Letters to the Editor

• DBaker

  [Read the article: The right's explicit and candid rejection of "the rule of law"]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  It would take more than a 1000 words, a few pictures, and lots of time to undo the rot in whathisname's brain. He can't even get pregnant, but he's concerned about Roe v. Wade. If he could, as with most of these wingers, there'd be an abortion clinic next to every bar in America. Open 24/7/365 and 366 on leap years. Then he pats himself on the back for wanting to allow adults the "privacy" and "autonomy" to do whatever they like in the confines of their own homes and bedrooms, as long as it's not harming anyone. Would Thomas Jefferson still agree with this?

  Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least.

  --Thomas Jefferson, in the Virginia Bill number 64, 18 June 1779

  I doubt it. He was a "progressive".

  "I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the same coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

  -- to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1810

  I've been listening to this "constitutional drivel" and judicial activist two-step from the right for years. It's just what most here have said. Bullshit and rhetoric. What else has Texas got, these days?

  Permalink Thursday, May 3, 2007 11:18 AM

• I should add...

  [Read the article: The right's explicit and candid rejection of "the rule of law"]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  Abortificients were commonly available to women in colonial America, except for slave women, obviously. Jefferson made no mention of this in his writings, at least none that I am aware of. He did mention his preference for what we call "death with dignity" today. There is no question which side he would have taken in the Schiavo affair.

  Permalink Thursday, May 3, 2007 11:25 AM