Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ihuxo!engels
From: engels@ihuxo.UUCP (SME)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics
Subject: Re: ERA
Message-ID: <386@ihuxo.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Oct-84 13:33:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxo.386
Posted: Wed Oct  3 13:33:33 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Oct-84 03:39:55 EDT
References: <319@hou2g.UUCP> <334@pucc-k> <385@ihuxo.UUCP> <376@pucc-k>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 27



>> Having the Equal Rights Amendment would give women a tool to use 
>> in court for proving discrimination.  

>Wrong again! The ERA simply says that no laws shall be written at any
>legislative level discriminating against women. It has no definiton of
>what discrimination is, ie dress codes discussed earlier. It still
>remains up to the court to decide what is discrimination and what isn't.
>
>

You misunderstood. I've know the text of ERA and realize it does not
define discrimination.  The fact that is states clearly that no laws
shall be written at ANY legislative level gives support to all PEOPLE,
regardless of their sex, cuts across state boundaries.
If a law exists that discriminates based on sex, ERA can then be used
as a tool to overturn that law.
It would be interesting to start a survey of the state by state 
discriminatory laws.  I have heard that the common property laws in
Iowa are in favor of the husband, if the wife dies first.
Also, many a loan application states that if you are borrowing
the money in Louisiana and are a married female, your husband
must co-sign.

Anyone got any details or references on existing discriminatory laws?