You are not interpreting the amendment strictly. Quite the opposite; you are reading a great deal into it that is not there. You are making the fundamental mistake of confusing the government with private organizations. This is the same mistake that people make when they claim that the “freedom of the press” clause in the first amendment compels privately owned media to publish anything. For example, I heard some ignorant souls accuse CBS of violating the constitution when they decided not to broadcast their Reagan documentary on network television.
The proposed amendment stated that
Most of your examples either do not involve federal or state government, or they do not involve a denial or abridgment of rights.
Do women have a right to serve equally in all parts of the military?
What right is abridged or denied by single sex bathrooms?
If these bars and clubs are privately owned, how do you, under your “strict interpretation”, apply this amendment to them?
Whose (and what) rights are abridged or denied by a separate Mother’s Day and Father’s Day? Be specific.
See (3). Where do you get these ideas? Has the fourteenth amendment outlawed ethnic organizations?
First of all, the amendment could only conceivably apply to state-run colleges and universities. Second, “separate but equal” was bad in the case of race because it demonstrably led to inequality. Do you argue that inequality follows from separate dorms? If not, then what rights to you see being denied or abridged by them?
What rights are being denied or abridged, and to whom, by such benefits? Be specific.
This would only follow if the rights of fathers’ are being denied or abridged under the current system. If this is so, isn’t it an argument for the amendment?
Why on Earth does this follow? You do know that alimony can be and is paid by both sexes, depending on the circumstances, right? Alimony is paid disproportionately by males because income is earned disproportionately by males.
Read the amendment. It is not mysterious or obscure. It quite explicitly applies to “the United States or . . . any state”. These are public institutions. If the language worked the way you seem to think it does, then churches would be prevented from respecting an establishment of religion and newspapers would have to publish every “letter to the editor” they received.