The Arizona laws written by only one man, Howell, and adopted in 1864 by just 27 men were barbaric then, but 4 members of the current AZ Supreme Court decided that those laws are just wonderful and should remain in effect. Absolutely disgusting. Thank you, Heather, for providing the full context of the origin of this decision.
The Arizona laws written by only one man, Howell, and adopted in 1864 by just 27 men were barbaric then, but 4 members of the current AZ Supreme Court decided that those laws are just wonderful and should remain in effect. Absolutely disgusting. Thank you, Heather, for providing the full context of the origin of this decision.
Lucy, I think those 27 men were not barbaric but may have been just the opposite, trying to bring some semblance of order to a barbaric time via the only guy who had some kind of a blueprint for what a body of laws should look like in a time of violent chaos and "frontier justice." My fantasy of possibilities for the motivations behind the "better angels of our nature" of the current Arizona high court's decision is that it is serving up a rebuke to their legislature for having never updated their currently archaic legal structure and a powerful stimulus to DO something about it!
John, I agree with you about the intentions of those 27 men, but not the idea that the current law makers were trying to do anything good. They just kept going back in time until they found a law that met their needs. I do believe that they have given us a тАЬgiftтАЭ in their eager desire to impose their will on women. Feeling threatened brings out hysteria in some.
JohnM, what part of forbidding abortion and allowing sex with girls as young as 10 would "bring some semblance of order to a barbaric time"? We should all rebuke the members of every AZ legislative session since Arizona was admitted to the Union for failing to remove those original laws. Is some man now going to use that same 1864 law to claim that women have no right to vote, or that he can have sex with any female child under the age of consent?
The Arizona laws written by only one man, Howell, and adopted in 1864 by just 27 men were barbaric then, but 4 members of the current AZ Supreme Court decided that those laws are just wonderful and should remain in effect. Absolutely disgusting. Thank you, Heather, for providing the full context of the origin of this decision.
Lucy, I think those 27 men were not barbaric but may have been just the opposite, trying to bring some semblance of order to a barbaric time via the only guy who had some kind of a blueprint for what a body of laws should look like in a time of violent chaos and "frontier justice." My fantasy of possibilities for the motivations behind the "better angels of our nature" of the current Arizona high court's decision is that it is serving up a rebuke to their legislature for having never updated their currently archaic legal structure and a powerful stimulus to DO something about it!
John, I agree with you about the intentions of those 27 men, but not the idea that the current law makers were trying to do anything good. They just kept going back in time until they found a law that met their needs. I do believe that they have given us a тАЬgiftтАЭ in their eager desire to impose their will on women. Feeling threatened brings out hysteria in some.
JohnM, what part of forbidding abortion and allowing sex with girls as young as 10 would "bring some semblance of order to a barbaric time"? We should all rebuke the members of every AZ legislative session since Arizona was admitted to the Union for failing to remove those original laws. Is some man now going to use that same 1864 law to claim that women have no right to vote, or that he can have sex with any female child under the age of consent?