Skip to main content

Why do we still need the Equal Rights Amendment to be approved and added to the United States Constitution?

First of all, we have to recognize that there are many people who would say that we do not need an equal rights amendment to the Constitution.  Some of these are conservatives who believe that women already have enough rights or that we should be careful about giving women equal rights because it would lead to women being drafted into the military or men being allowed in women’s bathrooms.  Others are not necessarily conservative but they believe that the problems that women face today are not really because of legal discrimination and would not be solved by an equal rights amendment.  For example, women tend to make less money than men today, but that is largely not because of any conscious discrimination.  Instead, women tend to cluster in poorly-paid jobs and women in good jobs often do not climb as high because they have to take time off to raise children.  An equal rights amendment would not solve either of these problems.  For these reasons, there are many people who would disagree with the premise of this question.

However, let us assume that we do need an equal rights amendment.  There are two main reasons for this.  First, an amendment would subject laws that discriminate on the basis of sex to the same “strict scrutiny” standard as laws that discriminate on the basis of race.   Right now, laws that treat men and women differently are not subjected to this level of scrutiny.  This means that it is easier for a law to be upheld by courts if it discriminates on the basis of sex than if it does so on the basis of race.  Second, and perhaps more importantly, an equal rights amendment would send a message, even if it would not have that much of a legal impact.  Right now, our Constitution grants greater protection from discrimination on the basis of race.  This might send the message that discrimination on the basis of sex is simply not such a big deal.  It implies that we don’t need to care enough to ban such discrimination in the Constitution.  If we added such an amendment, it would make a statement about our values.  It would clearly state that we believe that sexual discrimination is just as bad as racial discrimination.  This might not have much of a legal, tangible effect, but it would send a message that would eventually help to change our society.


For more arguments in favor of an equal rights amendment, please follow the links below.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the meaning of "juggling fiends" in Macbeth?

Macbeth is beginning to realize that the three witches have been deceiving him since he first encountered them. Like jugglers, they have kept changing their forecasts in order create confusion. This is particularly apparent when the Second Apparition they raise in Act IV,   Scene 1 tells him that no man of woman born can overcome him in hand-to-hand battle--and then Macbeth finds himself confronted by the one man he has been avoiding out of a... Macbeth is beginning to realize that the three witches have been deceiving him since he first encountered them. Like jugglers, they have kept changing their forecasts in order create confusion. This is particularly apparent when the Second Apparition they raise in Act IV,   Scene 1 tells him that no man of woman born can overcome him in hand-to-hand battle--and then Macbeth finds himself confronted by the one man he has been avoiding out of a sense of guilt, and that man tells him: Despair thy charm. And let the angel whom thou still hast serve...
Post a Comment
Read more

What are some external and internal conflicts that Montag has in Fahrenheit 451?

 Montag, the protagonist of Fahrenheit 451, faces both external and internal conflicts throughout the novel. Some examples of these conflicts are: External Conflicts: Conflict with the society: Montag lives in a society that prohibits books and critical thinking. He faces opposition from the government and the people who enforce this law. Montag struggles to come to terms with the fact that his society is based on censorship and control. Conflict with his wife: Montag's wife, Mildred, is completely absorbed in the shallow and meaningless entertainment provided by the government. Montag's growing dissatisfaction with his marriage adds to his external conflict. Conflict with the fire captain: Montag's superior, Captain Beatty, is the personification of the oppressive regime that Montag is fighting against. Montag's struggle against Beatty represents his external conflict with the government. Internal Conflicts: Conflict with his own beliefs: Montag, at the beginning of th...
Post a Comment
Read more

In A People's History of the United States, why does Howard Zinn feel that Wilson made a flimsy argument for entering World War I?

"War is the health of the state," the radical writer Randolph Bourne said, in the midst of the First World War. Indeed, as the nations of Europe went to war in 1914, the governments flourished, patriotism bloomed, class struggle was stilled, and young men died in frightful numbers on the battlefields-often for a hundred yards of land, a line of trenches. -- Chapter 14, Page 350, A People's History of the United States Howard Zinn outlines his arguments for why World War I was fought in the opening paragraph of Chapter 14 (referenced above). The nationalism that was created by the Great War benefited the elite political and financial leadership of the various countries involved. Socialism, which was gaining momentum in Europe, as was class struggle, took a backseat to mobilizing for war. Zinn believes that World War I was fought for the gain of the industrial capitalists of Europe in a competition for capital and resources. He states that humanity itself was punished by t...
Post a Comment
Read more