ConstitutiondictatorFeaturedJoe BidenKamala Harrislaw

Rambling, Raving Biden Declares that the Equal Rights Amendment Is in the Constitution ‘NOW’ – Twitchy

January 17, 2025
0 0
0
0
Rambling, Raving Biden Declares that the Equal Rights Amendment Is in the Constitution 'NOW' – Twitchy
0
Shares

Earlier today we told you how Biden declared via The Social Media Site Formerly Known As Twitter (‘TSMSFKA Twitter’) that the Equal Rights Amendment was part of the Constitution, which would end discrimination against women in the law. We provided all kinds of background on that announcement there, so if you are looking for more context, please go there.





But now, we have video of him ranting about his decision:

Ugh, we would feel more sorry for the way he stumbles all over the place, if he wasn’t going out in such a vicious manner. After all, by a certain age, we all see relatives fail with age and it is so hard to watch, but he is also doing real damage to this country on the way out the door. This author will renew our call to have the Biden administration investigated to determine whether and when he was incompetent, with an eye toward declaring certain actions null and void. This is the most damaging lame duck period in our memory.

And this might not be seen by the courts as any action at all. To quote from Jonathan Turley, again:

So as much as Biden is ranting that this is the law of the land, NOW, there’s a real question of whether anything changed at all today from a legal standpoint. 

Recommended

In addition to that ranting, Vice President and failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris also chimed in:

And naturally, we have lots of reactions to all of this nonsense:

Exactly what we were thinking, GMTA and all that.





Hey, if just shouting a thing makes it so, then two can play at that game.

Indeed, there is an old saying among lawyers on how to argue in court. There are many versions of it, but it generally goes like this:

If the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If the law is on your side, pound the law. And if neither is on your side, pound the table.

Joe Biden is pounding the table in that speech.

They’re probably seal-clapping because equal rights or something.





Seriously, this alleged ratification took place about a year before Biden was inaugurated on January 27, 2020. Why did he wait until there was three days left in his term?

Yeah, we all know why.

Indeed, if you look at the text of the proposed amendment, it says, in relevant part:

SEC. 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Thus, it goes into effect two years after ratification. So… when is that, Joe? Is it two years from today? Or on January 27, 2022—meaning two years after it was allegedly ratified in Virginia?

Sixty-nine hours? As Triple-Jump would say: ‘Nice!’

We will answer that. Every time an amendment to the Constitution creates or recognizes a right, it is anti-democratic, including this proposed amendment. Literally any law that treats men and women differently at all, would be overturned even if each of those laws were passed democratically. This almost certainly includes every law allowing us to have segregation between men and women in bathrooms, locker rooms, prisons, and sports. That would be one way to end the debate over whether men who claim they are women can enter spaces reserved exclusively for women—there would no longer be spaces exclusively for women. Everything would have to be unisex under this amendment. And besides highlighting a major reason why this is a bad idea, this is also anti-democratic.





Now, to a certain extent, a certain amount of anti-democratic elements in our constitution is justified. We would be the first to defend the fact that the First Amendment prohibits the government from silencing critics, even if a majority of Americans want them to do it.

But what Biden is trying to do by fiat, rather than by consent. The fact is, this so-called amendment was not ratified within the time limit, and you can’t call it ratified unless you count states that rescinded their votes. So, one man is effectively attempting to amend the Constitution, to overturn multiple state and federal laws. That is tyrannical, even if you think ‘it’s for a good cause.’ To quote C.S. Lewis: ‘Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.’

Indeed, many old laws prohibiting women from participation in the legal profession was designed to protect women from that ‘awful’ occupation. This author is firmly in the camp of the old-school ‘wear the pants’ feminism that believes that if women can do a job without lowering relevant standards, they should be allowed to.

Finally, two people decided go meta:





He’s got a point. Laughs.

RELATED: BREAKING: Supreme Court Makes Decision on TikTok ‘Ban’

BREAKING: Lame Duck Biden Attempts to Declare That the Equal Rights Amendment Is Ratified

WATCH: Wikipedia Co-Founder Describes How the Site Turned to Leftist Garbage

Joe Biden’s Potential Incompetence Threatens Chaos in Our System (And We Should Embrace the Chaos)

Ana Navarro-Cárdenas Gets Wrecked on Bad Pardon History (And Let’s Talk about Hunter’s Pardon)




Source link

Related Posts

Load More Posts Loading...No More Posts.
© 2025 ariseright
© 2025 ariseright
Your text