2008051200 WHY ISN’T AFFIRMATIVE ACTIONS & QUOTAS VIOLATIONS OF THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES?

The Equal Rights Amendment doesn’t specify a race, nor does it specify a sex that are to be protected from discrimination. And Affirmative Action & Quotas can’t give preference to any race or sex without regard to merit without preemptively or simultaneously depriving thereof from someone else that would, or even may, be entitled thereof based on their merit. Equal opportunity for Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness is actually subverted by Affirmative Actions & Quotas.

Where in the founding documents of the United States of America do they advocate for the supplanting of Equal Opportunity and replacement of it with Equitable Outcome (equity)? Personally I don’t care for Spencer Tracy’s acting for the most part. And with a special dislike for the 1952 film "PLYMOUTH ADVENTURE" starring Spencer Tracy, Gene Tierney – it’s just a bad movie. But out of that whole movie there was but one really good line of dialog & I can’t find a clip of it for you – irritating! You’d think that’d be the clip to promulgate – but no. That one line I looked for expressed the promise of America & the new world succinctly as it’s possible to do so. So I paraphrase they saying that: They were coming to a new world for a new life wherein a man could earn a living for himself without having to pluck it from the throat of his fellow man - in short, For Equal Opportunity! Equal opportunity to make ones way in life without having to deprive others of that same right to do so for themselves. There’s nothing there about promise of Equity of Outcome.

There is one shortfall I may perceive? That possibly being that Equality of Species may needed to have been included as woman is so unlike man she could almost be considered a different species altogether. But then you’d be getting into animal rights before you know it. It just seems to me that the word ‘race’ could or should be more broadly defined so as to include womanhood as a race rather than a sex or gender. And it seems like that would be appealing to Feminism considering that they say that: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Or doesn’t it seem more realistic to be discussing relations between a race of women & a race of Men?

Young Men, consider #MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) Galt - #MGTOW is nothing more than: 1 Corinthians 7:27 “Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.” (kjv) Young Men, you as a gender no longer have obligation of any sort to provide for or protect womankind - “To thin own self be true.”~ William Shakespeare (Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 3).

Rational Philosophy
“Jordan Peterson - Diversity, Inclusivity & Equity”