 |
| |
|
|
SlowwHand
|
 |
of The Cooler
Sep 1999
time: 23:31
|
|
MrFun, you're bastardizing history again. 
http://www.snopes.com/language/colors/bluelaws.htm
Origins:
The term "blue laws" originally applied to laws enacted by the Puritans in seventeenth-century Connecticut to regulate moral behavior (especially what people must or must not do on the Sabbath), laws which often called for rather harsh punishments to be applied to offenders. Blue laws typically specified penalties for moral offenses such as failure to attend church on the Sabbath; lying, swearing, and drunkenness; and the playing of games (such as cards, dice, and shuffleboard) in public. They also mandated more severe punishments for crimes committed on the Sabbath and regulated the sale and consumption of alcohol. Violators of blue laws might be assessed monetary fines, be whipped, be forced to spend time in the stocks, have body parts burned or cut off, or even receive the death penalty. As the influence of the colonial Puritan theocracies declined after the American Revolution, blue laws were generally abolished or went unenforced, although the temperance movements which began in the late nineteenth century brought a new round of legislation intended to regulate private conduct by banning the sale of cigarettes and alcohol, prohibiting amusements and "unnecessary labor" on Sundays, and providing for local censorship of arts and entertainment (such as books, plays, and films).
Many remnants of "blue laws" survived into the late twentieth century as seemingly nonsensical patchworks of regulations about which types of businesses could operate on Sundays and what items they could sell. Thus various jurisidictions might have regulations which, on Sundays, prohibited the sale of hammers but not nails, forbade trading in horses while allowing automobile dealerships to remain open, or prohibited the purchase of alcohol at liquor stores but not grocery stores.
Also puzzling to latter-day Americans was the term "blue laws" itself. Why were these regulations called "blue laws"? With no obvious explanation at hand, we invented a satisfying one: these types of laws had originally been printed on blue paper or bound in books with blue covers.
Not so. No one has turned up seventeenth-century sheets of blue paper or blue-bound books containing these laws, nor has anyone found any seventeenth-century references to these regulations as "blue laws." The earliest recorded use of the term didn't appear until well over a century later, when the Reverend Samuel Peters' 1781 book, General History of Connecticut, described onerous colonial laws in the following manner:
Blue Laws; i.e. bloody Laws; for they were all sanctified with whipping, cutting off the ears, burning the tongue, and death.
(A variant of this tale posits a self-referential origin for the term by claiming that Peters' book itself was printed on blue paper!)
Although Peters maintained that early colonists did refer to these laws as "blue laws," he did not claim that the name was taken from the paper they were printed on, nor is there any evidence of an earlier usage of the term than his own. Since parts of Peters' book (such as his list of forty-five putative "blue laws") have since been found unreliable, it's possible he may simply have invented the term "blue laws" himself. If not, the term most likely derived from an eighteenth-century usage of the word "blue" as a disparaging reference to something perceived as "rigidly moral" (a "bluenose," for example, is one who advocates a rigorous moral code), not from the color of the material on which the laws themselves were printed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrFun
|
 |
of Iowa
Nov 2000
time: 23:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SlowwHand
MrFun, you're bastardizing history again.
http://www.snopes.com/language/colors/bluelaws.htm
Origins:
The term "blue laws" originally applied to laws enacted by the Puritans in seventeenth-century Connecticut to regulate moral behavior (especially what people must or must not do on the Sabbath), laws which often called for rather harsh punishments to be applied to offenders. Blue laws typically specified penalties for moral offenses such as failure to attend church on the Sabbath; lying, swearing, and drunkenness; and the playing of games (such as cards, dice, and shuffleboard) in public. They also mandated more severe punishments for crimes committed on the Sabbath and regulated the sale and consumption of alcohol. Violators of blue laws might be assessed monetary fines, be whipped, be forced to spend time in the stocks, have body parts burned or cut off, or even receive the death penalty. As the influence of the colonial Puritan theocracies declined after the American Revolution, blue laws were generally abolished or went unenforced, although the temperance movements which began in the late nineteenth century brought a new round of legislation intended to regulate private conduct by banning the sale of cigarettes and alcohol, prohibiting amusements and "unnecessary labor" on Sundays, and providing for local censorship of arts and entertainment (such as books, plays, and films).
Many remnants of "blue laws" survived into the late twentieth century as seemingly nonsensical patchworks of regulations about which types of businesses could operate on Sundays and what items they could sell. Thus various jurisidictions might have regulations which, on Sundays, prohibited the sale of hammers but not nails, forbade trading in horses while allowing automobile dealerships to remain open, or prohibited the purchase of alcohol at liquor stores but not grocery stores.
Also puzzling to latter-day Americans was the term "blue laws" itself. Why were these regulations called "blue laws"? With no obvious explanation at hand, we invented a satisfying one: these types of laws had originally been printed on blue paper or bound in books with blue covers.
Not so. No one has turned up seventeenth-century sheets of blue paper or blue-bound books containing these laws, nor has anyone found any seventeenth-century references to these regulations as "blue laws." The earliest recorded use of the term didn't appear until well over a century later, when the Reverend Samuel Peters' 1781 book, General History of Connecticut, described onerous colonial laws in the following manner:
Blue Laws; i.e. bloody Laws; for they were all sanctified with whipping, cutting off the ears, burning the tongue, and death.
(A variant of this tale posits a self-referential origin for the term by claiming that Peters' book itself was printed on blue paper!)
Although Peters maintained that early colonists did refer to these laws as "blue laws," he did not claim that the name was taken from the paper they were printed on, nor is there any evidence of an earlier usage of the term than his own. Since parts of Peters' book (such as his list of forty-five putative "blue laws") have since been found unreliable, it's possible he may simply have invented the term "blue laws" himself. If not, the term most likely derived from an eighteenth-century usage of the word "blue" as a disparaging reference to something perceived as "rigidly moral" (a "bluenose," for example, is one who advocates a rigorous moral code), not from the color of the material on which the laws themselves were printed. |
According to the documentary series, "500 Nations" one part of the Blue Laws concerned itself with Amerindians who were violating Christian customs by praticing their own customs.
Blue Laws consisted of a whole range of laws concerning moral behavior -- including killing Amerindians for not conforming to Christian customs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Field Marshal Klesh
If a town is 10 miles from the border of New Hampshire or Vermont (2 states that allow Sunday liquor sales), then their package stores are allowed to be open. |
Of course, if that were true, then land 10 miles or farther into Massachusetts would be a barren wasteland, with a mysterous metropolis starting at exactly the border to exactly ten miles in.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
Perhaps the term "blue nose" was used to indicate the coldness of puritanical abstinence in contrast to the cheery red warmth of a good toddy quafed by a warm hearth as enjoyed by CofE types?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
I can see it now: Huge migrations from the inner state to the borders where alcohol sales is legal. Busses filled with people ready to purchase some booze. I could start a transport company and become rich in days! I'd better start before anyone else catches on to my scheme.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-10-2003 01:30
Or was it just a slip of the fingers on the keyboard.
Amerinds are the native peoples of the Americas. Armenians are one of the nations inhabiting the Caucasus Mountain region.
|