What if...

Quote: Mission146

The only thing that it does is create division (which was probably one of Biden's goals) and enables people to question her qualifications as she could be seen, by some, as the best available choice who fit the priors required to even be a potential running mate.

It was about getting a few more news cycles out of it.

Quote: AZDuffman

He did the exact same thing with his SCOTUS pick. It is the Democrat playbook. Say how important skin color is to you while claiming the other guy is the racist. We see it in Biden, we see it on this board.

This!!!!

Just pick who you want and don’t pre-announce a race/gender/sexual orientation requirement!

After the Dems had Obama as their nominee first cycle, do you think there was ANY chance they’d pick a second Black man (or woman) as VP? Of course not! But did they officially announce that they were looking for an old White man? How would that have gone?

Quote: SOOPOO

This!!!!

Just pick who you want and don’t pre-announce a race/gender/sexual orientation requirement!

After the Dems had Obama as their nominee first cycle, do you think there was ANY chance they’d pick a second Black man (or woman) as VP? Of course not! But did they officially announce that they were looking for an old White man? How would that have gone?

Geraldine Ferraro was picked by Mondale as the first woman vice President. You can call it the same thing as when a woman didn't get a job or own property.
Duffman can keep pretending it's the exact same thing keeping blacks from rights. Or whatever.

Keep on keepin' on.

Quote: rxwine

Geraldine Ferraro was picked by Mondale as the first woman vice President. You can call it the same thing as when a woman didn't get a job or own property.
Duffman can keep pretending it's the exact same thing keeping blacks from rights. Or whatever.

Keep on keepin' on.

I've read that through a couple of times but ... do you need to take a class in writing or something?

Quote: odiousgambit

I've read that through a couple of times but ... do you need to take a class in writing or something?

I was wondering if I was the only one could not make heads or tails out of it.

When were women not allowed to own property I wonder?

Quote: odiousgambit

I've read that through a couple of times but ... do you need to take a class in writing or something?

Quote:

Single women could own property under certain circumstances, but married women in the U.S. couldn't buy or own property in their own name until the mid-1800s; everything belonged to their husbands, even inheritances.Mar 14, 2023

Quote: odiousgambit

I've read that through a couple of times but ... do you need to take a class in writing or something?

... of course! "A stitch in time saves nine." "Haste makes waste." That's my excuse.

Quote: rxwine

Single women could own property under certain circumstances, but married women in the U.S. couldn't buy or own property in their own name until the mid-1800s; everything belonged to their husbands, even inheritances.Mar 14, 2023

I notice you do not leave a cite. You also do not know how false this is. I have researched hundreds of chains of title over 3 states* and in all cases women signed the deeds with their husbands and were granted property on the deed with their husbands. They could keep property as a widow and had a dower interest in it, though the inheritance laws protected the kids from her remarrying and a new husband getting it.

I had one case where a single daughter had some kind of mental condition so had to be declared a lunatic so her share in the estate could be sold. I had many cases where sons had to have their wives also sign off on deed when their husband got an inheritance from his father.

It was rare for anyone single to buy property, male of female. I can actually not remember it happening at all.

So, sorry. But your uncited quote does not match up with actual paperwork I have seen and worked with.



*4 if you count WV as VA pre-1861

Okay, here's a cite.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Married-Womens-Property-Acts-United-States-1839

Quote: rxwine

Okay, here's a cite.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Married-Womens-Property-Acts-United-States-1839

So, you finally cite something!

The way I read it seems sketchy and irregular. I maintain, the wife always signed off on things. The Notary would examine the wife "separate and away from her husband" to verify things and note it as such. None of this would have happened if the wife had no property rights.

While I am not saying things were perfect, I am not buying the feminist line on the subject.