Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Audrey Muck's avatar

Let's be clear about the whole "equal protection" argument. Women in the United States do not enjoy equal protection under the law. Women in the Revolution called for that, but the patriarchal founding fathers laughed at the very idea.

The argument that zygotes and fetuses deserve "equal protection" is a slap in the face to each and every woman in America. It would elevate them above pregnant women/people - and babies born female would instantly lose such protection on birth. We are not protected under the 14th Amendment - Justice Scalia was clear about that, and his protégés on the Supreme Court now believe it when he said:

“Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t. Nobody ever thought that’s what it meant.”

Of course women were still PROPERTY under the law in 1868, without voting rights, when the 14th was ratified.

The Equal Rights Amendment has met all the requirements of Article 5 of the Constitution. It would protect our right to bodily autonomy. The 'deadline' was put in the preamble to the amendment, unlike the other amendments with binding deadlines - compare those amendments with the ERA language. I believe we've all been sold a false bill of goods with the ERA "deadline."

Suel J's avatar

Abortion is anything but dead as a campaign issue. Reproductive freedom is central. It's the first question in the minds of most women. Does she/he support repro freedom? A woman's absolute right to bodily control? Most Americans support this. The nerve of the Supreme court thinking that they know better, and overturning Rowe vs Wade. I wonder what woman's issue the court will take on next. In vitro fertilization and birth control pills is the word on the street.

1 more comment...

No posts

Ready for more?