Ken Burns Argues One Vote Can Change History | NYT Opinion

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
  • Harnessing the power of its new Democratic majority, the Virginia legislature is poised to vote this week to become the 38th of the 38 states needed to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, which would make women’s rights explicit in the Constitution. In the video Op-Ed above, the filmmaker Ken Burns compares this historic moment with the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote 100 years ago.
    Subscribe: bit.ly/U8Ys7n
    More from The New York Times Video: nytimes.com/video
    ----------
    Whether it's reporting on conflicts abroad and political divisions at home, or covering the latest style trends and scientific developments, New York Times video journalists provide a revealing and unforgettable view of the world. It's all the news that's fit to watch.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 93

  • @milhouse14
    @milhouse14 4 роки тому +32

    Virginia just passed the ERA.👍🎉🎊

  • @dashcamvideos6742
    @dashcamvideos6742 4 роки тому +26

    Virginia just ratified it today! 1/15/2020

  • @blondjon
    @blondjon 4 роки тому +54

    ERA will pass ....FINALLY. Why would anyone oppose such a basic fundamental set of rights?

    • @fatpotatoe6039
      @fatpotatoe6039 4 роки тому +1

      Even though I support it, literally reading the intro to the wikipedia page on the Equal Rights Amendment will tell you.

    • @blondjon
      @blondjon 4 роки тому +3

      @@fatpotatoe6039 read the whole intro on Wikipedia just right now ....literally still do not know why anyone would oppose these basic fundamental rights.

    • @vaccinefraud5570
      @vaccinefraud5570 4 роки тому

      You can't grant a right - only a priviledge. The whole thing is a psyop from the start.

    • @blondjon
      @blondjon 4 роки тому +4

      @@vaccinefraud5570 This legislature is actually neither of those things.... It's a declaration to the citizens of the USA that this country views men and women as equals. That's the basis of this amendment. It's symbolic.

    • @fatpotatoe6039
      @fatpotatoe6039 4 роки тому +3

      @@blondjon "In the early history of the Equal Rights Amendment, middle-class women were largely supportive, while those speaking for the working class were often opposed, pointing out that employed women needed special protections regarding working conditions and employment hours."
      "With wide, bipartisan support (including that of both major political parties, both houses of Congress, and Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter)[5] the ERA seemed destined for ratification until Phyllis Schlafly mobilized conservative women in opposition. These women argued that the ERA would disadvantage housewives, cause women to be drafted into the military and to lose protections such as alimony, and eliminate the tendency for mothers to obtain custody over their children in divorce cases.[6] Many labor feminists also opposed the ERA on the basis that it would eliminate protections for women in labor law, though over time more and more unions and labor feminist leaders turned toward supporting it."

  • @gailallen3035
    @gailallen3035 4 роки тому +6

    I'm confused. One of the criticisms many Americans have about other countries is that the women don't have any rights. And yet, it seems, many in the US also don't want women to have any rights. Why is that OK in the US but not in other countries?

    • @hanginwithlois
      @hanginwithlois 4 роки тому +5

      Welcome to America, much like the language, its filled with contradictions.

    • @vaccinefraud5570
      @vaccinefraud5570 4 роки тому

      @@hanginwithlois or... as the bumper sticker I saw in California in the 1980s said: Welcome to California... now leave....

  • @roniquebreauxjordan1302
    @roniquebreauxjordan1302 4 роки тому +6

    Thank you, Ken Burns ....💛💜💛💜💕💚💕💚

  • @Ashley-ku7is
    @Ashley-ku7is 4 роки тому +25

    Imagine thinking that 50% of the population, that 50% that literally gives life, do not deserve a say in who governs them. That 50% of the population are less human. Despite the fact that none of us would even exist without them. Impossible to imagine nowadays. But all I can say to those in the past who championed women and women rights is THANK YOU.

    • @Toxodos
      @Toxodos 4 роки тому

      and imagine being a woman who thinks that, while at the same time being so strong, basically already having so much of a say, that you keep whole states from ratifying. How did she not see that paradox lol

    • @vaccinefraud5570
      @vaccinefraud5570 4 роки тому

      North America ratio is 60%. You can't grant rights - only priviledges. In Latin Govern means To Steer (as in a rudder on a ship) and Mente means Mind. To Steer the Mind is Mind Control, so I don't think anyone, having studied words would WANT to say who Controls Their Mind.

    • @Robin4
      @Robin4 4 роки тому

      @@vaccinefraud5570 thats some nonsense right there, are you okay?

    • @vaccinefraud5570
      @vaccinefraud5570 4 роки тому

      @@Robin4 It's called projection in psychology when someone like you who has a disturbed mind then accuses the world around them of being disturbed. EVERYTHING that I wrote was 100% verifiable. Was the wiki button for latin translation broken for you or did you run out of your prescription?

