Because constitutional equality is so “retro”

There’s a new effort to pass the Equal Rights Amendment. Nice.

The amendment, which came three states short of enactment in 1982, has been introduced in five state legislatures since January. Yesterday, House and Senate Democrats reintroduced the measure under a new name — the Women’s Equality Amendment — and vowed to bring it to a vote in both chambers by the end of the session.
The renewed push to pass the ERA, which passed the House and Senate overwhelmingly in 1972 and was ratified by 35 states before skidding to a halt, highlights liberals’ renewed sense of power since November’s midterm elections. From Capitol Hill to Arkansas, legislators said they are seizing a political opportunity to enshrine women’s rights in the Constitution.

But naturally, some women think equality is just plain silly.
Eagle Forum President Phyllis Schlafly has been making the rounds testifying against the ERA.

In the 1970s, Schlafly and others argued that the ERA would lead to women being drafted by the military and to public unisex bathrooms. Today, she warns lawmakers that its passage would compel courts to approve same-sex marriages and deny Social Security benefits for housewives and widows.
“It’s very retro. It had 10 years of debate, very passionate debate for 10 years, and it was defeated,” Schlafly said in an interview yesterday.”

Hows about we make a rule that the amendment would guarantee equality for all women except Phyllis Schlafly? Then everyone wins.
By the way, here’s the oh-so-controversial text of the amendment.

UPDATE: Read Shakes for more.