The Constitution And Women’s Rights
– By Lisa Rutherford –
I find our country’s Constitution fascinating as, apparently, many others do, too, since it is a constant source of news, conversation, and political battles. Although created on September 17, 1787, it took several years for the Constitution to be ratified by all states. Federalists, who supported the new Constitution, wanted the document sent to the states for ratification with “congressional approbation,” – approval – while Antifederalists wanted amendments added before sending them to states for ratification. Since its ratification, it has been amended twenty-seven times, which includes ten amendments to the United States Bill of Rights and the three Reconstruction Amendments, also known as the Civil War Amendments: Amendment Thirteen, Amendment Fourteen, and Amendment Fifteen.
It’s clear that during the Constitution’s creation and during its ratification, there was a lot of disagreement over the document, its content, its meaning, and how it would affect this great new nation. During the Constitution’s life, there have been many court cases, including those considered landmark cases. Those who make it sound as though what the framers intended is clear and concise are trying to simplify what is a very complex document. In fact, the earliest landmark case, Hylton v. US, was in 1796, not long after the new document had been ratified.
My current interest in the Constitution relates to a play being performed in November from the 9th to the 18th at the Center for the Arts at Kayenta. The play titled What the Constitution Means to Me is a reflection of the now 40-something-year-old author, who, as a 15-year-old girl, was vying for an American Legion Oratory Contest scholarship. She was prompted to debate constitutional issues and how the Constitution related to her life. The setting for the play is the American Legion Hall in Wenatchee, Washington. The main character, Heidi, is asked to speak extemporaneously on the Fourteenth Amendment, Section One, specifically explaining how that has affected her life. For those of you who don’t remember what Section One says, here’s a refresher:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The Fourteenth Amendment was passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868.
Since that time, women’s rights have been shunted aside. Efforts to amend the Constitution have faced challenges over nine decades. In fact, throughout the history of the world, laws including the Code of Hammurabi (1800 BCE), the Roman Code of Paterfamilias (circa 27 BCE), Renaissance France, and eighteenth-century England have generally neglected women’s rights, and that practice came through the ages to our Constitution and the laws it has spawned. To that point, Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment clearly specifies “male”. Thus, it excluded females from voting.
SECTION 2
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male (emphasis added) inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male (emphasis added) citizens shall bear to the whole number of male (emphasis added) citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
However, Section 1 of the Twenty-sixth Amendment did correct the “male” reference:
The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.
Although the Twenty-sixth Amendment, passed in March 1971, did eliminate reference to “male”, that was done not so much in deference to women but to change the voting age because prior to that, young men were not able to vote due to age but were being sent to war, which became a political issue.
In 1972 Congress finally passed the Equal Rights Amendment which recognized women’s equal rights to men, but the ERA has not been ratified by all states due to a variety of reasons. So, protection of women’s rights continues to be stymied.
After the play’s main character, Heidi, details her knowledge of the Constitution and her family’s experience with domestic matters revealing how little protection it affords, she is joined on stage by a young student, and they debate whether the Constitution should be abolished or kept.
The play has been performed in many locations including Broadway and includes participation by the audience, which might be very interesting, to say the least. I look forward to attending the play and learning more about the Constitution and the protection it provides – or rather does not provide – for all Americans.
Viewpoints and perspectives expressed throughout The Independent are those of the individual contributors. They do not necessarily reflect those held by the staff of The Independent or our advertising sponsors. Your comments, rebuttals, and contributions are welcome in accordance with our Terms of Service. Please be respectful and abide by our Community Rules. If you have privacy concerns you can view our Privacy Policy here. Thank you!
Click here to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or a Letter to the Editor
I fully support equal rights for women and they are elaborately protected by dozens of federal and state laws and vigorously enforced in all jurisdictions in the United States. A long list of those laws Is provided in the following article:
https://suindependent.com/the-unneeded-equal-rights-amendment/
The Equal Rights Amendment is purely symbolic and would do nothing to advance women’s rights. I challenge you to name a single right that is abridged in any way or otherwise not available to women in this country.
Howard, apparently, the woman who created the play which my article describes does not feel that is the case nor does her personal experience bear that out. Perhaps you can attend the play and try to make your case there since there will be audience participation. Or, you could attend an AAUW (American Association of University Women) luncheon with me and make your case to all those women. Just as it is difficult for women to fully understand the inequities that some men may experience, so it is difficult for men to understand that which women deal with. And, as your article describes, while many inroads have been achieved by women over my lifetime, many are still struggling. As for Utah, that you reference in your article, Utah ranks 50th in the nation when it comes to paycheck fairness. 50th! There are many reasons for that, but the fact is that many women still perceive the unfairness of the system in their lives. In fact, one can look at the abortion decision to see clearly how women’s lives are ruled by others.
Lisa, I readily agree that women do experience discrimination in a variety of often subtle ways. My wife is quick to point that she feels “talked down to” on occasion and asks me to act on our behalf in certain situations.
Nonetheless, these slights — both real and perceived — will not and cannot be remedied with a Constitutional amendment anymore than continuing subtle and occasionally overt discrimination against blacks, Hispanics, Asians and other minorities have been or can be eliminated with new legislation or amendments. Nothing less than a change of heart by those prone to discrimination, one by one, will improve circumstances for women and all minorities.
BTW, Utah was second only to Wyoming in affording women the right to vote in state elections in 1893, far in advance of the 19th Amendment, ratified in 1920. As for equal pay, Utah’s predominant culture encourages women to stay at home to raise children when possible. Many do, entering the workforce in middle age and as a result, often in entry-level positions. Average pay is a weak indicator of our quality of life: we’re ranked as first in the nation in happiness!
Howard, I agree that the Constitution cannot change people’s hearts and minds, but it’s a good thing that our Founding Fathers did not let that stop them from creating a document that allows amending. If we had counted on people’s hearts and minds to stop the slavery that was tearing this nation apart, where would we be?
As for Utah’s pay gap, yes, many women do stay out of the workforce for long periods, and that does have an effect. But, here is one woman’s take on the matter: https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2022/2/28/22950908/utah-gender-wage-gap-women-paid-less-than-men-for-equal-work. So, perhaps we have gone backward since the 1800s when men recognized the value of women fairly.
As for the state’s “happiness” ranking, polls can be skewed depending on who is answering the questions. The fact that women may be happy, doesn’t dismiss the fact that they may still feel unequally treated and want better.
It seems that all this points to the fact I made in my article. The Constitution has been argued since before, during and after its creation and will continue to be argued…and changed.
Not sure which is better, the original article or the comment section. This article packs a punch especially if you get faked out initially reading section 2. Of course the next paragraph mentions the wording “men” was changed later. I call that a juke… when in football, a runner spins off or around a defensive player. Made me think how far we have come in terms of equal rights from the good ole boy days. Great job Lisa –
Always like to hear from you, Fulcanelli. I enjoy hearing from Howard, too, but good to know someone else is reading my pieces, also!