Thread

1. QuercusMax · 1790267978 · focus · HN ↗

   I don't understand why Texas voters support such inhumane conditions. All these "Christians" who support this kind of cruel punishment need to have a "come to Jesus" moment, literally.

   1. dkural · 1790270568 · focus · HN ↗

      It's because Texas is the OG of human suffering. Texas gave up territory than end slavery: This is why Oklahoma looks so weird (the "panhandle"). After the so-called Missouri compromise, in order to remain a slave-state, Texas gave up that piece of land. Also, Texas declared independence not once, but twice, to remain a slave state. First, from Mexico: "Many Anglo-American settlers were from the southern United States and brought enslaved workers, using legal loopholes like indentured servitude to bypass Mexican restrictions against slavery. They feared Mexico would abolish the practice entirely". And then, famously, of course, fighting to remain independent during the Civil War.

      1. ceroxylon · 1790270847 · focus · HN ↗

         Your point is valid, but it is worth noting that the panhandle territory was a notoriously inhospitable place to try and exist (for European settlers at least, who called it "no mans land"), so it wasn't like Texas was giving up a gem, none of the surrounding states wanted it.

         1. apercu · 1790271507 · focus · HN ↗

            Isn’t that part of the llano estacado? The Comanche lived there just fine.

            1. ceroxylon · 1790297694 · focus · HN ↗

               That's why I added the context about European settlers, it was the States that were drawing the lines and they labeled it "no man's land", look into the history of Beaver County.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.