Equal Rights Amendment bill in Arkansas, HJR1002
Eagle Forum of Arkansas: Representative Lindsley Smith (D) has filed a Equal Rights Amendment bill in Arkansas, HJR1002. bill on ERA has been referred to the House STATE AGENCIES & GOVT'L AFFAIRS and will probably come up next week sometime. This should be of great concern to anyone who opposes abortion or homosexual marriage. The following excerpts from an article entitled, "Marriage Must Be Protected from the Judges," is proof that the opponents of Equal Rights Amendment (that nice sounding law supposedly designed to prevent discrimination against women) did not exaggerate the negative consequences of the ERA Amendment as ERA supporters vehemently claimed. Read entire article
Names of Legislators who are listed as Sponsors on the ERA bill HJR 1002.
In the recent case Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health cited the Massachusetts state Equal Rights Amendment as authority to legalize same-sex marriages. The state ERA was added to Article 1 of the Massachusetts Constitution in 1976. It provides: "Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed or national origin."
The Goodridge decision did use the Massachusetts ERA to legalize marriage between people of the same sex. This caused UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh to post on his website: "Phyllis Schlafly said it would be like this." He cited typical examples from the liberal press ridiculing the opponents of ERA for "canards," "scare tactics," and "hysterics" in predicting that ERA would require same-sex marriage.
- U.S. News & World Report (4-28-75): "Opponents, for example, suggested passage of ERA would mean abortion on demand, legalization of homosexual marriages, sex-integrated prisons and reform schools -- all claims that were hotly denied by ERA supporters."
- New York Times (7-5-81): "Discussion of [the ERA] bogged down in hysterical claims that the amendment would eliminate privacy in bathrooms, encourage homosexual marriage, put women in the trenches and deprive housewives of their husbands' support."
- Washington Post (2-19-82): "The vote in Virginia [against the ERA] came after proponents argued on behalf of civil rights for women and opponents trotted out the old canards about homosexual marriages and unisex restrooms."
Volokh concluded: "So the Massachusetts ERA did contribute to constitutional protection for homosexual marriage — as the opponents of the ERA predicted, and as the supporters of the ERA vehemently denied."
Read about feminists', National Organization of Women, goal to promote abortion rights and homosexual marriage through the ERA
Tags: Arkansas, Equal Right Amendment, ERA, HJR1002, homosexual activism
Names of Legislators who are listed as Sponsors on the ERA bill HJR 1002.
In the recent case Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health cited the Massachusetts state Equal Rights Amendment as authority to legalize same-sex marriages. The state ERA was added to Article 1 of the Massachusetts Constitution in 1976. It provides: "Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed or national origin."
The Goodridge decision did use the Massachusetts ERA to legalize marriage between people of the same sex. This caused UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh to post on his website: "Phyllis Schlafly said it would be like this." He cited typical examples from the liberal press ridiculing the opponents of ERA for "canards," "scare tactics," and "hysterics" in predicting that ERA would require same-sex marriage.
- U.S. News & World Report (4-28-75): "Opponents, for example, suggested passage of ERA would mean abortion on demand, legalization of homosexual marriages, sex-integrated prisons and reform schools -- all claims that were hotly denied by ERA supporters."
- New York Times (7-5-81): "Discussion of [the ERA] bogged down in hysterical claims that the amendment would eliminate privacy in bathrooms, encourage homosexual marriage, put women in the trenches and deprive housewives of their husbands' support."
- Washington Post (2-19-82): "The vote in Virginia [against the ERA] came after proponents argued on behalf of civil rights for women and opponents trotted out the old canards about homosexual marriages and unisex restrooms."
Volokh concluded: "So the Massachusetts ERA did contribute to constitutional protection for homosexual marriage — as the opponents of the ERA predicted, and as the supporters of the ERA vehemently denied."
Read about feminists', National Organization of Women, goal to promote abortion rights and homosexual marriage through the ERA
Tags: Arkansas, Equal Right Amendment, ERA, HJR1002, homosexual activism
Posted by Bill Smith at 12:42 AM - Post Link
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home