One of the greatest defenders of the US Constitution in the 20th Century, Phyllis Schlafly, passed away on 5 September aged 92. During 70 years of political activism she did perhaps more to defend the integrity of the Constitution, as well as the dignity of American womanhood, than any other individual.
When asked what was her greatest achievement, Mrs Schlafly replied it was raising her six children. Yet political commentators from both left and right had no doubt about her most significant achievement in American political life – the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in the 1970s, a text which she knew would have mutilated the Constitution. Sadly, many of the worst elements of that amendment were subsequently introduced by the back door through rulings of an activist Supreme Court immune to the wishes of the American people and the vision and values of its Founding Fathers.
When Phyllis Schlafly began her STOP ERA campaign in 1972 (STOP standing for “Stop Taking our Privileges”) the amendment had already been approved by overwhelming majorities in both Houses of Congress, as well as ratified by 28 of the required 38 States in the Union. She rightly idenfied the inherent danger embedded in the amendment, the denial of an objective truth by claiming that there was no difference between men and women.
Having truth on her side, Mrs Schlafly was not deterred by these odds and her grass-roots campaign of common-sense ordinary Americans against the coastal elites finds echos in the uprising we witness today in support of Donald Trump. She was a visionary who campaigned against what has subsequently become known as Gender Theory – the notion that gender is merely a social construct. Mrs Schlafly rejected radical feminism which sought to deny women their right to be fully women, including the dignity of motherhood. Even today’s “toilet wars” where the gender totalitarians aim to force women and girls to accept men using their toilets, were foreseen by her.
In its attempt to mainstream its destructive gender ideology in the entire legal framework, parallels can be drawn between the ERA in the United States of the 1970s and the EU’s “Equal Treatment Directive” (ETD) of our time. Both are founded on a denial of fundamental truths about human nature and would in fact limit true inherent rights while purporting to be defending them.
The odds are similarly stacked in the case of the ETD which has been approved by the European Parliament and endorsed by a majority of the Member States, though the required unanimity in the Council has not yet been achieved, despite persistent bullying by the LGBTI and other radical lobbies. So there is still hope of defeating this totalitarian proposal. Perhaps we in Europe can turn to the late great Phyllis Schlafly – now gone to her eternal reward – for inspiration in the struggle for truth in politics.