Since Trump is self destructing and Hillary is poison, still how can one consciously vote liberalism

[turzovka]

Because liberalism by and large implies and deploys secular liberalism in this nation.

Secularism implies there is no room for God in political discourse or in public education. And any moral issue that hints at a religious value is considered bad for society by secular liberalism. So children are taught being gay is great, being bi-sexual is great, turning into a transgender is perfectly acceptable, premarital sex is totally expected with some precautions, and oral sex will be covered as well.

and this is a bad thing, why? Frankly, Religion has caused a lot of misery through history. Crusades, Jihads, Inquisitions... The sooner we expunge it, the better as far as I'm concerned.

That is secularism taking over morality and the indoctrination of an abhorrent universal moral understanding. Don’t want to ever mention God, fine, don’t ever discuss matters that are not reading writing or arithmetic. When schools usurp the authority of parents and promote immoral practices it is wrong. When they whoosh kids off for secret abortions, that is an even more unspeakable crime.

Okay, here's the problem with that kind of mentality. Whose Imaginary sky Friend are we going to teach about in Schools? Are we going to tell kids about Protestant Jesus or Catholic Jesus or Orthodox Jesus? Keep in mind, the main reason why you can't get public funding for your superstitions today is because most states have Blaine Amendments to their constitutions. Blaine was an anti-Catholic bigot who didn't want no kids learning about the Pope or some such shit.

Ironicaly, today, the Protestants are sending their kids to Catholic Schools because they are better (i.e., they can throw out the darkies) and the Catholics have responded by soft-pedelling the Catholicism. Too fucking Funny.

Liberalism promotes illegal immigration and open borders, risks conservatives do not want to take with potential terrorists and also other trafficking. We want legal immigration only. We will fund them if we can afford it and the elected congress says it’s Ok.

Guy, I think you are a little confused as to who is encouraging illegal immigration.It's Rich Republicans who don't want to pay Americans even minimum wage.

Liberalism turns a blind eye to the unvetted Middle Eastern migrants coming in here by untold thousands. How insane is that? We already have tens of thousands of Arab men on student visas who we can no longer locate in this nation. Want a link?

Uh, no, guy. I think any terrorist who is going to try to sneak in as a refugee and wait two years before he can get in here is probably not an immediate danger.

Liberalism leads the parade against cops making them out to be this terrible racist menace. Do they care what fallout that brings? Heck no, because it assures the black vote. Are they coming down hard against the thugs in the Black Lives Matter demonstrations? Of course not. More racial divide.

Yeah, how dare those black people object when White cops shoot their kids in the back.

Liberalism does nothing to stop Obama’s defunding of the military, reduction of troops, and demoralizing the entire military. Nor does it take the threats of terrorism or hostile nations near as seriously as conservatism does. Very misguided. National security is job one!

We spend 600 Billion on the military, more than the next ten countries combined and 8 of those are our allies.

Liberalism is against increased offshore drilling, Alaskan drilling, fracking, keystone pipeline, nuclear plants, and are anti-coal. All these measures to please the gods of extrement environmentalism. This is so wrong. These are national security issues first and foremost. Dependence on Arab oil or other subversive nations should be done away with as soon as possible. Our economy would benefit enormously as well – again, liberals do not care.

Guy, paying a little less at the gas pump isn't going to do us any good if the planet becomes unlivable.

Liberals are soft on crime and light on sentences. It is not conservative judges giving rapists, and violent criminals mitigated sentences and paroles. Worst of all, liberalism is far less likely to address the worst of crimes in this nation, urban gang violence. What conservative would be against a huge cop presence and very stiff sentences for these young offenders? You need to eradicate gang violence by attacking it vehemently. That is the only hope of stopping its perpetual presence. I think it is reprehensible children are afraid to walk to school, bus to school, or go outside in Chicago and other gang infested U.S. cities. Unforgivable! What has Obama ever said or done about that?? Not giving congress much credit here either, as it is.

Guy, one more time- We lock up TWO MILLION PEOPLE. We have another 7 Million on Parole or Probation. We aren't going to imprison our way to a solution.

