Posted on 03/01/2017 11:42:09 AM PST by VegasVictor
The Nevada Senate will soon consider a bill that would overturn Nevada’s ban on female genital mutilation, and Senate Democrats are tripping over themselves to vote for it.
Why would anyone support rolling back a ban on something Nevada law defines as sexual abuse?
That’s one of the questions supporters of Senate Joint Resolution 2, the “Equal Rights Amendment” to the U.S. Constitution, should answer before voting on it as early as Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at reviewjournal.com ...
Anything to get their nose up a Mooslims a$$!!!
What about MGM? Happens to guys all the time; not a peep!
Well since you didn't mention Pizza you probably will get a pass.
Simple solution! Legislate the same thing in the US Congress. The state law will then be nullified.
Read the story, y’all.
The reporter is hypothesizing.
He’s saying that IF the ERA had passed (remember the ERA?) it would have legalized things like “female circumcision” and the military draft for women.
As to whether Nevada is truly resurrecting the ERA, it’s unclear.
Perhaps Nevada FReepers can weigh in.
Not fake news, but the headline is gotcha journalism... but also fair in a way.
Nevada is considering passing the Equal Rights Amendment. Recent critics have pointed out that the ERA would have one consequence its founders certainly never would have considered: Under the ERA, female genial mutilation could not be prohibited.
So it’s not as though supporters are directly pushing to allow female genital mutilation.
On the other hand, supporters are insisting that it’s merely a symbolic measure, since the ERA has expired. I wouldn’t trust them. There’s nothing in the plain-text reading of the Constitution that allows for Congress temporarily or conditionally authorizing an amendment. It’s a two-step process: Congress proposes the amendment, then three-quarters of the states must ratify it. I wouldn’t trust them not to argue that the expiration is illegal.
Mind you, if Congress conditionally authorizes an amendment and the amendment fails to meet that condition, then I’d argue that Congress never authorized the amendment.
Here’s how little you can trust the lefties on this one: The LVJR cites 35 states (out of 38) passed the ERA before it expired. You’d think, therefore, it’s only 3 short. It’s 8 short. 5 have rescinded their ratification. The fact that the left is acting as if it’s only 3 short suggests that they would dispute the ability of a state to rescind ratification.
The difference between circumcision and FGM is that male gets some loose skin removed, while FGM is the removal of far more than just the clitoral hood. It’s the full removal of the clitoris itself.
To compare the two on more equal terms would require the discussion of amputating the glans of penises and nobody’s calling for that to happen.
We can’t allow the left to make a knowingly inaccurate comparison.
Uh-oh. This is worse than I imagined:
On December 23, 1981, in Idaho v. Freeman, the United States District Court for the District of Idaho ruled that the rescissions—all of which occurred before the original 1979 ratification deadline—were valid and that the ERA’s deadline extension was unconstitutional. The National Organization for Women appealed both rulings. On October 4, 1982, in NOW v. Idaho, 459 U.S. 809 (1982), the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the ruling in Idaho v. Freeman and declared the entire matter moot on the grounds that the ERA was dead for the reason given by the Administrator of General Services that the ERA had not received the required number of ratifications (38), so that “the Amendment has failed of adoption no matter what the resolution of the legal issues presented here.”
Why vacate the ruling, rather than simply calling it moot? The Supreme Court, in effect, removed the precedent that states can rescind ratifications.
Amazing! This is what happens when Islam takes over your Party.
I am just astonished that you actually need a ban on this. Anyone who does this should be hauled away and charged with a sexual violation and torture.
More cultural diversity, Muslim style.....
QUIT IT...If so, line up all the Dem Women, These people are INSANE..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.