Thomas Jefferson vs. Ron Paul's First Episcopal Marital Rape Ministry

Religious Freedom ≠ Religious Dictatorship

In actual fact, ≠  DOES NOT mean "Does Not Equal", or "Is Not The Same As" - it specifically denotes "Inequality";

Meaning that Uncle Ron is actually saying " "Wants" are either inferior or superior to "Rights" ".

By the notation "Wants ≠ Rights", what he is actually expressing is that "Wants" he agrees with, and thinks are virtuous and admirable (such as black people not breeding, being forced to quit work due to medical bills and time off due to unwanted pregnancies, and yet him still not having to pay for it) are sometimes (often) SUPERIOR in law and in merit to the "Rights" of others...

This from the Candidate from the Confederacy who still thinks that Appomattox represented the ultimate abbrogation of Property Rights...

Access to Affordable Heathcare is a Basic Human and Eccomic Right.

But I Digress.

(I want to punch the leathery, cracker-assed cracker in the neck...)

Uncle Ron is a big fan of Narcotics and of total decriminalisation - however, I have never seen him attempt to make a First Ammendment religious freedom argument in support of marijhuana in supoort of the Rastafari bredderens of East Texas:

It's certainly a view - another is "Blacks + Drugs = Genocide" - H. Rap Brown

It would also be interesting to see Uncle Ron come out in support (as surely he must) to defend the institution of Marital Rape as a Religious Freedom:

It's official - Public Domain is God.

1 Corinthians 7:3-5King James Version (KJV)

3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.

4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Reynolds v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 14–15, 1878 Decided May 5, 1879
Full case name	George Reynolds v. United States
Citations	98 U.S. 145 (more) 25 L. Ed. 244; 1878 U.S. LEXIS 1374; 8 Otto 145
Prior history	Defendant convicted, District Court for the 3rd Judicial District of the Territory of Utah; conviction upheld by Utah Territorial Supreme Court
Holding
Religious duty was not a suitable defense to a criminal indictment.

Document 10

Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments

1778Papers 2:492--504

"Whereas it frequently happens that wicked and dissolute men resigning themselves to the dominion of inordinate passions, commit violations on the lives, liberties and property of others, and, the secure enjoyment of these having principally induced men to enter into society, government would be defective in it's principal purpose were it not to restrain such criminal acts, by inflicting due punishments on those who perpetrate them; but it appears at the same time equally deducible from the purposes of society that a member thereof, committing an inferior injury, does not wholy forfiet the protection of his fellow citizens, but, after suffering a punishment in proportion to his offence is entitled to their protection from all greater pain, so that it becomes a duty in the legislature to arrange in a proper scale the crimes which it may be necessary for them to repress, and to adjust thereto a corresponding gradation of punishments.

And whereas the reformation of offenders, tho' an object worthy the attention of the laws, is not effected at all by capital punishments, which exterminate instead of reforming, and should be the last melancholy resource against those whose existence is become inconsistent with the safety of their fellow citizens, which also weaken the state by cutting off so many who, if reformed, might be restored sound members to society, who, even under a course of correction, might be rendered useful in various labors for the public, and would be living and long continued spectacles to deter others from committing the like offences.

And forasmuch the experience of all ages and countries hath shewn that cruel and sanguinary laws defeat their own purpose by engaging the benevolence of mankind to withold prosecutions, to smother testimony, or to listen to it with bias, when, if the punishment were only proportioned to the injury, men would feel it their inclination as well as their duty to see the laws observed.

For rendering crimes and punishments therefore more proportionate to each other: Be it enacted by the General assembly that no crime shall be henceforth punished by deprivation of life or limb except those hereinafter ordained to be so punished.

Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least.

But no one shall be punished for Polygamy who shall have married after probable information of the death of his or her husband or wife, or after his or her husband or wife hath absented him or herself, so that no notice of his or her being alive hath reached such person for 7. years together, or hath suffered the punishments before prescribed for rape, polygamy or sodomy."