Phyllis Schlafly – STOP ERA Campaign
According to Phyllis Schlafly, a lawyer and outspoken activist against the Equal Rights Amendment, the ERA is bad for Americans because:
1. ERA is a fraud; it pretends to benefit women and “put women in the Constitution,” but women would receive no benefit from it whatsoever, and the Constitution has been gender-neutral ever since it was written.
2. ERA would require 18-year-old girls to register for the draft and make them subject to conscription and combat duty just like men, and the American people are not going to tolerate this.
3. ERA would transfer large areas of law, now within the domain of the states, to the Federal Government, such as marriage, divorce, family law, child custody, schools, insurance, prisons, etc., and the Federal Government already has grabbed too much power.
However, Schlafly’s claims are, in fact, common misconceptions. Let’s clear a few things up:
1. According to Schlafly “the Constitution has been gender-neutral ever since it was written.” We at NOW believe that the suffragettes who fought ardently and tirelessly for the 19th Amendment to be passed might disagree with such a statement. Remember, when the Constitution was first written, it did not grant women or African-Americans the same rights as white men; it was written in a particularity sexist and racist era of American history. The Constitution is a living, breathing document that has been amended several times since it’s original drafting. By including the ERA now, the Constitution will strictly ensure that no law, federal or state, can be passed that discriminates on the basis of sex.
2. Schlafly believes that Americans will not tolerate the military participation of women and fears that they will be subject to the draft and inescapable combat duty. Once again, she is mistaken. In 1973, the U.S. discontinued the military draft to which men were subject, and it began to assemble a volunteer-based military force. Women’s involvement in the military will be based on their own desires and interests.
3. The ERA would not take away states’ rights. It would simply be one more legal principle among others in the Constitution with which courts evaluate the constitutionality of state and federal actions. The Constitution guarantees the right to life, liberty and property, and the ERA directly ensures that American men and women receive the same civil liberties and treatment.