• @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      321 year ago

      uh objection, relevance?

      13th amendment predates the state of israel by like 80 years lol

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Indeed. The first amendment right. Apparently criticizing Israel in any way shape or form is antisemitism… and antisemitism has a fluid definition. Virtually the first amendment would be eroded if the new anti-Semitism law is passed.

        Also the fact that at gun point, we’re forced to give up a portion of our income to Israel so that they can afford arsenal, free health care for all, and other living expenses for their citizens.

          • Hello Hotel
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            probably just a very angry man, doesn’t take a bot nor a psyop to manipulate the conversation, to be 2 tonged or be blinded by rage on a public forem.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Dude, what? You’re so lost. Anyways, I don’t think anyone is hating on you, it’s just hilarious how you tried to get the Israel conversation going, like it was such a fail.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          241 year ago

          Just bitching about Israel whether it’s relevant or not isn’t antisemitism, but it makes you look like an antisemite. Go and find a conversation about the war and complain about Israel there.

  • Hello Hotel
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    what was the logic of allowing ANY form of slavery at all?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      Logically, slavery as punishment for crime is actually pretty reasonable and theoretically good. The criminal isn’t just taken care of by the state, thus costing the people even more, instead, they actually have to pay for their crime by working it off.

      But reality intrudes upon this theoretical situation. Since someone benefits from the criminal’s work, there’s now incentive to imprison as many people as possible. It creates perverse incentives that cannot possibly be avoided.

      But almost as bad a perverse incentive is the for profit prison system, even if they aren’t allowed to force prisoner labor. Because for profit prisons again have the incentive to imprison as many people as possible since that makes them more money; anything that reduces incarceration rate means less money for them.

      Of course, we have both of these going for us. For profit prisons that make more money off the state the more prisoners they have, and the permission to force labor from them since the Constitution specifically allows it, thus letting the prisons make money twice off each prisoner. Yay!

      • Zloubida
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        Yeah even theoretically it’s a bad idea. You can’t revoke the fundamental rights of people, even criminals, or the fundamental rights are not fundamental anymore, thus endangered for everyone, not just criminals.

    • ChaoticNeutralCzech
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      In this context? Probably so that prisons pay for themselves. Or the loophole was intentional – it seems rather obvious that Southern states could pass arbitrary laws and enforce them willy-nilly, targeting minorities or whoever fell out of favor of the ruling class.

      • Hello Hotel
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        that’s the overview answer, mabe better put, how did the justify this to the lawmakers?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 year ago

          how did the justify this to the lawmakers?

          In the 19th century, it was widely believed that people were criminals because of moral deficiency, and that hard labor would have a positive effect in reforming them into good, upstanding members of society.

          This is not really connected to reality in any way, but fits with the popular protestant theology of the time.

        • ChaoticNeutralCzech
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          I am not even a US citizen and I’m making guesses based on my limited knowledge of its history. You’ll have to ask someone else.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    6
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Article 1. [All persons born free; their natural rights; slavery and indentured servitude prohibited]

    That all persons are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent, and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety; therefore slavery and indentured servitude in any form are prohibited.

    Article 1 of the Vermont Constitution of 1777. Vermont is awesome.

    Also, article 3 specifically establishes freedom from religion:

    Article 3. [Freedom in religion; right and duty of religious worship]

    That all persons have a natural and unalienable right, to worship Almighty God, according to the dictates of their own consciences and understandings, as in their opinion shall be regulated by the word of God; and that no person ought to, or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any minister, contrary to the dictates of conscience, nor can any person be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of religious sentiments, or peculia[r] mode of religious worship; and that no authority can, or ought to be vested in, or assumed by, any power whatever, that shall in any case interfere with, or in any manner control the rights of conscience, in the free exercise of religious worship. Nevertheless, every sect or denomination of christians ought to observe the sabbath or Lord’s day, and keep up some sort of religious worship, which to them shall seem most agreeable to the revealed will of God.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    Societies force you to ignore certain loopholes in the law.

    Murdering people is bad … but terrorists are okay.

    Raping animals is bad … but killing is okay.

    Killing babies is bad … but abortion is okay.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
    link
    fedilink
    171 year ago

    I just realized, does that make the draft unconstitutional? It’s literally state coerced labor without even the pretense of a bullshit charge.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    871 year ago

    The “Protestant Work Ethic” of the 19th century demanded that prisoners work for the sake of their own ‘moral development’. Turns out it was a really great excuse to turn prison wardens into labor contractors.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      I mean tbf there are things you can have prisoners do that seem to help develop them in the prison, working with animals is the one I remember most recently, but in the Nordics they actually have these guys chop down the timber they use for the community stove and the woodshop.

      Maybe we just gotta ask if the job is analogous to anything that a kid in grade school would have willingly signed up for.

      • volvoxvsmarla
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        When a prison rather resembles a merry commune and the free outside world is a capitalist hell hole…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        Here in the United States they actually produce products that are sold to the general public, for profit, for like $0.13 an hour.

        But that’s ok because you know, a dimebag or loose cigarettes or whatever

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        201 year ago

        “Huh, I wonder why these Good Ol’ Boys put so many former slaves on this chain gang? It must be a coincidence. Good thing this doesn’t resemble anything unfortunate!”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          151 year ago

          Let’s dress them up like zebras so that people can’t tell if they are black slaves with white stripes or white slaves with black stripes!

          • Hello Hotel
            link
            fedilink
            English
            4
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I feel like that has to be a really old quote or phrase

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              Verily, let us garb them akin to zebras, so as to confound the discernment of whether they be black thralls with white stripes or white thralls with black stripes!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 year ago

      Guess what happens when you introduce a third party that benefits from higher incarceration numbers…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      551 year ago

      China, with four times more inhabitants, has fewer persons in prison.

      China, being well-known for its honesty and upstanding record-keeping. That’s why they punished Al-Jazeera English for investigating their prison system, and why nothing at all is going on in Xinjiang.

      • Pistcow
        link
        fedilink
        36
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Welll, there’s also 1.8 million Uyghurs being reeductated, which is more than the 1.2 million in the prison system. So, one number is bigger than another and doesn’t even count the Chinese prison system.