approximately Vermont Slavery... I read with interest "WTF: Why Does a Sign in Richmond order Passersby to 'Understand Slavery'?" [April 26]. However,I wish people would stop saying that Vermont outlawed slavery in 1777. No such thing happened — the Vermont Constitution outlawed adult slavery only. Young men could be enslaved until age 21; young women until age 18. At a time when African American life expectancy was approximately the mid-thirties, people of color could be enslaved for most of their lives. Many were never freed at their age of majority but were sold to slave states. The "owners" then forced fresh youngsters to work for them. Some were simply never freed and stayed enslaved for life in Vermont. The age of majority was later changed to 21 for both genders. That is still in our Vermont Constitution nowadays! Elise A. Guyette South Burlington Smoke Signals [Re Off Message: "Vermont Senate Rebuffs Attempt to Raise Smoking Age, and " April 25]: On March 26,2015, the Huffington Post reported that "Cigarettes used to be everywhere in American society. Fifty years ago, and 42.4 percent of U.S. adults smoked. Since then,that figure has declined by more than half, reaching a record low 17.8 percent in 2014 ... The Surgeon General's Office estimates that almost nine out of 10 smokers began smoking before age 18, or while virtually every smoker — a full 99 percent — started by age 26. Accordingly,a lot of effort has been directed at discouraging young people from picking up that first cigarette." Raising the legal age for cigarette purchases to 21 is a positive step in safeguarding the health of the next generation and lowering the crippling costs to our health system of the subsequent diseases associated with smoking cigarettes. Age 25 would be even better. The Vermont legislature — both houses — should have the health and welfare of all citizens of Vermont as an underlying principle in their work. Glennis Drew Barre Badreads! [Re "Vermont Fantasy Novel Sparks a Tale of Fascism and Internet Fury," April 26]: The interview with author Laurie Forest begins with the statement that Goodreads is a democratic forum and goes on to narrate readers who have condemned the book without ever having read it. It is remarkable to me that the article does not comment further on what has been, and with this book and others,a "fury" of cyberbullying. Dissent and civil…
Source: sevendaysvt.com