Posted on 02/25/2010 6:46:21 AM PST by JoeProBono
FRANKFORT, Ky. - When you take the oath of office in Kentucky, you have to swear that you haven't taken part in a duel with deadly weapons.
The promise usually elicits laughter, and state Rep. Darryl Owens has proposed amending the Kentucky Constitution to do away with the archaic language. The Democrat's proposal cleared a House committee Tuesday.
According to Carl Chelf, a retired political science professor at Western Kentucky University, the language comes from Kentucky's frontier days, when the state was a hotbed for dueling. Chelf says the framers of the state constitution wanted to clean up Kentucky's reputation as a haven where people came to fight duels.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Just wait till some gang bangers win elections for office.
Are they embarressed of their ancestors? No more feudin’ in KAIN-Tuck?? Outlawing gentlemen’s DUELS, whadda they wanna replace it with?
Oh just leave it in!
It may be totally irrelevant to today, but it’s just a harmless historical accent to an oath that people should be more focused on their elected representatives actually adhering to.
I mean doctors swear an oath to Apollo, but it’s the “do no harm” part that people care about.
Kentucky Officials should be free to exercise their 2nd amendment rights and their right of self defence. Does this prohibition interfere with those? I wonder.
BTW, dueling of any sort is a crime.But the appearance of dueling is not.
I think duels should be brought back anyway. Lots of examples in recent years of mostly leftist politicians deliberately slandering opponents. Accusing them of outright lies for financial consideration.
Wonder how many believe their slander enought to show up on the on the field of honor? Recently some of the comments about Sarah seem worthy of a slap and pistols at 10 paces.
And in each duel,, at least one politican bites the dust. Where’s the downside??
Just my opinion.
I believe its also illegal in Kentucky to open a can of beans with a shotgun. Meddling politicians spoils all the fun.
And think of this for example,,,say a man loudly says Obama is not a natural born citizen, or is a closet muslim deliberately aiding our enemies. If we can expect such a slander of treason or bastardi to receive a challenge,, but then Obama doesn’t issue a challenge, we would be left to conclude it is true, or Obama a coward.
I would so love for challenge and duels to hit our political world. And it might even have a fringe benefit. Dems might suddenly find the right to own and practice a LOT with pistols. Lord knows they would need it.
I’ve thought that dueling should brought back for quite a long time.
It would shut some big mouths and thin out the herd a bit.
“shut some big mouths and thin out the herd a bit.”
Amen,,,,
Dueling should be brought back. People would become nicer overnight. And many lawyers would have to earn an honest living.
In one ancient parliament, a law was passed that if any legislator wanted to submit a law, they had to do so with a noose around their neck. And if their proposed law didn’t pass, they would be strangled with it.
For 200 years after that, they passed no new laws.
Now that is the true definition of “conservative.” Some wits have also suggested that this was also the true origin of the necktie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.