Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Conservatives: OK, so Virginia passed the ERA but it's too late anyway because the deadline passed so we can't possibly ratify the amendment even though, gosh, we really want to. House: OK, we'll just remove the deadline. There you go, fixed   (washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: News, United States Constitution, United States House of Representatives, House floor, proposed amendment, Virginia General Assembly, Nancy Pelosi, Kristan Hawkins, new Democratic majorities  
•       •       •

1782 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Feb 2020 at 1:22 PM (20 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



65 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-02-13 11:47:46 AM  
 
2020-02-13 11:50:50 AM  
Does this mean bras are outlawed?
 
2020-02-13 11:50:50 AM  
And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.
 
2020-02-13 12:11:31 PM  
enshrining protections for women in the Constitution would mean abortion could not be restricted

I realize I say this a lot lately, but WTF?
 
2020-02-13 1:24:31 PM  
i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size
 
2020-02-13 1:24:34 PM  
What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?
 
2020-02-13 1:24:41 PM  

knbber2: Yeah, especially this noted conservative:

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/02/11​/id-like-it-to-start-over-ginsburg-say​s-its-too-late-for-equal-rights-amendm​ent/


She was complaining that due to the deadline, it would be nearly impossible to pass it. Now that it's fixed, her issues with the bill are resolved.

Game on!
 
2020-02-13 1:24:51 PM  
Why won't women just submit to their roles as child-bearers and servants to their men and the Homersexuals simply recognize how wrong and unholy they are?

(if you can't detect the sarcasm, you're a faking idiot)
 
2020-02-13 1:26:04 PM  

fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-02-13 1:26:24 PM  

enry: enshrining protections for women in the Constitution would mean abortion could not be restricted

I realize I say this a lot lately, but WTF?


What part of that exactly is the problem here (no snark)?
 
2020-02-13 1:26:36 PM  

fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?


Pop-quiz hotshot...who enforces those laws?
 
2020-02-13 1:26:51 PM  

AAAAGGGGHHHH: (if you can't detect the sarcasm, you're a faking idiot)


or looking at the current reality in despair.
 
2020-02-13 1:27:58 PM  

wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.


The attack ads will write themselves if he does.

"Mitch McConnell hates women so much he won't even let their voices be heard on the Senate floor."
 
2020-02-13 1:29:43 PM  
Would this amendment do anything or is it just feel-good legislation? Opponents say it would permanently protect abortion, proponents play it down. No matter your opinion, that is something real. I hear 'equal pay' and 'maternity leave' and I hear squishy nonsense.
 
2020-02-13 1:30:07 PM  

yukichigai: wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.

The attack ads will write themselves if he does.

"Mitch McConnell hates women so much he won't even let their voices be heard on the Senate floor."


Except his base will respond with "damn right!  Good work, Mitch!"
 
2020-02-13 1:30:08 PM  
"During debate on the House floor, Republicans leaned on antiabortion and constitutional arguments to oppose the ERA, arguing that enshrining protections for women in the Constitution would mean abortion could not be restricted."

It has always been about controlling women and ensuring they are second class citizens.

Men keep f*cking sh*t up. Maybe it is time to let women have a shot at it, eh?
 
2020-02-13 1:30:12 PM  

drewsfarkthrowaway: fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?

[Fark user image 620x617]


The "P" isn't very close to the "R" on the keyboard, I'm not sure he even knows what he's threadshiatting right now.
 
2020-02-13 1:30:29 PM  

wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.


That is so farking not how things work.
 
2020-02-13 1:32:04 PM  

yukichigai: wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.

The attack ads will write themselves if he does.

"Mitch McConnell hates women so much he won't even let their voices be heard on the Senate floor."


does that really matter though. people vote for him because hes a POS.
 
2020-02-13 1:33:59 PM  

nmrsnr: drewsfarkthrowaway: fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?

[Fark user image 620x617]

The "P" isn't very close to the "R" on the keyboard, I'm not sure he even knows what he's threadshiatting right now.


And we're still not supposed to use the outgassing image for him....

It's just not fair.  :D
 
2020-02-13 1:35:06 PM  
"During debate on the House floor, Republicans leaned on antiabortion and constitutional arguments to oppose the ERA, arguing that enshrining protections for women in the Constitution would mean abortion could not be restricted."

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-02-13 1:35:19 PM  

Subtonic: Would this amendment do anything or is it just feel-good legislation? Opponents say it would permanently protect abortion, proponents play it down. No matter your opinion, that is something real. I hear 'equal pay' and 'maternity leave' and I hear squishy nonsense.