Liberalism is insanely hung up on pushing transgenderism on this nation and its institutions. They are promoting a bizarre perversion that ruins lives. They push everything gay to the point of punishing anything that stands in its ways.

No one is making you wear a dress, dummy.

Liberalism has demanded legalized abortion and gay marriage. Both of these evolutions are an enormous affront to God. They are immoral and sinful, especially abortion, and with the government and our schools celebrating it all it influences children and society that this is all good. The worst of govt’s faults.

There is no God. Never was. People don't choose to be gay and women have had abortions since Jesus was walking around. You really need to check into the real world some time, dummy.

Liberalism is an enemy of Israel and an apologist for Islam. This is so cowardly and so wrong. Islam is the scourge and Israel is the perpetual victim and the world’s punching bag and scapegoat for their own sins.

Fuck Israel. The Zionists are like abused children who've gotten big enough to beat up soemone else. It will be a great day when they are pushed into the sea.

Liberalism has taken the word God out of school out of our nation's history. No one can say the word, carry a Bible to school, mention the word Christmas or sing about it. Our Christian history and tradition is now treated like a pox on this nation. And all it takes is for one creep to sue.

Yup. Keep your fucking Bronze Age superstitions in your churches where they belong.

Our universities are immersed in liberalism and its social engineering. Their course and the elitist snobbish liberal professors sicken me. They do anything but encourage dialogue and counter arguments. I have no interest in tax dollars funding that kind of enemy.

Yup, you don't need you no edujumacation, Cleetus!

Liberalism allows a lying criminal like Hillary to get away with murder. Only because they have a corrupt mainstream media ready to do their bidding and support their every cover up and lie. This is a sickness that is killing America or has killed America.

You guys have spent hundreds of millions of dollars investigating Clinton. You can't even prove she violated minor laws, much less murder.

Liberalism is weak on Islamic terrorism, of course no better example than our “coward in chief.” That bastard would not even march in Paris after Charli Hedbo with all the other heads of state of Europe and Israel and Palestine. No, he hid under his desk. And you guys give him another free pass. I don’t!

Guy, our problem with "Islamic" terrorism is we keep going into their countries and fucking with them.

YOu are like the guy who sticks his dick into a hornet's nest and then whines about getting stung.

Thanks JoeB for taking the time to read my rant and then respond --- at least in some manner.


Questions:

Are you for real?

Why are you here?

Do people take you seriously in real life?

Your answers or excuses are bewildering.

There is nothing a conservative opposes that you do not favor. There is nothing a liberal stands for that you will not defend, often in the most bizarre ways. You think God is a total joke and those who follow this God are crazy and detrimental. Plus you lump all people of all religions together as though there is no difference between what they believe or how they act. You hate Israel and you blame all the endless acts of Islamic violence on the West.

Joe, I wish you well.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Slavery existed because, regrettably, the SCOTUS failed to properly interpret the language of the Constitution with regard to our founding principles. Self-evident truth is hard to deny. Presidents, congresses and courts couldn't do it. Even a war couldn't do it. Eventually self-evident truth prevails. All men ARE created equal and endowed rights by their Creator. The Constitution wasn't flawed, men who interpreted it incorrectly were.

Are you really that stupid and ill informed? Here was the law of the land then until 1865, fool!

US Constitution;
Article, § 2, Clause 3
"No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Article I, § 2, Clause 3
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". [slaves]

First slave act of Congress - Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

Slavery was a part of the Constitution until 1865 when Amendment XIII was ratified and certified, dimwit! It had nothing to do with the Courts being the Law of the Land. Slavery continued to exist after ratification of the Constitution because it was written into the Constitution. It was nothing more than a compromise with the devil himself himself, and the human misery it caused is unimaginable and a stain on this Nation. You really don't know jack shit, you bloody creature!!!!

Oh my goodness... are we having an argument that slavery was legal from 1776-1865? I had no idea that was what we were debating. You see, we were talking about founding intent being secular or non-secular. So how did we end up here? I think you were attempting to make some lame point that the Constitution didn't hold true to the self-evident truth that all men are created equal because it allowed slavery. The thing is, it was impossible in 1782 to abolish slavery. Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready.

