Frank Reichert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in part: >> >As I wrote above, most people simply did what their cultural >> >orientation assumed that they would do. Nothing like this was ever as >> >I recall historically codified into law. At least until prohibition.
>To which, you replied: >> No, the phrase "banned in Boston" exists for a reason. They really did >> enact some of their religion into law. They couldn't quite get the degree >> of suppression of the Catholics they'd wanted to, but they did manage to >> get them to finance the basically Congregationalist (or >> Congregationalist-Unitarian) public schools. >Okay. Again we are talking about New England, But the gov't school movement spread from there; it was almost simultaneous in NY. And when I mentioned blue laws eariler in the thread, I sure wasn't referring to New England alone. In Your Sly Tribe, Robert _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