It codifies the rights of women to be treated the same as men. No longer can businesses claim they're 'following the law' when they pay women less for the same work, or don't take the problems unique to women in consideration during their employment.
 
2020-02-13 1:35:38 PM  
I mean, that's great and all, but what about those five or so states who voted to reverse their passage on the ERA?
 
2020-02-13 1:37:04 PM  

khitsicker: yukichigai: wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.

The attack ads will write themselves if he does.

"Mitch McConnell hates women so much he won't even let their voices be heard on the Senate floor."

does that really matter though. people vote for him because hes a POS.


If targeted correctly, yeah. Pitch it as blocking a law that would protect someone's precious daughter/wife/mother from rapists and (((brown people))) and it'll rile up a few people. Probably not the majority of his supporters, but it could be just enough.
 
2020-02-13 1:37:05 PM  
How many states that have long ago already ratified the ERA will move to revoke that to appease the Trump base? This could prove to be the clearest signal yet of how far the US has regressed into a state of conservative pearl clutching.
 
2020-02-13 1:37:47 PM  

fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?


media.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2020-02-13 1:39:19 PM  

enry: enshrining protections for women in the Constitution would mean abortion could not be restricted

I realize I say this a lot lately, but WTF?


It's interesting that they are willing to be explicit about it. They actually admit that if women were equal citizens, conservative/the government would not be able to control womens bodies.
 
2020-02-13 1:39:38 PM  

fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-02-13 1:40:24 PM  

fragMasterFlash: How many states that have long ago already ratified the ERA will move to revoke that to appease the Trump base? This could prove to be the clearest signal yet of how far the US has regressed into a state of conservative pearl clutching.


Can they take back a ratification vote?
 
2020-02-13 1:40:34 PM  

fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?


"We already allow them to do X without it being codified in law. Why do they want a law? It's not like we might decide they shouldn't explicitly barred from performing X in some future law!"

So we should never have bothered ratifying the 15th Amendment so long as the white landowners promised that they wouldn't explicitly stop former slaves from voting? Or maybe we shouldn't have ratified the 19th so long as it was promised that women folk would totally get the opportunity to vote?The whole point of Amendments were to further define the founding document of the government of these United States. The Constitution lays out both laws and rights; codifying a law that explicitly states that everyone has the same rights is LONG overdue.Unless you're a bigot using strawman arguments to try and hamper everyone have the same, documented, legal rights according to the highest legal document in the land. You're not trying to do that are you, Pooter?
 
2020-02-13 1:42:12 PM  
Good. Make them go on record as to why they oppose equality.
 
2020-02-13 1:42:26 PM  

nmrsnr: drewsfarkthrowaway: fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?

[Fark user image 620x617]

The "P" isn't very close to the "R" on the keyboard, I'm not sure he even knows what he's threadshiatting right now.


....On a hunch, I looked something up.  And....  From wikipedia about the Russian alphabet:

Fark user image
 
2020-02-13 1:43:28 PM  

Flashfyr3: fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?

Pop-quiz hotshot...who enforces those laws?


EEOC for one. Which law or law(s) isn't being enforced? Just one, and I'll search around. I have time. (Obviously.)

/If you are talking about equal pay, for equal work I can give you some information that it's no longer the case.
 
2020-02-13 1:44:29 PM  

Nadie_AZ: "During debate on the House floor, Republicans leaned on antiabortion and constitutional arguments to oppose the ERA, arguing that enshrining protections for women in the Constitution would mean abortion could not be restricted."

It has always been about controlling women and ensuring they are second class citizens.

Men keep f*cking sh*t up. Maybe it is time to let women have a shot at it, eh?


This would also grant protections to the LGBTQIA+ community that the administration has been slowly eroding in the name of protecting religious freedom.  They would no longer be able to decline housing, employment, medical services, etc. due to religious objections.  Religious conservatives would no longer be able to lawfully oppress a minority they have been targeting for years. Somehow, this is stifling their rights and oppressing them by granting equal rights to minorities.
 
2020-02-13 1:46:14 PM  

fernt: What does the EPA fix that's broken?

Laws take care of any inequality that's out there. What problem is the EPA solving that hasn't already been solved by legislature?


OK Ms Litella
 
2020-02-13 1:46:26 PM  

thehobbes: fragMasterFlash: How many states that have long ago already ratified the ERA will move to revoke that to appease the Trump base? This could prove to be the clearest signal yet of how far the US has regressed into a state of conservative pearl clutching.

Can they take back a ratification vote?


Yes, and enough states have done so that even if the deadline is extended, there are not enough to pass the ERA.