Over the next century, the SCOTUS reviewed several cases in which they continued to uphold slavery. Congress deliberated several bills and acts to further institutionalize slavery. I'm well aware of history.... but eventually, the self-evident truth prevailed. The brilliance of Madison was realized by people like Frederick Douglass. It was precisely because of the non-secular spirit in which the Constitution rests that slaves were ultimately freed.

Oh my goodness... are we having an argument that slavery was legal from 1776-1865? I had no idea that was what we were debating. You see, we were talking about founding intent being secular or non-secular. So how did we end up here? I think you were attempting to make some lame point that the Constitution didn't hold true to the self-evident truth that all men are created equal because it allowed slavery. The thing is, it was impossible in 1782 to abolish slavery. Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready.

Hey dummy, you broached that topic to dodge the topic of discussion you fucking idiot in your post #88 and continued in your post #125! I went along with it to let you hang yourself by that smoking petard hanging half way out your bloody ass waiting for it to explode! And explode it did!. And your dishonest conclusion displays you were caught out, fool! That's how we got here IDIOT! Need a white cane to find your way?

What the fuck does 1782 have to do with the Constitution (topic of discussion) and slavery (your dodge topic) other than making a statement of the absolute obvious? Not a Damn thing! The Revolutionary War was still going on and only ended after the preliminary peace treaty was ratified in April 1783 and the Treaty of Paris signed in September 1783! You don't have a fucking clue do you? I didn't believe you would answer after those 16 long seconds!

You wrote this absurd bit of shit to close the paragraph:
"Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready."

Just what in the ever loving giant turd is that supposed to mean? That Madison some how set up within the original "Frame of Government" sent to the several States for ratification in the fall of 1787? Gawd your perfidy knows no fucking bounds!

Over the next century, the SCOTUS reviewed several cases in which they continued to uphold slavery. Congress deliberated several bills and acts to further institutionalize slavery. I'm well aware of history.... but eventually, the self-evident truth prevailed. The brilliance of Madison was realized by people like Frederick Douglass. It was precisely because of the non-secular spirit in which the Constitution rests that slaves were ultimately freed.

You bloody idiot! Slavery was the Law of the Land when the 1st Congress convened in March 1789! Let me repost this because you didn't read it the first time I posted it to you, obviously!

"Are you really that stupid and ill informed? Here was the law of the land then until 1865, fool!

US Constitution;
Article, § 2, Clause 3
"No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Article I, § 2, Clause 3
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". [slaves]

First slave act of Congress - Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

Slavery was a part of the Constitution until 1865 when Amendment XIII was ratified and certified, dimwit! It had nothing to do with the Courts being the Law of the Land. Slavery continued to exist after ratification of the Constitution because it was written into the Constitution. It was nothing more than a compromise with the devil himself himself, and the human misery it caused is unimaginable and a stain on this Nation. You really don't know jack shit, you bloody creature!!!!"
Since Trump is self destructing and Hillary is poison, still how can one consciously vote liberalism

You're a true sadist you sick fuck!

You'll note the words "slave" and "slavery" were not used in the Constitution. That was certainly not unintentional. Jefferson and Madison both knew that slavery would eventually be debated. Jefferson could have very easily written "all free men are created equal" ...he didn't. Madison could have used the word "slaves" ...he didn't.

Whenever I've articulated this point in the past, I've been accused of being an "apologist" for going against the meme that the founding fathers were a bunch of racists who didn't give a damn about the slaves. But what I've relayed comes from Frederick Douglass' biography. Is Douglass an apologist? I wouldn't think so.

What I still don't understand is why we're off in the weeds on a debate about slavery in the middle of a thread about Trump and the 2016 election? I also don't understand why seemingly coherent persons such as yourself, want to mess your posts up by spewing such obnoxious hate-filled insults? You realize when you start your post with that crap, people tune you out and totally gloss over any point you hoped to make. It also doesn't dissuade me any, I've been around these boards for years and have been called every name in the book. So it must be for self-gratification but it's a shame because you could probably hold your own in a debate if not for that.

You'll note the words "slave" and "slavery" were not used in the Constitution. That was certainly not unintentional. Jefferson and Madison both knew that slavery would eventually be debated. Jefferson could have very easily written "all free men are created equal" ...he didn't. Madison could have used the word "slaves" ...he didn't.

