Equal Rights Amendment (Congress, Indiana, lobby, states)

[rogead]

I'm curious as to how people feel about the attempts to resurrect the 1972 Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) as worded below in its original form:





Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.




There are currently two bills being worked on in congress which deal with the ERA. One would begin a new ratification process. The other would allow the old process to continue (Indiana became the 35th state to ratify the original amendment in 1977)


For everyone: Do you self-identify as a feminist? (I'm not looking to define "feminist", I'm simply interested in whether or not you classify yourself as such)


For those who are opposed to the amendment: What specific harm do you feel the amendment will cause?


For feminists who support the amendment: What rights do you feel it would provide that don't exist today?


While I do not consider myself a feminist, I think passage of the amendment is needed to codify a basic civil right. I have some concern that there will be those who will lobby for a creative definition of equality, but that is best addressed by the courts when and if the issue arises.

[rbohm]

the ERA is an expensive ans wasteful amendment that does nothing. there are already plenty of laws on the books that allow for equal rights, pay, etc.