8 Comments
User's avatar
womanlaw's avatar

Thank you for this informed commentary. "Women's Bill of Rights" sounds so hopeful and inspiring. But the title is so misleading. It's shot through and through with conservative ideology. The whole idea that courts may apply "intermediate scrutiny" of discriminatory laws accepts that women are not constitutionally protected -- if we were, strict scrutiny of such laws would be automatic. Constitutional protection such as through the ERA is what we really need.

Expand full comment
Katherine M Acosta's avatar

Exactly - we need the ERA!

Expand full comment
Hazel-rah's avatar

Yes to the ERA, but the name isn't being passed into law, the law itself is. Superficial concern.

Expand full comment
Valley of the Rogue's avatar

The fact that WoLF and WDI-USA would not support ERA, with arguments right out of the Phyllis Schlafly playbook, means I would never give a dime to either organization. Sadly, those two organizations are completely tainted with this and their association with far right groups.

Expand full comment
Hazel-rah's avatar

Only people more interested in appearances than progress turn down the opportunity for beneficial single-issue alliance.

Expand full comment
Katherine M Acosta's avatar

Appearances?! Real material issues are at stake.

Expand full comment
Hazel-rah's avatar

Perfect is the enemy of good, and guilt-by-association is pure BS.

Luxury-belief purity tests are harmful, as is adhering to left-wing orthodoxy over protecting women and girls.

Expand full comment
Crimson's avatar

I think fear of christian nationalism has a lot of people looking the other way on porno, and all the SA on pornhub too. Otherwise, I cant explain why so many progressives justify it.

Expand full comment