Letters to the Editor
Ron Pauliac
Published Letters: 456
-
"And it doesn't assume the stupidity of dead people"
[Read the article: Tucker Carlson unintentionally reveals the role of the American press]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ahhh! The Age of Enlightenment! This is the Thomas Jefferson that Ron Paul is talking about!
Proposed by Thomas Jefferson in a Virginia Bill number 64, 18 June 1779:
Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least. - Bill Number 64, authored by Jefferson and "Reported by the Committee of Advisors, 18 June 1779"
But wait...
It is true that he proposed this legislation. The problem with the argument though is that it drops the context of the times and intent of Jefferson’s proposal. At this time the punishment for these "crimes" was death (so those that say that Jefferson’s position was too extreme are, in effect, saying that they believe they should have continued to execute homosexuals). Jefferson sought to make the punishment less severe. He did not propose castration where no law had existed before.
In a letter to Edmund Pendelton Jefferson wrote...
Punishments I know are necessary, & I would provide them, strict & inflexible, but proportioned to the crime. Death might be inflicted for murder & perhaps for treason if you would take out of the description of treason all crimes which are not such in their nature. Rape, buggery, etc., -- punish by castration. All other crimes by working on high roads, rivers, gallies, etc., a certain time proportioned to the offence. But as this would be no punishment or change of condition to slaves (me miserum!) let them be sent to other countries. By these means we should be freed from the wickedness of the latter, & the former would be living monuments of public vengeance. Laws thus proportionate & mild should never be dispensed with. Let mercy be the character of the lawgiver, but let the judge be a mere machine.
These punishments are no doubt harsh by today’s standards. But, we cannot be assured that Jefferson actually felt these laws just. From this, we do know that he believed death too severe and sought to show greater mercy.
Many would then ask, "if Jefferson believed homosexuality to not be a proper crime then why did he not call for repeal of all laws against it." I don't know that he did not believe it a proper place for the law. But, he was a politician and understood the need for pragmatic approaches. As he wrote...
The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches, and we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good.
http://www.ronstringfield.com/?r=h&d=1&e=168
-
Sheeple!
[Read the article: Tucker Carlson unintentionally reveals the role of the American press]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]gm11103
-
Preach it, Comrade Bucky!
[Read the article: The principled, honest House Republicans]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bucky1... There is no need to capitalize libertarian since I am not speaking of the American political party. I would never join that party --- well at least not as presently constituted.
The Big L Libertarians
Those are the false libertarians, Bucky. The Sears Libertarians. Like at Cato. The only true libertarians are those of us at Lew Rockwell. We are the true libertarians
because we fight the One True Evil, The State! When we are not at War with the Warfare State we are at War with the Welfare State. We are always in a State of War with the State! Whatever State the State is in, we are at War with it!
Revolution!
-
Kitt, gti
[Read the article: The Politico claims the Iraq war will help McCain]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]AQI is not al Qaeda or any branch or faction of it. I meant that al Qaeda will be beaten out of Iraq. According to credible readings about them they are not an Osama bin Laden off shoot. They will be a problem for the Iraqis but a lot of the violence that happens in Iraq is due to our being their. At any rate the US military has not been at all successful dealing with AQI and they never will be any more so than the Soviets were successful in Afghanistan. Same as most every other occupation, historically.
-- Kitt
You are not taking the evolving nature of AQ into account. Iraq was the perfect place for them, being Sunnis. Iran is the perfect counter to them, the way out, being predominantly Shia, with almost no Sunnis. The Kurds are predominantly Sunnis. Read this first, so you can see why the MEMRI article linked to is intel worthy:
AQI Commander's View of his Position
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2008/03/aqi-commanders.html
gti,
You need to stop reading drivel. Try reading Col. Pat Lang instead. Or General Odom. Not clueless neocon wonks who have never heard a shot fired in anger, just drunken hunting accidents at Dick Cheney's pigeon ranch.
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/
http://hammernews.com/odomspeech.htm
-
Clarification
[Read the article: The Politico claims the Iraq war will help McCain]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Kitt,
I may have been unclear.
AQ are Sunni fundies, jihadis and takfiris.
Iraq as you well know had a Shia majority ruled by a Sunni minority and the Baathist party. Perfect for AQ.
I didn't mean that Iraq was predominantly Sunni, but there is a considerable Sunni presence
-
Oops!
[Read the article: The Politico claims the Iraq war will help McCain]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I just noticed forgot to change out of my superhero costume.