Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

In reply to the discussion: Just think... [View all]

Cerridwen

(13,262 posts)
5. Section 2.
Wed May 30, 2012, 02:37 PM
May 2012
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.


That section was used in many states to rescind the franchise that was slowly expanding for women. It was the first use of the word "male" in any piece of the constitution and it was used to justify discrimination against women just as surely as defining slaves as "3/5"ths human would be used against blacks; regardless of their "free" or "slave" state.

I believe this is also the amendment that has been used to justify the "personhood" of the legal contrivance known as "corporation."

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Just think... [View all] Playinghardball May 2012 OP
14th amendment. No state shall deny to any person the equal protection of the law. TheWraith May 2012 #1
Then one wonders why the 19th was necessary tkmorris May 2012 #2
Probably because Meiko May 2012 #4
Then why isn't gay marriage allowed in all states? sinkingfeeling May 2012 #3
Good question Meiko May 2012 #6
Because the SCOTUS hasn't ruled on it yet. TheWraith May 2012 #8
You just explained why your post #1 was demonstrably incorrect tkmorris May 2012 #11
Section 2. Cerridwen May 2012 #5
Puke Angelshare1 May 2012 #7
Oh look. We have a semi literate troll in our midst DisgustipatedinCA May 2012 #9
Actually, Angelshare has been a member since 2009. CaliforniaPeggy May 2012 #12
I'd like to know how THEY (Angelshare1) know Plucketeer May 2012 #13
He's not technically correct... CaliforniaPeggy May 2012 #14
IS it safe to assume Plucketeer May 2012 #16
It would be for me! CaliforniaPeggy May 2012 #18
kind of like meteors, meteorites, and meteoroids, eh? nt sudopod May 2012 #17
So you're saying that technically Plucketeer May 2012 #19
lolz nt sudopod May 2012 #20
Ummm, no. progressoid May 2012 #10
Guns aren't protected by a constitutional amendment try again. jp11 May 2012 #15
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Just think...»Reply #5