<div dir="ltr">Tangential to some of the recent discussions I wish to point out that the defintion of right and wrong is subjective and indeed changes through history.<div>As one example consider the recent post on love from <a href="http://www.talmudology.com/">http://www.talmudology.com/</a></div><div><br></div><div><span style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px">In the 1440s in England, Elizabeth Paston, the twenty-year old daughter of minor gentry, was told by her parents that she was to marry a man thirty years her senior. Oh, and he was disfigured by smallpox.  When she refused,</span><a target="_blank" href="https://archive.org/stream/pastonsandtheir00benngoog" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(61,153,145);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"> she was beaten</a><span style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px"> "once in the week, or twice and her head broken in two or three places." This persuasive technique worked, and reflected a theme in Great Britain, where Lord Chief Baron Matthew Hale  </span><a target="_blank" href="https://books.google.com/books?id=y39FAAAAcAAJ&lpg=PA491&ots=3KcjInZC5R&dq=by%20the%20law%20of%20God%2C%20of%20nature%20or%20of%20reason%20and%20by%20the%20Common%20Law%2C%20the%20will%20of%20the%20wife%20is%20subject%20to%20the%20will%20of%20the%20husband.&pg=PA491#v=onepage&q=by%20the%20law%20of%20God,%20of%20nature%20or%20of%20reason%20and%20by%20the%20Common%20Law,%20the%20will%20of%20the%20wife%20is%20subject%20to%20the%20will%20of%20the%20husband.&f=true" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(61,153,145);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial">declared</a><span style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px"> in 1662 that "by the law of God, of nature or of reason and by the Common Law, the will of the wife is subject to the will of the husband." Things weren't any better in the New Colonies, as Ann Little points out (in a gloriously titled </span><a target="_blank" href="https://books.google.com/books?id=iuAzDHsAHT0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=lethal+imagination&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XcNMVfu_E8qhNr37gagJ&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=ye%20rule&f=false" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(61,153,145);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial">article</a><span style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px"> "</span><em style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px">Shee would Bump his Mouldy Britch; Authority, Masculinity and the Harried Husbands of New Haven Colony 1638-1670.</em><span style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px">) The governor of the New Haven Colony was  found guilty of "not pressing ye rule upon his wife."</span><br></div><div><span style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgba(26,26,26,0.701961);font-family:adobe-garamond-pro;font-size:18px;line-height:28.7999992370605px">What was obvious in one generation is no longer regarded as true today. Similar arguments apply to slavery</span></div><div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><font color="#000099" face="'comic sans ms', sans-serif">Eli Turkel</font></div></div>
</div></div>