The Equal Rights Amendment Redux Bad for Babies
By Judie Brown
Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg spoke at Georgetown University recently. During her remarks, she voiced her support for the Equal Rights Amendment, but her comments have been widely interpreted to mean that she suggested that the process to ratify that amendment would have to start all over again.
Ginsburg, who is a died-in-the-wool feminist, told an audience in 2014:
“If I could choose an amendment to add to the Constitution, it would be the Equal Rights Amendment.” The bottom line is that we can presume that she is signaling to her younger feminist supporters that the battle is far from over.
She is not alone. Recently, during their induction into the Women’s Hall of Fame, fellow feminist icons Justice Sonia Sotomayor, actress Jane Fonda, and attorney Gloria Allred stood in unison in support of more rights for women.
This is only as it should be, given the fact that the Seneca Falls center of feminist history exists to recognize women with feminist agendas, including support for abortion-on-demand. Their inductees include Eleanor Smeal, Rosalynn Carter, and many other women noted for their battle to defend the “rights” of women—including abortion.
So why should we care? Quite simply, the fact is that the culture of death has many tools at its disposal—and the ERA is among them.
Delegate Robert G. Marshall has delved deeply into this question and most recently recorded a series of nine podcasts explaining why every one of us should be concerned about the ERA, including the effect it could have on protecting the act of abortion. As he points out in the 9th installment of the podcast, which is also available on the Charlotte Lozier Institute website in written form: “Because legal abortion has no actual constitutional authority, abortionists and their Congressional allies are convinced they need to add the ERA to the Constitution to keep abortion ‘legal.’ Taking a radical shortcut to this goal is, in their view, self-justifying.”
In addition, Marshall, who is if nothing else a master of history, explains that currently there is a movement afoot on Capitol Hill spearheaded by Jerrold Nadler, the pro-abortion chairman of the house judiciary, to adopt a three-state ratification procedure for the ERA. Nadler, in other words, wants to sidestep the dead ERA ratification process and revive it based on a bogus proposal. Marshall explains:
A three-state ERA ratification process is a revolutionary act on the part of progressives to graft the legal authority for the killing of unborn children into our Constitution. It will set back the cause of life for decades. Inaction or silence in the face of this threat is unacceptable. Act today: the lives of children and the future of Judeo-Christian institutions in America hang in the balance.
This is very bad news, but it is far from being a fait accompli. There is still time to act.
For the sake of the babies, heed the action items at the close of Marshall’s article. Learn more about the tragic effects that the ERA would have on this nation, including the condemnation of millions more preborn children to death. Pass this critical information on to others.
We are compelled to pay close attention to this threat to our preborn brothers and sisters, never forgetting this warning from St. John Paul II: “The root of modern totalitarianism is to be found in the denial of the transcendent dignity of the human person who, as the visible image of the invisible God, is therefore by his very nature the subject of rights which no one may violate—no individual, group, class, nation or State.”
At its core, the principle reason for any ratification of the ERA—bogus or otherwise—is to violate and destroy respect for the transcendent dignity of the human person!
We must stop the ERA!