A distinction without a difference and totally irrelevant written only as more deflection! But then you just HAD to write something, huh dimwit!

Whenever I've articulated this point in the past, I've been accused of being an "apologist" for going against the meme that the founding fathers were a bunch of racists who didn't give a damn about the slaves. But what I've relayed comes from Frederick Douglass' biography. Is Douglass an apologist? I wouldn't think so.

Let me check and see if I give a rats ass...no I don't give a rats ass about your past intrigues on this forum! I do know from our past and present exchanges that you are a fraud willing to say anything with the integrity of a guttersnipe!

What I still don't understand is why we're off in the weeds on a debate about slavery in the middle of a thread about Trump and the 2016 election? I also don't understand why seemingly coherent persons such as yourself, want to mess your posts up by spewing such obnoxious hate-filled insults? You realize when you start your post with that crap, people tune you out and totally gloss over any point you hoped to make. It also doesn't dissuade me any, I've been around these boards for years and have been called every name in the book. So it must be for self-gratification but it's a shame because you could probably hold your own in a debate if not for that.

You purposely led the exchange in that direction fool as already explained to you in detail. Playing dumb only makes you appear more impotent and ineffectual you bloody wimp!

The insults were merely statements of fact and small attempts to wake you up to the fact that I was on to your fucking game, FOOL! You sure the fuck didn't "tune out" you idiot, you "responded" to every post because it's in your nature to do what you do in your responses...attempting to appear what you are not! Here is a hint laddie buck, I have been far above holding my own and then some.

I'm a retired engineer. I have the intellect, training and discipline to formulate logical tracks of thought and express them, albeit not always succinctly. You on the other hand appear to be incapable of such, given your track record during this exchange as an exemplar. You just haven't been paying attention because you've been to busy playing your role as you've dreamt it. Try honesty for a change and observe how things change and improve one's own self esteem! Be yourself and not something you only think you are.

God Bless and keep your family!

 

[Boss]

Slavery existed because, regrettably, the SCOTUS failed to properly interpret the language of the Constitution with regard to our founding principles. Self-evident truth is hard to deny. Presidents, congresses and courts couldn't do it. Even a war couldn't do it. Eventually self-evident truth prevails. All men ARE created equal and endowed rights by their Creator. The Constitution wasn't flawed, men who interpreted it incorrectly were.

Are you really that stupid and ill informed? Here was the law of the land then until 1865, fool!

US Constitution;
Article, § 2, Clause 3
"No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Article I, § 2, Clause 3
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". [slaves]

First slave act of Congress - Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

Slavery was a part of the Constitution until 1865 when Amendment XIII was ratified and certified, dimwit! It had nothing to do with the Courts being the Law of the Land. Slavery continued to exist after ratification of the Constitution because it was written into the Constitution. It was nothing more than a compromise with the devil himself himself, and the human misery it caused is unimaginable and a stain on this Nation. You really don't know jack shit, you bloody creature!!!!

Oh my goodness... are we having an argument that slavery was legal from 1776-1865? I had no idea that was what we were debating. You see, we were talking about founding intent being secular or non-secular. So how did we end up here? I think you were attempting to make some lame point that the Constitution didn't hold true to the self-evident truth that all men are created equal because it allowed slavery. The thing is, it was impossible in 1782 to abolish slavery. Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready.

Over the next century, the SCOTUS reviewed several cases in which they continued to uphold slavery. Congress deliberated several bills and acts to further institutionalize slavery. I'm well aware of history.... but eventually, the self-evident truth prevailed. The brilliance of Madison was realized by people like Frederick Douglass. It was precisely because of the non-secular spirit in which the Constitution rests that slaves were ultimately freed.

Oh my goodness... are we having an argument that slavery was legal from 1776-1865? I had no idea that was what we were debating. You see, we were talking about founding intent being secular or non-secular. So how did we end up here? I think you were attempting to make some lame point that the Constitution didn't hold true to the self-evident truth that all men are created equal because it allowed slavery. The thing is, it was impossible in 1782 to abolish slavery. Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready.