Even Ginsberg yesterday said that the issue is likely dead because not even she believes, if you extend the deadline, that you should only count the ones who ratified it after the deadline and not the ones who reversed it.
 
2020-02-13 1:48:50 PM  
The Democrats are arguing that the Constitution should make  women and men equal before the Law

The Republicans are arguing that it should not

Vote accordingly, America
 
2020-02-13 1:49:04 PM  

yukichigai: wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.

The attack ads will write themselves if he does.

"Mitch McConnell hates women so much he won't even let their voices be heard on the Senate floor."


I feel like you could just run that as a promotional ad for the Republican party to energize the base.
 
2020-02-13 1:49:31 PM  

drewsfarkthrowaway: knbber2: Yeah, especially this noted conservative:

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/02/11​/id-like-it-to-start-over-ginsburg-say​s-its-too-late-for-equal-rights-amendm​ent/

She was complaining that due to the deadline, it would be nearly impossible to pass it. Now that it's fixed, her issues with the bill are resolved.

Game on!


Better article here.  It's not just the deadline.  She also pointed out that some states have rescinded their ratification.  If you count the states that ratified after the deadline, you have to count the states that pulled their support as well, meaning it's still below the bar.  Deadline or not, the amendment doesn't have 38 states supporting it.
 
2020-02-13 1:52:21 PM  
So really the only question left is can a state choose to cancel its ratification. I would wager the legal answer is no as there is no mechanism provided in the constitution and the only method would be via new amendment canceling the old one. Like prohibition.
 
2020-02-13 1:53:19 PM  
Is the racist VA governor or the rapist VA lieutenant governor on board?  Both Madlibs by the way.  I would post pics, but 'fair and balanced' Fark would delete/censor them.
 
2020-02-13 1:55:29 PM  

Nadie_AZ: "During debate on the House floor, Republicans leaned on antiabortion and constitutional arguments to oppose the ERA, arguing that enshrining protections for women in the Constitution would mean abortion could not be restricted."

It has always been about controlling women and ensuring they are second class citizens.

Men keep f*cking sh*t up. Maybe it is time to let women have a shot at it, eh?


Hmmm, ok, but you only get 70% of a shot.
 
2020-02-13 1:57:08 PM  

Daddy's Big Pink Man-Squirrel: wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.

That is so farking not how things work.


That's exactly how Congress works
 
2020-02-13 2:00:27 PM  

thehobbes: fragMasterFlash: How many states that have long ago already ratified the ERA will move to revoke that to appease the Trump base? This could prove to be the clearest signal yet of how far the US has regressed into a state of conservative pearl clutching.

Can they take back a ratification vote?

Article V (Article 5 - Mode of Amendment)
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.


I don't see where it says a state can take back a ratification or that Congress can set a time limit for ratification.

/there's also nothing that says they can't take back a ratification or that Congress can't set a time limit. the Constitution is kinda funny that way
 
2020-02-13 2:00:46 PM  

wearetheworld: Is the racist VA governor or the rapist VA lieutenant governor on board?  Both Madlibs by the way.  I would post pics, but 'fair and balanced' Fark would delete/censor them.


Gotcha covered.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-02-13 2:01:39 PM  

roddack: So really the only question left is can a state choose to cancel its ratification. I would wager the legal answer is no as there is no mechanism provided in the constitution and the only method would be via new amendment canceling the old one. Like prohibition.


One, "rescinding a ratification" refers specifically to doing it before the amendment is fully ratified.

Two, if a state can ratify an amendment after rejecting it and that ratification is counted, then there is no reasonable argument that the reverse is not permissible.
 
2020-02-13 2:11:01 PM  

harleyquinnical: QIA


*eyeroll*
 
2020-02-13 2:12:08 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Does this mean bras are outlawed?


Mine burned awfully fast. It must have been all the tissue paper.
 
2020-02-13 2:13:22 PM  
Just a reminder.  This is what the republicans and their incompetent bootlickers are against:

"Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_R​i​ghts_Amendment#Resolution_text
 
2020-02-13 2:15:58 PM  

HerptheDerp: yukichigai: wooden_badger: And McConnell will sit on it and it won't go anywhere.

The attack ads will write themselves if he does.

"Mitch McConnell hates women so much he won't even let their voices be heard on the Senate floor."

I feel like you could just run that as a promotional ad for the Republican party to energize the base.


You don't need to energize the Republican base. They already vote every time, and have been running around for the last 3 years like they have a lifetime sildenafil prescription. The problem with them is that if all the blood is in the little head they don't have much left for the big head.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.