  • @heavyweaponsguy21
    @heavyweaponsguy21 4 роки тому +15

    Why anyone would vote against ERA is baffling, especially in this day and age.

  • @BiodegradableYTP
    @BiodegradableYTP 4 роки тому +3

    Mother truly knows best.

  •  4 роки тому +5

    Vote now. Wait 100 years for change. .. Oh here it comes. Uh nope

  • @billtruttschel
    @billtruttschel 4 роки тому +12

    I thought the constitution was intended to be re-written every couple decades or so, not to stay in perpetuity.

    • @iyamaxx
      @iyamaxx 4 роки тому

      No, Congress just adds on to it. At least we have a Supreme Court though to make sure it's updated.

    • @kenlandon6130
      @kenlandon6130 2 роки тому

      @@iyamaxx He's talking about the original intent. I think Thomas Jefferson or James Madison had a quote about constitutions ought to be revised every 20 years or so.

  • @anakareng8962
    @anakareng8962 4 роки тому +3

    I've been struggle with my ERA essay for school but I take this as a sign to keep going!! This history has always been so inspiring to me. Thank you to The Suffragettes and to modern trailblazing women! 💯🔥✨❤

  • @dennismorris7573
    @dennismorris7573 4 роки тому +3

    The great Ken Burns with the great NYT helping to document and to propel, a very great cause.

  • @394pjo
    @394pjo 4 роки тому +1

    How will our vote make a difference when we are being offered to choose between Al Capone, Pretty Boy Floyd and Ma Baker?

  • @Alan.Endicott
    @Alan.Endicott 4 роки тому +1

    What part of "within seven years from the date of it's submission by the Congress," wasn't clear? Yes, I know the Congress passed a resolution extending the deadline another three years, but the legality of this extension is in some doubt, as it did not pass by the same two-thirds required for the adoption of the original proposed amendment, and the Supreme Court never ruled on the constitutionality of such an extension. Furthermore, as some states have voted to rescind their support of the original proposed amendment, the question of whether the number of ratifying states stands at 38 (one more than required), or 34 (three less than required). The question of whether rescission is constitutional has likewise never been decided by the Supreme Court. Congress has attempted to reset the clock repeatedly since 1982 by re-submitting the amendment to the states without success. If the amendment is ratified by three additional states but outside the extended 1982 deadline, I'm sure the issue will be sent to the courts. That would be a terrible mistake. If something as consequential as an amendment to the Constitution was decided by the courts when the plain text of the law says the issue was settled in 1982, it would cause irreparable damage to the country. Besides, it's all been made moot by the 14th Amendment, which prevents any state from denying "any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Persons. Not men. Persons. Including women.

  • @tboyd5150
    @tboyd5150 4 роки тому

    Hi everyone...Harry T. Burn, that young Tennessee legislator, was my great-granduncle. His mother was Febb Burn, my great-great grandmother! I just wrote a book that tells the complete and true story of their role in the 19th Amendment's ratification. Here is the link to buy it: www.amazon.com/Tennessee-Statesman-Harry-Burn-Elections/dp/1467143189/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

  • @sammysosa3542
    @sammysosa3542 4 роки тому

    If more than 50% Americans man votes for a Woman to be president , I will be convinced that 2+2= can be 5 . Man have balls women’s have hearts

  • @Urdalibertine
    @Urdalibertine 4 роки тому

    Oh Dear

  • @lenahoppe2417
    @lenahoppe2417 4 роки тому +5

    the US needs to end felony disenfranchisement

    • @vaccinefraud5570
      @vaccinefraud5570 4 роки тому

      The US ***IS*** felony disenfranchisement. So, to take your postion to its logical conclusion.....

  • @hillarybanks8
    @hillarybanks8 4 роки тому

    Bless his sweet Mama. Makes you think, “Who am I having conversations with about the things that matter to me?”

  • @hartdr8074
    @hartdr8074 4 роки тому +1

    Can one vote change his wig, tho???

  • @supersequence14159
    @supersequence14159 3 роки тому

    #RepealThe19th

  • @nakedshadows
    @nakedshadows 4 роки тому

    ERA is de facto law in the USA, no?

  • @Truthseaaker
    @Truthseaaker 4 роки тому

    The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States (Article VI, Clause 2), establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the “supreme Law of the Land”, and thus take priority over any conflicting state laws.[1] It provides that state courts are bound by, and state constitutions subordinate to, the supreme law.[2] However, federal statutes and treaties are supreme only if they do not contravene the Constitution.

  • @bdtol3142
    @bdtol3142 4 роки тому +1

    Yah, but the women that were against the ERA are now benefiting from it. Shouldn't they be denied the right to vote.

