Fifty Years of the Phyllis Schlafly Report: Liberal “Freedom of Choice” Doesn’t Protect Women From The Draft

With a name like “Equal Rights Amendment,” it’s not too hard to frame the debate to make conservatives look like the bad guys. The rallying cry of feminists was the same as it is today: “Freedom and choice!” They argued that ERA would open new doors for women by giving them more choices in their supposed new-found equality. However, looking below ERA’s surface revealed legislation much more focused on forced compliance than on “choice.” That was the theme of the March 1973 Phyllis Schlafly Report, which explored the question “Should Women Be Drafted?” Of course, this is still a matter of contention to this day, so it is just as important to arm ourselves with the facts to fight the forces of political correctness and social engineering.

Fifty Years of the Phyllis Schlafly Report: What’s Still Wrong with “Equal Rights” For Women

Tornadoes are created by a unique collision between systems of warm and cold air in only the most select of circumstances. Likewise, February 1972 created the ideal conditions for a “perfect storm” that would alter the course of American history forever. Standing in the eye of that storm was a dynamic woman named Phyllis Schlafly. When she wrote the February 1972 issue of the Phyllis Schlafly Report, she did not know that she was going to lead a movement against an overwhelming congressional majority, several acting presidents and their wives, the media, big donors, and a horde of “radical women’s libbers.” However, she still wrote her very first article on the subject as though it would be her last. Each point in the article was a point that she would employ throughout her campaign, and that we can still employ today. Just because the ERA was declared dead by the courts on December 23, 1981 does not mean we do not have to deal with the same ol’ liberal lines today.

Hate Group or Hated Group?

University liberals and the truth have a tenuous relationship at best on many campuses. However, one liberal group at the University of Wisconsin-Madison has gone so far as to call a conservative student group a “hate group” in order to remove the conservative voice from campus. The Student Coalition for Progress pushed a petition to label the school’s chapter of Young Americans for Freedom a “hate group” whose efforts “create a hostile environment on campus.” Of course, that could not be further from the truth. Young Americans for Freedom is nothing more than a conservative student group that seeks to share an alternative viewpoint on a predominantly liberal campus. They do this by hosting conservative speakers and debates about political topics relevant to students.

College Offers Course On Liberalism

We have known for years that public universities slip a liberal agenda into the coursework that they teach our young people. However, Ohio State University is now openly embracing this fact by offering a course which solely focuses on the liberal fallacies that have plagued Leftist academia for years. The course called “Crossing Identity Boundaries” has the express purpose of teaching students about so-called “social justice.” The term “social justice” is a favorite for liberals on college campuses. Social justice is based on the idea that some groups of people will always do better in life than other groups of people, regardless of how hard they try to succeed. This is also called “identity politics.” Of course, this concept is deeply flawed because it ignores the fact that America is the land of opportunity. Although some people may start out with more opportunities because of their parents’ prosperity, America is a place where hard work and ingenuity will allow anyone to succeed in the long run.

Liberal Media Bias Has Deadly Consequence

New studies are showing that liberals and their lackeys in the mainstream media are making our streets less safe. It is hard to turn on the television or look at internet news without hearing the media’s hatred for law enforcement. The media are always quick to pick up the story whenever a new anti-police activist takes to the streets. However, these media sources are don’t reflect the general sentiment that people have for law enforcement. In reality, their goal is to shape those sentiments rather than to represent them fairly.