Skip to main content

View Diary: ERA = equality, so WTF??? [rant] (58 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Media girl, thank you (4.00)
    for this diary.

    As a charter subscriber to Ms. Magazine, I remember very well the disappointment of the failure of ratification.

    IMHO, the very fact that it would still take a great deal of energy to secure the passage of the ERA simply proves that it is still needed.  There obviously are still many interests who think that it is perfectly all right for equality of rights under the law to be denied or abridged on account of sex. Otherwise it would pass immediately and unanimously.

    State by state, issue by issue work is dangerous -- what a legislature giveth, a legislature can take away. But what is protected by the constitution is still much harder to do away with (although the Bushies are sure trying, aren't they?)

    52 years for the right to vote?  And if you count from the 1848 Seneca Falls Declaration it is 72 years.  At that rate I expect to see this amendment ratified in my granddaughter's lifetime. Festina lente.

    For it is your business when the wall next door catches fire. --Horace

    by marylrgn on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 10:29:10 AM PST

    •  The sad truth (none)
      There obviously are still many interests who think that it is perfectly all right for equality of rights under the law to be denied or abridged on account of sex.

      That some of these interests are on the left is very ... disappointing.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site