More concerning the Inquisition from the book I'm reading on the topic:
[T]he system of secrecy was an open invitation to perjury and malicious testimony. This objection might not have been valid but for the fact that all accusations were taken seriously, and even if a man were later exonerated, the evil brought on him by a slight and secret accusation was immense.
I'm not sure if Henry Kamen is referring to the Inquistion or rape shield laws. The parallel is stunningly accuarate. I'm not going to add further comment concerning the Duke case; as I pointed out months ago, the charges were obviously fallacious. Yet, in incidents of rape, "all accusations [are] taken seriously", and "even if [three men are] later exonerated the evil brought on [them]... was immense."
If the medieval instituion was damnable, why are laws which provide for the same abuses considered laudable? Are feminists Inquisition apologists, or is this merely further evidence confirming their inability to think? Stay tuned...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment