Do you support the 28th Amendment, the "Equal Rights Amendment" ? (Poll)

Do you oppose or support the ratification of the 28th Amendment, the "Equal Rights Amendment"?

  • I support the 28th Amendment, and Biden's ratification declaration

    Votes: 7 28.0%
  • I oppose the 28th Amendment, Biden is wrong that it is ratified

    Votes: 18 72.0%

  • Total voters
    25
Why would they need to?



RBG voted to affirm Roe every time it came up. It was only after she died and got replaced by Serena Joy that we got the crazy that is Dobbs.
So why did you call her a fucking idiot?
 
Actually, the Amendment WAS ratified.
nope sorry, the National Archives says Xiden was just blowing hot air and they don't intend to certifiy it as an Amendment just because a would be dictator made a declaration.
 
So why did you call her a fucking idiot?
I didn't, but you are a little slow.

RBG supported Roe until she died.

nope sorry, the National Archives says Xiden was just blowing hot air and they don't intend to certifiy it as an Amendment just because a would be dictator made a declaration.

Actually, it would probably be a good idea to let it pass, and pass a resolution in Congress accepting it. Optics, man, Optics.
 
I didn't, but you are a little slow.

RBG supported Roe until she died.



Actually, it would probably be a good idea to let it pass, and pass a resolution in Congress accepting it. Optics, man, Optics.
Nothing makes xiden look good.
 
People already have equal rights under the law.

What they want are special rights for special people and push for unrestricted abortion rights of course.

They don't realize it would eliminate women's sports, women's preferrable treatment in divorce, women's bathrooms, etc.

It would also prevent women from getting preferential treatment in all those "both drunk hookup" things in colleges where they blame the guy even if both were blasted.
 
No, Joey is DISHONEST about that, as well as everything else. He is a shameless propagandist, in the tradition of Goebbels.
You give him more credit than I. He's always seemed rather ignorant, on top of being a shameless propagandist for his cult's masters
 
JoeyB seems rather ignorant of RBG's opinion on the Roes decision.

Post what you are babbling about or shut up.

They don't realize it would eliminate women's sports, women's preferrable treatment in divorce, women's bathrooms, etc.

YOu say that like they are bad things.

Women shouldn't get preferential treatment in divorce

Women's sports are a joke. If there weren't big bags of Title IX money lying around, no one would care.

As for bathrooms.... Give them stalls with locks on the door, problem solved.
 
Post what you are babbling about or shut up.
She knew it was a fundamentally flawed decision.

Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”

 
She knew it was a fundamentally flawed decision.

Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”


Wow, so she didn't have a problem with the decision, just its the political effect of stopping legislation and that it was more about protecting doctors than women.



“My criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change,” Ginsburg said. She would’ve preferred that abortion rights be secured more gradually, in a process that included state legislatures and the courts, she added. Ginsburg also was troubled that the focus on Roe was on a right to privacy, rather than women’s rights.

“Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”
 
Wow, so she didn't have a problem with the decision, just its the political effect of stopping legislation and that it was more about protecting doctors than women.
?? She had a huge problem with the Roe decision. Did you read this or any of her other discussions of Roe? She felt the decision was fundamentally flawed - it was not based on a woman's right, it was based on a right to privacy. She knew that Roe has always been vulnerable to the exact reversal that finally happened in Dobbs
 
No....
Because it isn't about equal rights. It's about extra privileges.

Some ethnicities and sexes don't participate in certain job trades in every geographic area generally speaking.

It's like Asian women bricklayers/stonemasons. They are extremely rare. Certainly not enough to find one capable of being a foreman. And the Spanish speaking crew simply won't listen to her.

In some locations minorities are the majority but not enough of the minorities prize education enough to actually gain the skills needed for management or high skill.

Then, when large companies hire a minority for an executive position the minority person KNOWS they never earned their position and are uninterested in working to keep the position. But they glide through, not working at all....knowing they will not get fired because their performance is not relevant to their employment or regular raises or even sometimes performance bonuses. (What would you do in this situation?)

ERA is nothing more than a large corporation efficiency drag. (Not that I really feel bad for big companies....it's just unwarranted).

Let the content of a person's character and performance be more relevant than their sex or race or religion.
 
She had a huge problem with the Roe decision.

But not because it was wrongly decided, but because the focus was on doctors instead of women.

She had wished that another case that would have been more explicitly protecting women's reproductive rights had been heard instead.

She felt the decision was fundamentally flawed - it was not based on a woman's right, it was based on a right to privacy. She knew that Roe has always been vulnerable to the exact reversal that finally happened in Dobbs

But that wasn't the argument she made.
 
But not because it was wrongly decided, but because the focus was on doctors instead of women.
Because the Constitutional reasoning was fundamentally flawed.
She had wished that another case that would have been more explicitly protecting women's reproductive rights had been heard instead.



But that wasn't the argument she made.
That was exactly the argument she made.
 
As Biden heads out the WH door he makes a statement that the 28th Amendment is ratified. This will be a legal battle.

Biden says Equal Rights Amendment is ratified, kicking off expected legal battle as he pushes through final executive actions​

“He is using his power of the presidency to make it clear that he believes – and he agrees with leading constitutional scholars and the American Bar Association – not that it should be, but it is the 28th Amendment of the Constitution,” the official added.
But legal experts contend it isn’t that simple: Ratification deadlines lapsed and five states have rescinded their approval, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s law school, prompting questions about the president’s authority to ratify the amendment more than 50 years after it first passed.
Biden is leaning on the American Bar Association’s opinion, the senior Biden official said, which “stresses that no time limit was included in the text of the Equal Rights Amendment” and “stresses that the Constitution’s framers wisely avoided the chaos that would have resulted if states were able to take back the ratifying votes at any time.”

My opinion is that Trump needs to evaluate what happens if the 28th is ratified. Does it make any difference in 2024? Will it hurt business?


Much ado about nothing? Or, will it open the flood gates to frivolous lawsuits?
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) became the 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when Virginia was the 38th state to ratify in 2020.

Scott Statement on the Equal Rights Amendment​

 

Forum List

Back
Top