Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!ginosko!usc!ucla-cs!uci-ics!tittle From: dgross@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (David Gross) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: AA / ERA Message-ID: <1989Oct18.013043.15864@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> Date: 18 Oct 89 05:48:16 GMT Sender: tittle@ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle) Reply-To: David Gross Organization: Youth International Party Lines: 23 Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu Last year, I started a men's issues group at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. One of our activities this year has been to try to put together some sort of "MANifesto" about what our group stands for. Among the planks which I proposed was one in support of the Equal Rights Amendment. One of the group members objected to this on the grounds that such an amendment would codify a huge AA-enforcing, quota-generating bureaucracy. I've heard just the opposite: That once the ERA is passed, there will be no constitutional basis for discriminating on the basis of sex -- even for quotas or affirmative action. Is there a consensus of legal opinion on this? When I proposed the plank, I was more concerned about issues such as the draft rather than AA, but now this intrigues me... --dgross@polyslo.calpoly.edu -- -- Dave Gross (dgross@polyslo.calpoly.edu) -- "A little rebellion now and then is a good thing." -- Thomas Jefferson