Hey dummy, you broached that topic to dodge the topic of discussion you fucking idiot in your post #88 and continued in your post #125! I went along with it to let you hang yourself by that smoking petard hanging half way out your bloody ass waiting for it to explode! And explode it did!. And your dishonest conclusion displays you were caught out, fool! That's how we got here IDIOT! Need a white cane to find your way?

What the fuck does 1782 have to do with the Constitution (topic of discussion) and slavery (your dodge topic) other than making a statement of the absolute obvious? Not a Damn thing! The Revolutionary War was still going on and only ended after the preliminary peace treaty was ratified in April 1783 and the Treaty of Paris signed in September 1783! You don't have a fucking clue do you? I didn't believe you would answer after those 16 long seconds!

You wrote this absurd bit of shit to close the paragraph:
"Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready."

Just what in the ever loving giant turd is that supposed to mean? That Madison some how set up within the original "Frame of Government" sent to the several States for ratification in the fall of 1787? Gawd your perfidy knows no fucking bounds!

Over the next century, the SCOTUS reviewed several cases in which they continued to uphold slavery. Congress deliberated several bills and acts to further institutionalize slavery. I'm well aware of history.... but eventually, the self-evident truth prevailed. The brilliance of Madison was realized by people like Frederick Douglass. It was precisely because of the non-secular spirit in which the Constitution rests that slaves were ultimately freed.

You bloody idiot! Slavery was the Law of the Land when the 1st Congress convened in March 1789! Let me repost this because you didn't read it the first time I posted it to you, obviously!

"Are you really that stupid and ill informed? Here was the law of the land then until 1865, fool!

US Constitution;
Article, § 2, Clause 3
"No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Article I, § 2, Clause 3
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". [slaves]

First slave act of Congress - Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

Slavery was a part of the Constitution until 1865 when Amendment XIII was ratified and certified, dimwit! It had nothing to do with the Courts being the Law of the Land. Slavery continued to exist after ratification of the Constitution because it was written into the Constitution. It was nothing more than a compromise with the devil himself himself, and the human misery it caused is unimaginable and a stain on this Nation. You really don't know jack shit, you bloody creature!!!!"
Since Trump is self destructing and Hillary is poison, still how can one consciously vote liberalism

You're a true sadist you sick fuck!

You'll note the words "slave" and "slavery" were not used in the Constitution. That was certainly not unintentional. Jefferson and Madison both knew that slavery would eventually be debated. Jefferson could have very easily written "all free men are created equal" ...he didn't. Madison could have used the word "slaves" ...he didn't.

Whenever I've articulated this point in the past, I've been accused of being an "apologist" for going against the meme that the founding fathers were a bunch of racists who didn't give a damn about the slaves. But what I've relayed comes from Frederick Douglass' biography. Is Douglass an apologist? I wouldn't think so.

What I still don't understand is why we're off in the weeds on a debate about slavery in the middle of a thread about Trump and the 2016 election? I also don't understand why seemingly coherent persons such as yourself, want to mess your posts up by spewing such obnoxious hate-filled insults? You realize when you start your post with that crap, people tune you out and totally gloss over any point you hoped to make. It also doesn't dissuade me any, I've been around these boards for years and have been called every name in the book. So it must be for self-gratification but it's a shame because you could probably hold your own in a debate if not for that.

You'll note the words "slave" and "slavery" were not used in the Constitution. That was certainly not unintentional. Jefferson and Madison both knew that slavery would eventually be debated. Jefferson could have very easily written "all free men are created equal" ...he didn't. Madison could have used the word "slaves" ...he didn't.

A distinction without a difference and totally irrelevant written only as more deflection! But then you just HAD to write something, huh dimwit!

Whenever I've articulated this point in the past, I've been accused of being an "apologist" for going against the meme that the founding fathers were a bunch of racists who didn't give a damn about the slaves. But what I've relayed comes from Frederick Douglass' biography. Is Douglass an apologist? I wouldn't think so.

Let me check and see if I give a rats ass...no I don't give a rats ass about your past intrigues on this forum! I do know from our past and present exchanges that you are a fraud willing to say anything with the integrity of a guttersnipe!

