The biggest problems were oddly still problems that face us today. If the ammendment had passed, it would have essentially legalized gay marriage and gay adoption – in the late 70s and early 80s there was quite a bit of resistance to this from all across the spectrum. The other major problem was that if passed, women would have to register for the draft – something still being done then – and would be required to go into combat as ground troups. Again, something still debated today.

The Equal Rights Ammendment as written basically demanded total androgony. That is why it failed

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. The ERA was before my time, and I have been saddened as I have learned more about it. I think it is interesting to note the parallels with the recent marriage ammendment fight. I wish I had more time to make a more detailed response, but am getting ready to head out the door to the Exponent Retreat.

I have really appreciated what you have to say and would love to hear more from you. I think this is an important discussion to have- and will try to respond more when I get back.

As I’ve done more research on the Mormon Church’s opposition, including the involvement of a mormon federal judge who made a critical ruling against the amendment and the Church’s heavy, well-publicized opposition that greatly contributed to the amendment not gaining the necessary state ratifications, I’ve become more depressed about the Church’s view of women. In addition, I found myself apologizing (in my head) over and over to Alice Paul for my Church’s involvement in defeating an Amendment that she fought all of her life to try and get passed.

How could we oppose an Amendment that simply strives to eliminate discrimination based upon gender? How could we, as Mormon women, fight against such an amendment? I find myself believing that the mature, mormon women of that generation (1970s and early 1980s) who participated in the public opposition or merely remained silent owe a grand apology to msyelf, my daughters, my granddaughters, my sisters, my girlfriends, and all future generations of women.

How could we (Mormon women) have participated like we did? Can someone help me to find a little understanding? I don’t think I can find much peace over this, but maybe more understanding from someone who lived through this time (as an adult) would help.

It does make me think of the parallel to the opposition of gay marriage. The same rationale was used in the opposition to the ERA that is now being used regarding gay marriage–that it endangers the natural family. I don’t know about any of you, but I believe the greatest danger to my two, beautiful daughters is that society and our religion still discriminates against them because of their gender–something that would be at least somewhat alleviated by the ERA.

And, when thinking about the Church’s recent involvement for the Marriage Amendment, I begin to ask myself, “Will future generations look back to us and ask for an apology from those of us who participated in or merely remained silent to the anti-gay legislation our Church endorsed?”

I know I’m a radical but I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Kristy, I very much appreciate your comments as well.

I would like to be made of the firmer stuff that Kiskilili, Kristy, and numerous others that post here are made of. I am decidedly uncomfortable with sticking my neck out, and yet, I see that much good can come from it.

But in more recent times the assumption is often made that feminism and religion belong on different sides of the spectrum. (Braude wrote _Transforming the Faiths of Our Fathers_ in part to demonstrate empirically that there are many committed to both.) It’s interesting that in our own era, we typically perceive our feminist and our religious convictions as potential hindrances to one other.

In any case, I love Kristy’s suggestions. Count me in on any letter-writing project; I’ve already sent a number of letters to Salt Lake (probably to no avail), and I’m happy to send more. I really don’t mind sticking my neck out.

I do know the talk by President Hinckley (I assume you are making reference to) regarding that there isn’t any place in the scriptures where Christ prayed to a Heavenly Mother, and therefore, there is no precedence for doing so. However, I think it is interesting to note that there was nothing in the scriptures saying that black men should have the priesthood or that polygamy should be discontinued. Moreover, in these cases, there were scriptural references to uphold both policies/practices. However, prophets sought revelation (but only after much social pressure and, thus, they had a heightened awareness) and then we made bold changes, in spite of scriptural/doctrinal teachings of the past.

In any case, I find a serious contradiction when we justify our refusal to change a practice due to scripture when we have changed many practices/policies in spite of scripture.

We are a church of ongoing revelation. Are our leaders seeking revelation on the matter of a Mother in Heaven and the eternal roles of women or are they dismissing the issue altogether because there is no scriptural precedence?

I don’t know the answer but I think change is possible, but there has to be some pressure in order for this to come about. Revelation is only given after it is sought for; Prophets will only seek for revelation after they are aware that there is a need; Prophets can’t be aware that there is a need until there is a wide-spread conversation taking place, which places awareness and pressure on their shoulders. I believe there is a chain-reaction and creating a large conversation is the first step that leads to revelation and change. We are responsible for creating the wide-spread conversation and that is why I love blogs like this.

Sometimes it is hard for me to believe that an essay such as this was published in the late 1800′s in our official Church publication for women. It leaves me asking, “What has happened to Mormon women?” How did we go from this pro-ERA sentiment to being one of the most powerful opponents to the Equal Rights Amendment?

So, how can we influence change within the Church? There are probably many ways, but I believe some are far more effective than others. Here are my ideas on what must be done:

1)We have to “get the word out”. Most feminist women in the Church are out there feeling isolated and alone, having no idea that there are thousands just like them who want to see change. If one feels isolated and alone in their opinions, they are likely to remain silent or leave the Church because there is no hope for the change they desire.

2) We must overcome our fear of being reprimanded or disciplined by Church authorities. This is a big one as we often weigh the risk of perceived “eternal and social suicide” with the desire to make real change for ourselves, our daughters, our granddaughters and all women of the Church (The Church has used ex-communication as an effective tool to cool off the feminist movement within the Church–i.e. Margaret Tuscano, Janice Allred, etc. We can’t let this scare us anymore–we have to move forward. In a Church that teaches absolute obedience to Priesthood Authority, this is a very scary leap for most women to make.)

3) My belief is that the quickest way to attain change involves coordinating, standing and acting together. I have this pipe dream that if you could get just 3 women from every ward in the Church (I think this is a reasonable number) to send a form letter to their bishop/stake president/general authorities/prophet on the same day, in which we articulately and clearly outlined our concerns regarding gender inequality within the Church and demanded a “voice” and specific changes within the religion we have always supported, I think we would get the Church’s attention and I don’t think they would excommunicate thousands of women (safety in numbers). The trick would be addressing each of these items and coming up with a letter that all would support and endorse.

However, Darron Smith, who edited “Black and Mormon”, recently stated that “there isn’t an activist bone in most Mormon’s bodies”. There may not be now, but there sure used to be as is evident by the women involved in the Suffrage movement here in Utah. So, I guess I hope that the time will ripen when women and men will rise up again and fight for the women they love. At some point, I believe we HAVE TO STICK OUR NECKS OUT.

Yes! (Finally). The first of an expected two-part volume was recently released: An Advocate for Women: The Public Life of Emmeline B. Wells, by Carol Cornwall Madsen

This volume deals almost strictly with her work as editor of Exponent, women’s rights activist, and suffrage leader.