<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ratified Amendments</title>
	<link>http://ziphstric.com/blog/archives/2005/02/25/ratified-amendments/</link>
	<description>and other exclamations by the accidental taoist</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:39:15 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Prentiss Riddle</title>
		<link>http://ziphstric.com/blog/archives/2005/02/25/ratified-amendments/#comment-572</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:43:17 -0800</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ziphstric.com/blog/archives/2005/02/25/ratified-amendments/#comment-572</guid>
					<description>The answer is yes.  There were plenty of proposed amendments along the way which passed Congress but didn't get two thirds of the states to agree within a ten-year span.  The last one, I think, may have been the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.now.org/issues/economic/eratext.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Equal Rights Amendment&lt;/a&gt; in the 70s, which would have forbidden discrimination on the basis of gender.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>The answer is yes.  There were plenty of proposed amendments along the way which passed Congress but didn&#8217;t get two thirds of the states to agree within a ten-year span.  The last one, I think, may have been the <a href="http://www.now.org/issues/economic/eratext.html" rel="nofollow">Equal Rights Amendment</a> in the 70s, which would have forbidden discrimination on the basis of gender.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