What I still don't understand is why we're off in the weeds on a debate about slavery in the middle of a thread about Trump and the 2016 election? I also don't understand why seemingly coherent persons such as yourself, want to mess your posts up by spewing such obnoxious hate-filled insults? You realize when you start your post with that crap, people tune you out and totally gloss over any point you hoped to make. It also doesn't dissuade me any, I've been around these boards for years and have been called every name in the book. So it must be for self-gratification but it's a shame because you could probably hold your own in a debate if not for that.

You purposely led the exchange in that direction fool as already explained to you in detail. Playing dumb only makes you appear more impotent and ineffectual you bloody wimp!

The insults were merely statements of fact and small attempts to wake you up to the fact that I was on to your fucking game, FOOL! You sure the fuck didn't "tune out" you idiot, you "responded" to every post because it's in your nature to do what you do in your responses...attempting to appear what you are not! Here is a hint laddie buck, I have been far above holding my own and then some.

I'm a retired engineer. I have the intellect, training and discipline to formulate logical tracks of thought and express them, albeit not always succinctly. You on the other hand appear to be incapable of such, given your track record during this exchange as an exemplar. You just haven't been paying attention because you've been to busy playing your role as you've dreamt it. Try honesty for a change and observe how things change and improve one's own self esteem! Be yourself and not something you only think you are.

God Bless and keep your family!

Well you basically didn't do anything but run your mouth here, so I guess our debate has concluded. You disagree with me, which is not a surprise or unexpected.

If you simply wish to continue in vain to try and agitate me, I'll just pop you on my ignore list with all the other trolls.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Are you really that stupid and ill informed? Here was the law of the land then until 1865, fool!

US Constitution;
Article, § 2, Clause 3
"No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Article I, § 2, Clause 3
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". [slaves]

First slave act of Congress - Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

Slavery was a part of the Constitution until 1865 when Amendment XIII was ratified and certified, dimwit! It had nothing to do with the Courts being the Law of the Land. Slavery continued to exist after ratification of the Constitution because it was written into the Constitution. It was nothing more than a compromise with the devil himself himself, and the human misery it caused is unimaginable and a stain on this Nation. You really don't know jack shit, you bloody creature!!!!

Oh my goodness... are we having an argument that slavery was legal from 1776-1865? I had no idea that was what we were debating. You see, we were talking about founding intent being secular or non-secular. So how did we end up here? I think you were attempting to make some lame point that the Constitution didn't hold true to the self-evident truth that all men are created equal because it allowed slavery. The thing is, it was impossible in 1782 to abolish slavery. Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready.

Over the next century, the SCOTUS reviewed several cases in which they continued to uphold slavery. Congress deliberated several bills and acts to further institutionalize slavery. I'm well aware of history.... but eventually, the self-evident truth prevailed. The brilliance of Madison was realized by people like Frederick Douglass. It was precisely because of the non-secular spirit in which the Constitution rests that slaves were ultimately freed.

Oh my goodness... are we having an argument that slavery was legal from 1776-1865? I had no idea that was what we were debating. You see, we were talking about founding intent being secular or non-secular. So how did we end up here? I think you were attempting to make some lame point that the Constitution didn't hold true to the self-evident truth that all men are created equal because it allowed slavery. The thing is, it was impossible in 1782 to abolish slavery. Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready.

Hey dummy, you broached that topic to dodge the topic of discussion you fucking idiot in your post #88 and continued in your post #125! I went along with it to let you hang yourself by that smoking petard hanging half way out your bloody ass waiting for it to explode! And explode it did!. And your dishonest conclusion displays you were caught out, fool! That's how we got here IDIOT! Need a white cane to find your way?

What the fuck does 1782 have to do with the Constitution (topic of discussion) and slavery (your dodge topic) other than making a statement of the absolute obvious? Not a Damn thing! The Revolutionary War was still going on and only ended after the preliminary peace treaty was ratified in April 1783 and the Treaty of Paris signed in September 1783! You don't have a fucking clue do you? I didn't believe you would answer after those 16 long seconds!

You wrote this absurd bit of shit to close the paragraph:
"Madison would have loved to... that's why he carefully crafted a Constitution that allowed that whenever society was ready."

