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?