The “lung float” test claims to help determine if a baby was born alive or dead, but many medical examiners say it’s too unreliable. Yet the test is still being used to bring murder charges — and get convictions.
I doubt any of the cultures that were invaded by Roman expansion were given any choice in the matter. Conservatism always has different standards for the in group versus the out group.
I mean given that there were Roman emperors that hailed from almost every territory in the empire I don’t think your understanding of Romans is very accurate.
After 212AD if you were a free man and lived in the empire then you were a Roman citizen. There was also a surprising degree of religious freedom in the empire as well.
Using modern political group labels for antiquity is silly.
They were in the in-group as long as they paid taxes and followed the laws of the people in control of their lives. As long as they never disobeyed or rebelled. I urge you to look up consent before you hurt somebody.
Ok so no government has ever governed through consent in that respect so I’m not sure why that’s an important issue to bring up. No one consents to be ruled by a government, you’re just born into it in most cases and in others the one you initially didn’t consent to got replaced by yet another that wasn’t consented to.
You really are glossing over the fact that referring to a 2000 year empire as blanket conservative is ignorant and ahistorical. They were multicultural and, with glaring exceptions, tolerated alternative religions far more than most geopolitical entities through history. It’s a vast history with varying governments, both with progressive ideas for the time and regressive backslides.
Watering it down to boilerplate 21st century political terminology shows a lack of intellectual rigor in understanding this issue so I don’t think this conversation needs to continue. I wish you well.
I doubt any of the cultures that were invaded by Roman expansion were given any choice in the matter. Conservatism always has different standards for the in group versus the out group.
I mean given that there were Roman emperors that hailed from almost every territory in the empire I don’t think your understanding of Romans is very accurate.
After 212AD if you were a free man and lived in the empire then you were a Roman citizen. There was also a surprising degree of religious freedom in the empire as well.
Using modern political group labels for antiquity is silly.
It’s not my understanding of Romans that is flawed, it’s your understanding of freedom and choice.
My point is that they were also the in group. It’s very much a flawed perspective, referring to the whole empire as conservative makes it clear.
They were in the in-group as long as they paid taxes and followed the laws of the people in control of their lives. As long as they never disobeyed or rebelled. I urge you to look up consent before you hurt somebody.
Ok so no government has ever governed through consent in that respect so I’m not sure why that’s an important issue to bring up. No one consents to be ruled by a government, you’re just born into it in most cases and in others the one you initially didn’t consent to got replaced by yet another that wasn’t consented to.
You really are glossing over the fact that referring to a 2000 year empire as blanket conservative is ignorant and ahistorical. They were multicultural and, with glaring exceptions, tolerated alternative religions far more than most geopolitical entities through history. It’s a vast history with varying governments, both with progressive ideas for the time and regressive backslides.
Watering it down to boilerplate 21st century political terminology shows a lack of intellectual rigor in understanding this issue so I don’t think this conversation needs to continue. I wish you well.