Just what in the ever loving giant turd is that supposed to mean? That Madison some how set up within the original "Frame of Government" sent to the several States for ratification in the fall of 1787? Gawd your perfidy knows no fucking bounds!

Over the next century, the SCOTUS reviewed several cases in which they continued to uphold slavery. Congress deliberated several bills and acts to further institutionalize slavery. I'm well aware of history.... but eventually, the self-evident truth prevailed. The brilliance of Madison was realized by people like Frederick Douglass. It was precisely because of the non-secular spirit in which the Constitution rests that slaves were ultimately freed.

You bloody idiot! Slavery was the Law of the Land when the 1st Congress convened in March 1789! Let me repost this because you didn't read it the first time I posted it to you, obviously!

"Are you really that stupid and ill informed? Here was the law of the land then until 1865, fool!

US Constitution;
Article, § 2, Clause 3
"No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Article I, § 2, Clause 3
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". [slaves]

First slave act of Congress - Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

Slavery was a part of the Constitution until 1865 when Amendment XIII was ratified and certified, dimwit! It had nothing to do with the Courts being the Law of the Land. Slavery continued to exist after ratification of the Constitution because it was written into the Constitution. It was nothing more than a compromise with the devil himself himself, and the human misery it caused is unimaginable and a stain on this Nation. You really don't know jack shit, you bloody creature!!!!"
Since Trump is self destructing and Hillary is poison, still how can one consciously vote liberalism

You're a true sadist you sick fuck!

You'll note the words "slave" and "slavery" were not used in the Constitution. That was certainly not unintentional. Jefferson and Madison both knew that slavery would eventually be debated. Jefferson could have very easily written "all free men are created equal" ...he didn't. Madison could have used the word "slaves" ...he didn't.

Whenever I've articulated this point in the past, I've been accused of being an "apologist" for going against the meme that the founding fathers were a bunch of racists who didn't give a damn about the slaves. But what I've relayed comes from Frederick Douglass' biography. Is Douglass an apologist? I wouldn't think so.

What I still don't understand is why we're off in the weeds on a debate about slavery in the middle of a thread about Trump and the 2016 election? I also don't understand why seemingly coherent persons such as yourself, want to mess your posts up by spewing such obnoxious hate-filled insults? You realize when you start your post with that crap, people tune you out and totally gloss over any point you hoped to make. It also doesn't dissuade me any, I've been around these boards for years and have been called every name in the book. So it must be for self-gratification but it's a shame because you could probably hold your own in a debate if not for that.

You'll note the words "slave" and "slavery" were not used in the Constitution. That was certainly not unintentional. Jefferson and Madison both knew that slavery would eventually be debated. Jefferson could have very easily written "all free men are created equal" ...he didn't. Madison could have used the word "slaves" ...he didn't.

A distinction without a difference and totally irrelevant written only as more deflection! But then you just HAD to write something, huh dimwit!

Whenever I've articulated this point in the past, I've been accused of being an "apologist" for going against the meme that the founding fathers were a bunch of racists who didn't give a damn about the slaves. But what I've relayed comes from Frederick Douglass' biography. Is Douglass an apologist? I wouldn't think so.

Let me check and see if I give a rats ass...no I don't give a rats ass about your past intrigues on this forum! I do know from our past and present exchanges that you are a fraud willing to say anything with the integrity of a guttersnipe!

What I still don't understand is why we're off in the weeds on a debate about slavery in the middle of a thread about Trump and the 2016 election? I also don't understand why seemingly coherent persons such as yourself, want to mess your posts up by spewing such obnoxious hate-filled insults? You realize when you start your post with that crap, people tune you out and totally gloss over any point you hoped to make. It also doesn't dissuade me any, I've been around these boards for years and have been called every name in the book. So it must be for self-gratification but it's a shame because you could probably hold your own in a debate if not for that.

You purposely led the exchange in that direction fool as already explained to you in detail. Playing dumb only makes you appear more impotent and ineffectual you bloody wimp!

The insults were merely statements of fact and small attempts to wake you up to the fact that I was on to your fucking game, FOOL! You sure the fuck didn't "tune out" you idiot, you "responded" to every post because it's in your nature to do what you do in your responses...attempting to appear what you are not! Here is a hint laddie buck, I have been far above holding my own and then some.

