By the time of the American revolution, the government of G. Brittain
was a constitutional parlaimentary system based on a fairly wide
electoral base. The role of the King was secondary to parliment. In
fact, the system finally settled upon in America with our constitution
in 1789 was no more democratic than the system in GB at the time.We did
not have a king getting in the way but no larger percentage of the
population could vote than in GB. And the office of President was more
powerful than that of a British PM and presidents were not at first
meant to be elected by popular vote.
I do not bring this up to be contentious but to underline the point
that the extension of the right to vote and own property were gradually
extended things and were never, ever given away. Different categories
of men had to earn these rights. Merely existing and breathing air were
never taken seriously as a basis for having political rights, even in
the few places that were trying to perfect and extend democratic
ideals.
So when feminists get all angry about having no vote in the past,
they are merely revealing the depth of their sense of entitlement vs
men.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 1/8/05 11:33:11 AM