If you thought that the American Revolution, Boston Tea Party, and War of 1812 were about more than just land and taxes, you might have been wrong. First, it became un-American to question the government — meaning that, technically, we should all still be English. Well, it looks like a Maryland lawmaker (pictured right) has taken that to heart by arguing that 300 year old British Civil Law has a direct bearing on how we should treat sexual assault today in America. The Washington Post reports:
A senior Maryland lawmaker this week invoked a 17th-century English jurist who instructed juries to be suspicious of women’s claims of rape, infuriating women’s advocates and some lawmakers who say the comments were insensitive.
Del. Joseph F. Vallario Jr. (D-Prince George’s), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, recalled the words of Sir Matthew Hale at a hearing Tuesday on a bill to deny custody, visitation and other parental rights to rapists whose victims conceive and have a child.
[...]
A delegate on the committee searched the Internet for the exact words of the prominent British lawyer, who, as England’s chief justice in the 1670s, instructed juries to be skeptical of rape claims: “Rape is an accusation easily to be made, hard to be proved, and harder yet to be defended by the party accused.”
Great, so our laws really do need to be as paternalistic as the elitist monarchists we rebelled against to gain our independence. Maybe it really was all about land and not paying taxes. Fuck, it sure explains a lot, doesn’t it? The Patriot Act, the Imperialism, the growing gap between rich and poor. Well, hopefully my daughter’s rapist feels at least enough sympathy and remorse while visiting his bastard child that he actually makes some child support payments.
Story via Feministing.