I'm a retired engineer. I have the intellect, training and discipline to formulate logical tracks of thought and express them, albeit not always succinctly. You on the other hand appear to be incapable of such, given your track record during this exchange as an exemplar. You just haven't been paying attention because you've been to busy playing your role as you've dreamt it. Try honesty for a change and observe how things change and improve one's own self esteem! Be yourself and not something you only think you are.

God Bless and keep your family!

Well you basically didn't do anything but run your mouth here, so I guess our debate has concluded. You disagree with me, which is not a surprise or unexpected.

If you simply wish to continue in vain to try and agitate me, I'll just pop you on my ignore list with all the other trolls.

Well you basically didn't do anything but run your mouth here, so I guess our debate has concluded. You disagree with me, which is not a surprise or unexpected.

To bad you failed to take serious or heed what I wrote to you last; unwise and stupidly truculent to the end. Some folks never learn!

If you simply wish to continue in vain to try and agitate me, I'll just pop you on my ignore list with all the other trolls.

Fine! You just do that cowardly little thing so you don't have to have a mirror held up to your perfidiousness for you to see while others observe the reflection. Won't hurt my feelin's, but it won't save face for you either, brave heart!

BTW, if I'm a troll, why did you initiate this exchange in the first place with your post #5 on Page #1...hmmmm? Remember what I wrote in my last post to you about deflection, honesty and integrity? Obviously NOT you fucking hypocrite!

 

[Boss]

More yacking.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

More yacking.

More trolling, eh!

You failed to respond to my question responding to your assertion! Here it is again;

If I'm a troll, why did you initiate this exchange in the first place with your post #5 on Page #1...hmmmm? Remember what I wrote in my last post to you about deflection, honesty and integrity? Obviously NOT you fucking hypocrite!

I'll write it larger for you asshole so you'll have no excuse for missing it in that little box;
If I'm a troll, why did you initiate this exchange in the first place with your post #5 on Page #1...hmmmm? Remember what I wrote in my last post to you about deflection, honesty and integrity? Obviously NOT you fucking hypocrite!

 

[JoeB131]

Thanks JoeB for taking the time to read my rant and then respond --- at least in some manner.


Questions:

Are you for real?

Why are you here?

Do people take you seriously in real life?

Your answers or excuses are bewildering.

There is nothing a conservative opposes that you do not favor. There is nothing a liberal stands for that you will not defend, often in the most bizarre ways. You think God is a total joke

Yes, guy, I think that your God is a joke in that he is completely illogical. You essentially have a being who has a 14 BILLION year plan to create a universe so he can be totally concerned about where I'm putting my dick. (Because, let's be honest, most of your religious hangups about the sex.) Wouldn't it have been easier to just create beings without dicks to start with. And if man is made in his Image, why would God have a dick? I mean, where was he putting His Divine Dick for those 13,999,000,000 years before human beings showed up?

those who follow this God are crazy and detrimental. Plus you lump all people of all religions together as though there is no difference between what they believe or how they act. You hate Israel and you blame all the endless acts of Islamic violence on the West.

From my perspective, you are all equally crazy. There have been just as many "endless" acts of Christian violence. - Crusades, Inquisitions, Witch-burnings, Colonialism - as Islamic ones.

Zionists- There's a fucking Crazy bunch "We want this strip of land because our God told us to live here."

Me- "This would be the same God who did nothing to Stop Hitler from turning you all into Lampshades and Bars of Soap, then? If it weren't for the Godless Red Army saving you, there'd none of you left to colonize his land."

Now, mostly, I don't get involved in other people's religious crazy, up until the point where it effects my life.

Now, for "blaming the west"... um, yeah, guy. I do blame the west. The west is the ones who decided they were going to carve up the Ottoman Empire to loot all the resources, and created a lot of the nation states that are causing the problems today. You can't point to one country over there that wasn't effected by Western intervention in some form or another.

"Wah, those hornets stung me after I stuck my dick in their nest!!!"

DON'T STICK YOUR DICK IN A HORNET'S NEST!!!!

Did I say the word "Dick" enough times here?