    • @TnT24u
      @TnT24u 4 роки тому

      J Brooks NO ... EVERY US CITIZEN should have the right... no the MANDATORY Obligation to vote even Prisoners and EX- Felons .... EVERY US CITIZEN

  • @kyleebrock
    @kyleebrock 4 роки тому +1

    The bitter, nasty, alt right congress we have today would have killed this too.

    • @MeanOldLady
      @MeanOldLady 4 роки тому

      It's a trap. It's a political tool to pass extra agendas on top of it.
      Men & women are already inherently equal.
      Learn to think critically instead of mindlessly gobbling up propaganda turds that are designed around emotion instead of logic.
      Dig deeper, Watson.

  • @BucketPukes1969
    @BucketPukes1969 4 роки тому

    Time for Americans to have their voices heard by our government. We’re supposed to be able to trust that our political leaders will keep the promises they make and if we want to change that we can’t we’re gonna talk with our votes. I think our votes matter, not PACs or the immensely powerful corporate lobbies that run the DNC whether they (or you) realize it or not.

  • @connorboone8682
    @connorboone8682 4 роки тому +2

    A fellow michigander!!!

  • @blloob7228
    @blloob7228 3 роки тому

    its 2021 the apocilpise will happen

  • @tammcd
    @tammcd 4 роки тому +5

    Thanks to RepuGNicans, this was 100 years late. However, thanks to Democrats and a few morally-progressive Republicans, it passed.
    Congratulations, Virginia, you have reached the 20th century.

    • @drumyogi9281
      @drumyogi9281 4 роки тому

      So do women have to sign up for the draft now? I am confused.

  • @CensoredMercy
    @CensoredMercy 4 роки тому +6

    Why did a woman push against it?

    • @KingofHearts
      @KingofHearts 4 роки тому +1

      CensoredMercy Perhaps she was chosen to be the face of it. I imagine if it was a man standing up there arguing against something called the “women’s rights act” is not good optics.

    • @ImprovementisGrowth
      @ImprovementisGrowth 4 роки тому

      Some woman don't see themselves as leaders and want you to see yourself as less than also

    • @WilliamStoneContentZone
      @WilliamStoneContentZone 4 роки тому +6

      Internalized misogyny

    • @Ashley-ku7is
      @Ashley-ku7is 4 роки тому +1

      Brainwashed

  • @dn9ne
    @dn9ne 4 роки тому

    My dude needs a lineup.

  • @drumyogi9281
    @drumyogi9281 4 роки тому +1

    So do women have to sign up for the draft now?

  • @danntrev
    @danntrev 4 роки тому +1

    Ken, lookin like a lesbian

  •  4 роки тому +1

    Woman’s Suffrage: One of the worst thing to happen to the United States. It’s takes the average male half a century to understand female nature at its depth, some never learn: Men serve women children and society as a whole. A Woman serve only herself. Only exceptional women < 1%, should be allowed to vote.

  • @Henry-j5t
    @Henry-j5t 6 місяців тому

    We have all dated women is it really a good idea? Male role is to lead

  • @maxhill9254
    @maxhill9254 4 роки тому

    thx

  • @5541james
    @5541james 4 роки тому

    I tried to read up about this subject but it’s confusing because it seems mostly symbolic? Woman already enjoy all the same rights as men by law correct? But if I am wrong can someone tell me where a woman is treated unequal to a man besides the military and I’m not sure if that’s even true anymore. Yes I know that there are still issues but for the most part it all seems even, other than in say divorce court or family court where woman seem to actually have an advantage.
    Ken burns civil war doc is the greatest ever made!!

    • @iyamaxx
      @iyamaxx 4 роки тому

      It would make it easier for people, man or woman, to say a law or action violated the Constitution including the military and divorce. And by the way that woman in the video supported only men in the military and women always getting the kids in divorce.

  • @misterfunnybones
    @misterfunnybones 4 роки тому +6

    "What do women want? Everything!"
    - Chris Rock

  • @ebrubyrm6713
    @ebrubyrm6713 4 роки тому

    4

  • @liza9836
    @liza9836 3 роки тому

    1k like :)

  • @ryansoon1527
    @ryansoon1527 4 роки тому +1

    Haiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

  • @ksisniper1601
    @ksisniper1601 4 роки тому +1

    CRINGE

    • @Robin4
      @Robin4 4 роки тому +1

      Says "ksi sniper" ...

  • @allenlit6399
    @allenlit6399 4 роки тому

    Here at 500 views 📱📱📱✔👀🌐🎶🔌🔋🎯

    • @SomeGirl131
      @SomeGirl131 4 роки тому +2

      BRUH

    • @ace3585
      @ace3585 4 роки тому

      Phones providing a crazy networking / support system on three phone's....

  • @394pjo
    @394pjo 4 роки тому +1

    How will our vote make a difference when we are being offered to choose between Al Capone, Pretty Boy Floyd and Ma Baker?