PERSONS. That's what it says:

"Amendment XIV: Privileges or immunities, due process, elections and debt.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

"Persons" unquestionably means men AND women !

I would rather see an amendment repealing the Twenty Second Amendment and cancelling the electoral college and replacing it with direct election of the President and Vice-President.

[TAPat]

4. Thanks, but the subtext there is

all male persons.

I'll ask repectfully that unless you have something contructive to offer that you stand down.

[suston96]

7. Sub-text?

"Thanks, but the subtext there is all male persons."

It is? Where is that sub-text that says "all male persons"? Has any decision by the USSC, or any court, ever indicated or referred to that "sub-text" that claims that the Fourteenth refers only to "male persons."?

"I'll ask repectfully that unless you have something contructive to offer that you stand down."

I am being very constructive. You simply do not like my "constructions". When you post in a public forum you cannot reasonably expect anyone to "stand-down."

There is no need for this amendment. It was rejected for a reason and that reason is very plain: needless redundancy.

I ask you for a third time: please list any instances of any wrongs against women's rights that have been denied on the basis of the absence of constitutional protection.

[Cerridwen]

9. Redundant? Ah, that must explain why the 15th and 19th

Amendments were required to define exactly who "all persons" were who were allowed the privileges of citizenship.

Which would also explain the need for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX.

As to the reference to "male persons," please see 14th Amendment, Section 2 in my post above.

[Cerridwen]

8. Could you please explain Section 2.

Section. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Please, do explain what happens should the vote be denied to any female citizen and what the resultant consequences are.

And if this did not then deny or abridge women's right to vote, why was the 19th Amendment required in order that women could legally vote?

[suston96]

10. Sec 2 Fourteenth et alia

The Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments are known as the Reconstruction amendments. They each had their function and were introduced and adopted within a few years after the Civil War.

The Thirteenth "freed the slaves" or outlawed slavery. The Fourteenth applied the Bill of Rights to all the states.

And the Fifteenth protected the right to vote against discrimination by the states due to race.

The "Times, Places, and Manner of elections" of Representatives is assigned to the states by the Constitution. In order to prevent the abuse of the rights of the newly freed slaves by the states, the Fourteenth Amendment included a punitive Section 2 referred to above. But this section became a "dead letter" - or moot, when the Fifteenth Amendment was passed. (I do not consider it moot, but that is another discussion}.

The Nineteenth Amendment rendered moot any reference to male citizens and the 26th Amendment did the same for the age limit of 21, both of which were detailed in Sec. 2 of the Fourteenth you brought up above, and I repeat - rendered moot. The matter of sex and voting rights denied to women by the states, was settled by the Nineteenth Amendment and was necessary because most states denied women the exercise of their right to vote.

Through the years, the Fourteenth Amendment has slowly but forcibly incorporated the application of its rights and privileges protections for ALL persons in the states, so that now there are no other rights and privileges that are denied women that are not affirmed and remedied, if necessary, by the present Constitution.

Edited for link: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3805/is_200401/ai_n9379658

That is a good discussion of Sec. 2 discussed above.

By all means, list them, if you know of any. Those you listed above have been historically remedied or rendered moot as I have discussed above.