Feminists Want ERA So It Will Protect Partial Birth Abortion

ERA bill has been filed in Arkansas.  See this article for status of bill:



Who Needs An Equal Rights Amendment by National Organization of Women (NOW)


Quotes from articles on the National Organization of Women verify that the ERA amendment is designed to protect partial birth abortion.  The following quote came from this article, "Who Needs An Equal Rights Amendment" on their website at this link:  http://www.now.org/issues/economic/cea/who.html  Quotes from the NOW website are in red font.


"Since 1973, when the Supreme Court handed down the historic Roe v Wade decision which legalized abortion, a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy has been under continuous attack. These attacks come in the state legislatures, the U.S. Congress, the courts and at women's health clinics. The latest assault by the Congress has been on the late term abortion technique known as dilatation and extraction (D&X).[partial birth abortion]. This bill, passed by both houses of Congress, would have outlawed the abortion method, with inadequate protection for life and health of the woman. The bill was stalled by a presidential veto."


It is also obvious from the following quote in the same article and same link that feminists want ERA to pass so they can mandate public funding for abortion.


"Mandatory pregnancy has become the reality for many young and poor women and, as of 1995, for federal workers and women in the military serving abroad where safe, private facilities are not available The real issue for women is the right to bodily integrity, and without this basic right women can have no true freedom. " [ No freedom unless they can terminate a pregnancy at any time, even just before birth, and have it paid for by taxpayers.]


Feminists also want the ERA to prevent any judge from considering the fact that a father or mother is homosexual in child  custody cases.  See this quote in the same article and same link given above.


"Lesbian and Gay Rights. Currently lesbians and gay men are discriminated against in areas as basic as employment, parenting, marriage and housing rights. Numerous court decisions demonstrate the need to establish a constitutional  "Many cases illustrate the pervasive discrimination against lesbians and gay men. One of the most plainly egregious and unfair is the case of a lesbian mother in Pensacola, Florida."


Feminists are now advocating a more thorough Equal Rights Amendment (called Constitutional Equal Right)  that would spell out all the issues they desire.  However, they admit that the present Equal Rights Amendment could be used by a friendly judge to do the same.  See the following question and answer quoted from this NOW article "Frequently Asked Questions about the CEA" at this link: http://www.now.org/issues/economic/cea/faq.html#madison


2." Couldn't an amendment based on sex [meaning the ERA]  cover all the issues?" [All the gay and lesbian and abortion issues NOW is concerned with]

"ANSWER: The short answer is yes. Theoretically, a court could interpret a prohibition against sex discrimination to include the protection of lesbian and gay as well as reproductive rights. However, we have learned not to leave anything to chance. The proposed CEA says explicitly what we want."


Now there is no doubt as to why Representative Lindsley Smith is determined to get the ERA passed in Arkansas.  Lindsley Smith received a zero on her voting record on family issues in 2005 by the American Family Association of Arkansas.


Following in NOW's own words is a strategy for the ERA amendment to still be adopted nationwide.  (Same article and link as last one above)


"4. What is the Madison Strategy?

"ANSWER: The "Madison Strategy" calls for trying to get the last three states needed to make up the 38 necessary for passage of the Equal Rights Amendment and then present it to Congress for certification. Some people believe this strategy will work because in 1992, Congress certified the Madison Amendment (which concerns congressional pay raises) as still viable and therefore considered it ratified when passed by the thirty-eighth state 203 years after its original presentation to the states by Congress."








Hit Counter