To: Kingasaurus
"Many Northerners would add the caveat that the husband forces the wife to stay in the house so he can keep her from abusing the kids, which she had been doing contunuously. Buying and selling them, even... ;)"A better analogy in this particular case would be that the husband's primary motive in forcing his wife back was to retain control over her paycheck.
34 posted on
06/12/2003 8:04:55 AM PDT by
Aurelius
To: Aurelius
A better analogy in this particular case would be that the husband's primary motive in forcing his wife back was to retain control over her paycheck. Except in this case all the seceeding states complained first and foremost about the loss of their beloved institution of slavery.
It's funny how you neo-confederates always try to reinvent history to forget the south's main war cry was the protection of slavery.
43 posted on
06/12/2003 8:20:49 AM PDT by
jlogajan
To: Aurelius
A better analogy in this particular case would be that the husband's primary motive in forcing his wife back was to retain control over her paycheck.
We have a winner. It all boils down to tariff laws. Seems like the South were free traders way before the idea got popular in the North.
170 posted on
06/13/2003 5:13:22 AM PDT by
steve50
(I don't know about being with "us", but I'm with the Constitution)
To: Aurelius
"Many Northerners would add the caveat that the husband forces the wife to stay in the house so he can keep her from abusing the kids, which she had been doing contunuously. Buying and selling them, even... ;)"
A better analogy in this particular case would be that the husband's primary motive in forcing his wife back was to retain control over her paycheck.
Well said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1,362 posted on
07/08/2003 7:41:44 PM PDT by
Ethyl
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson