WTF, This is what we believe?

[MaggieMae]

I got an email about this today and thought I would easily disprove it. I have friends who send me stuff and ask if it's for real. People this is for real. Here is a disclaimer copied from a book being sold on Amazon:

"2008 Wilder Publications

This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values
as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with
their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and
interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before
allowing them to read this classic work."

The name of the book?

The Constitution
The Declaration of Independence and
The Articles of Confederation

Now I understand that yes we have changed the way we think about many things, but this is taught in History classes. Anyone who wants to warn my kids about the Constitution of the United States won't see any dollars from my wallet.

Oh and here is the page on Amazon:

Amazon.com: The Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation (9781604592689): Books

Read it for yourself. I still can't believe it.

See? what you are missing is the soros blame america first, anti american marxists don't give a shit about the constitution.. it's all about destroying America.. what part of "We are on the verge of fundamentally changing the United States of America" don't you understand.. with all due respect?

It says that? Where?

 

[MaggieMae]

This guy has the right idea:

Many FREE applications can be downloaded onto your iphone on the Constitution and Amendments and those applications DO NOT HAVE this obscene editorial note and comments that are on this edited version of the constitution. read a few of the comments here. And don't spend a dime on this when you can get FREE on a phone that is in your pocket and can be ready to be quoted at a moment's notice.

There's an obscene editorial note? The only note I saw stated clearly a few simple facts: That white property owners are not the only ones allowed to vote anymore and that "all men are created equal" means exactly that--it does not mean "...except black people and women. What's "obscene" about that statement?

 

[MaggieMae]

I got an email about this today and thought I would easily disprove it. I have friends who send me stuff and ask if it's for real. People this is for real. Here is a disclaimer copied from a book being sold on Amazon:

"2008 Wilder Publications

This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values
as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with
their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and
interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before
allowing them to read this classic work."

The name of the book?

The Constitution
The Declaration of Independence and
The Articles of Confederation

Now I understand that yes we have changed the way we think about many things, but this is taught in History classes. Anyone who wants to warn my kids about the Constitution of the United States won't see any dollars from my wallet.

Oh and here is the page on Amazon:

Amazon.com: The Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation (9781604592689): Books

Read it for yourself. I still can't believe it.

Yes, and Glenn Beck is the one who outed that information on his show yesterday. There are many reasons his show is so highly rated by millions of ppl...

Was he going after the publisher (who is at fault) or his usual suspects?

 

[SFC Ollie]

I got an email about this today and thought I would easily disprove it. I have friends who send me stuff and ask if it's for real. People this is for real. Here is a disclaimer copied from a book being sold on Amazon:

"2008 Wilder Publications

This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values
as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with
their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and
interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before
allowing them to read this classic work."

The name of the book?

The Constitution
The Declaration of Independence and
The Articles of Confederation

Now I understand that yes we have changed the way we think about many things, but this is taught in History classes. Anyone who wants to warn my kids about the Constitution of the United States won't see any dollars from my wallet.

Oh and here is the page on Amazon:

Amazon.com: The Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation (9781604592689): Books

Read it for yourself. I still can't believe it.

I really don't know what I'm supposed to be looking for.

This book includes all 27 amendments to our constitution. It is therefore not outdated, nor does it not reflect todays values. And it's not some publishers job to tell me to talk to my children and warn them about the Constitution of the United States.

I'll leave that up to the liberal wingnuts to poison their childrens minds.

 

[MaggieMae]

I got an email about this today and thought I would easily disprove it. I have friends who send me stuff and ask if it's for real. People this is for real. Here is a disclaimer copied from a book being sold on Amazon:

"2008 Wilder Publications

This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values
as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with
their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and
interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before
allowing them to read this classic work."

The name of the book?

The Constitution
The Declaration of Independence and
The Articles of Confederation

Now I understand that yes we have changed the way we think about many things, but this is taught in History classes. Anyone who wants to warn my kids about the Constitution of the United States won't see any dollars from my wallet.

Oh and here is the page on Amazon:

Amazon.com: The Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation (9781604592689): Books

Read it for yourself. I still can't believe it.

The intent was to show the disclaimer to be new : "If you had any doubts that liberals are attempting to radically change this great nation, look no further than Wilder Publications. The company, which prints the Constitution, among historical documents, includes a disclaimer that essentially states America's founding documents are no longer valid. FOX News opinion host Glenn Beck and radio talk show host Jim Quinn of The War Room with Quinn and Rose picked up on the situation and thankfully shared it with the masses. This is exactly how the Left is fundamentally trying to destroy what makes America, America."

Wilder Publications Prints Disclaimer on Constitution and Other Founding Documents

Sorry, but in my opinion, it's absurd comments like that which are UNAmerican. The Fox "war room" seems obsessed with creating problems where none would exist if they weren't on such a crusade to "share [their radical views] with the masses."

This is ONE publisher, who chose to insert a caveat into a book. Big fucking deal.

 

[nraforlife]

I have long found it quite believable that the average American whether 'conservative' or progressive would loathe living under the real meaning of the original Constitution. The typical poster here just confirms that reality.

 

[ConHog]

I have long found it quite believable that the average American whether 'conservative' or progressive would loathe living under the real meaning of the original Constitution. The typical poster here just confirms that reality.

and you clearly have no concept of the real meaning of the CON when you post stupid stuff like the world would be better off if fags died, so shut up.

 

[ConHog]

I got an email about this today and thought I would easily disprove it. I have friends who send me stuff and ask if it's for real. People this is for real. Here is a disclaimer copied from a book being sold on Amazon:

"2008 Wilder Publications

This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values
as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with
their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and
interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before
allowing them to read this classic work."

The name of the book?

The Constitution
The Declaration of Independence and
The Articles of Confederation

Now I understand that yes we have changed the way we think about many things, but this is taught in History classes. Anyone who wants to warn my kids about the Constitution of the United States won't see any dollars from my wallet.

Oh and here is the page on Amazon:

Amazon.com: The Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation (9781604592689): Books

Read it for yourself. I still can't believe it.

The intent was to show the disclaimer to be new : "If you had any doubts that liberals are attempting to radically change this great nation, look no further than Wilder Publications. The company, which prints the Constitution, among historical documents, includes a disclaimer that essentially states America's founding documents are no longer valid. FOX News opinion host Glenn Beck and radio talk show host Jim Quinn of The War Room with Quinn and Rose picked up on the situation and thankfully shared it with the masses. This is exactly how the Left is fundamentally trying to destroy what makes America, America."

Wilder Publications Prints Disclaimer on Constitution and Other Founding Documents

Sorry, but in my opinion, it's absurd comments like that which are UNAmerican. The Fox "war room" seems obsessed with creating problems where none would exist if they weren't on such a crusade to "share [their radical views] with the masses."

This is ONE publisher, who chose to insert a caveat into a book. Big fucking deal.

Maggie, I sit on a local school board, and have for several years, it is truly appalling how some of the textbooks we consider buying attempt to alter facts to fit their agenda.

 

[nraforlife]

I have long found it quite believable that the average American whether 'conservative' or progressive would loathe living under the real meaning of the original Constitution. The typical poster here just confirms that reality.

and you clearly have no concept of the real meaning of the CON when you post stupid stuff like the world would be better off if fags died, so shut up.

Like I said most apparently including YOU really have no desire to live under the original Constitution.

 

[MaggieMae]

Might wanna do some research yourself Cum Hog.......

The Constitution was ratified June 21, 1788, slavery wasn't abolished until 1 January 1863.

What about the years in between?

Have you heard of Amendments? As of TODAY the US CON makes slavery ILLEGAL. Agree or disagree?

read the OP: "This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values
as it would if it were written today..."

In order to avoid silly arguments over its choice of words, the publisher could have solved the problem by prefacing the disclaimer with "Although The Constitution is the underlying basis of law, this book is a product of its time and there are parts which do not reflect the same values as it would if written today."

 

[ConHog]

I have long found it quite believable that the average American whether 'conservative' or progressive would loathe living under the real meaning of the original Constitution. The typical poster here just confirms that reality.

and you clearly have no concept of the real meaning of the CON when you post stupid stuff like the world would be better off if fags died, so shut up.

Like I said most apparently including YOU really have no desire to live under the original Constitution.

You're right, most of us prefer to recognize the Amendments as well, you know since they are part of the CON and all.


What a moron you are.

 

[nraforlife]

and you clearly have no concept of the real meaning of the CON when you post stupid stuff like the world would be better off if fags died, so shut up.

Like I said most apparently including YOU really have no desire to live under the original Constitution.

You're right, most of us prefer to recognize the Amendments as well, you know since they are part of the CON and all.


What a moron you are.

Soooooo which Amendment is it smart guy which enshrines fags as 'necessary' to the USA, eh? And how about #16??? I bet you just love it don'tcha.

 

[SFC Ollie]

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).


Doesn't say a word about choosing the amendments. I will defend all of them.

 

[ConHog]

Like I said most apparently including YOU really have no desire to live under the original Constitution.

You're right, most of us prefer to recognize the Amendments as well, you know since they are part of the CON and all.


What a moron you are.

Soooooo which Amendment is it smart guy which enshrines fags as 'necessary' to the USA, eh? And how about #16??? I bet you just love it don'tcha.

Wait... The original CON said that if you not necessary to the USA you need to die? Why in all my vast studies I have never seen that clause.

But I will direct you to the 14th Amendment, specifically section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Pretty sure that NOWHERE in there does it say , except gays.

As for the 16th, what does the income tax have to do with you wanting gays dead?

 

[ConHog]

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).


Doesn't say a word about choosing the amendments. I will defend all of them.

AMEN brother

 

[MaggieMae]

I got an email about this today and thought I would easily disprove it. I have friends who send me stuff and ask if it's for real. People this is for real. Here is a disclaimer copied from a book being sold on Amazon:

"2008 Wilder Publications

This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values
as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with
their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and
interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before
allowing them to read this classic work."

The name of the book?

The Constitution
The Declaration of Independence and
The Articles of Confederation

Now I understand that yes we have changed the way we think about many things, but this is taught in History classes. Anyone who wants to warn my kids about the Constitution of the United States won't see any dollars from my wallet.

Oh and here is the page on Amazon:

Amazon.com: The Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation (9781604592689): Books

Read it for yourself. I still can't believe it.

I really don't know what I'm supposed to be looking for.

This book includes all 27 amendments to our constitution. It is therefore not outdated, nor does it not reflect todays values. And it's not some publishers job to tell me to talk to my children and warn them about the Constitution of the United States.

I'll leave that up to the liberal wingnuts to poison their childrens minds.

I would look at the disclaimer a little differently: We all know that many public school teachers are barely squeaking by (with rare exceptions) in their role of properly teaching our children (teaching as opposed to forced learning by rote). What happens when during a civics or social studies class gets to the assignment on reading x-number of clauses of The Constitution and the kids start reading what it initially said in certain parts, but the teacher doesn't explain that those were eventually changed by amendment? At that particular point, the kids don't even know what an "amendment" is, so in my mind, the teacher should explain the amendment process at the outset and why they were required (which is basically what the publisher's caveat does). All that said, the example is moot because I'm sure that particular book won't be used as a classroom textbook anyway. I'm just saying, a sharp kid would certainly question the first writing of parts of the Constitution if not provided any further explanation.

I should add that I'm insulted when someone accuses "liberals" of poisoning the minds of their children. It's that kind of rabid talk that is destroying this country--not the content of textbooks whether they present a conservative or liberal slant.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I really don't know what I'm supposed to be looking for.

This book includes all 27 amendments to our constitution. It is therefore not outdated, nor does it not reflect todays values. And it's not some publishers job to tell me to talk to my children and warn them about the Constitution of the United States.

I'll leave that up to the liberal wingnuts to poison their childrens minds.

I would look at the disclaimer a little differently: We all know that many public school teachers are barely squeaking by (with rare exceptions) in their role of properly teaching our children (teaching as opposed to forced learning by rote). What happens when during a civics or social studies class gets to the assignment on reading x-number of clauses of The Constitution and the kids start reading what it initially said in certain parts, but the teacher doesn't explain that those were eventually changed by amendment? At that particular point, the kids don't even know what an "amendment" is, so in my mind, the teacher should explain the amendment process at the outset and why they were required (which is basically what the publisher's caveat does). All that said, the example is moot because I'm sure that particular book won't be used as a classroom textbook anyway. I'm just saying, a sharp kid would certainly question the first writing of parts of the Constitution if not provided any further explanation.

I should add that I'm insulted when someone accuses "liberals" of poisoning the minds of their children. It's that kind of rabid talk that is destroying this country--not the content of textbooks whether they present a conservative or liberal slant.

Of course Maggie, if you say so........

 

[MaggieMae]

I have long found it quite believable that the average American whether 'conservative' or progressive would loathe living under the real meaning of the original Constitution. The typical poster here just confirms that reality.

There are very few articles in the original Constitution that anyone can determine as having "real meaning." I've said many times in many threads that the framers knew exactly what they were doing by their ambiguity because they were smart enough to know that the nation (and the world) wouldn't stand still in their moment in time; that it would modernize and evolve. They used specific words meant to be guiding principles that would hold forth as the foundation of future laws built around those words.

 

[MaggieMae]

The intent was to show the disclaimer to be new : "If you had any doubts that liberals are attempting to radically change this great nation, look no further than Wilder Publications. The company, which prints the Constitution, among historical documents, includes a disclaimer that essentially states America's founding documents are no longer valid. FOX News opinion host Glenn Beck and radio talk show host Jim Quinn of The War Room with Quinn and Rose picked up on the situation and thankfully shared it with the masses. This is exactly how the Left is fundamentally trying to destroy what makes America, America."

Wilder Publications Prints Disclaimer on Constitution and Other Founding Documents

Sorry, but in my opinion, it's absurd comments like that which are UNAmerican. The Fox "war room" seems obsessed with creating problems where none would exist if they weren't on such a crusade to "share [their radical views] with the masses."

This is ONE publisher, who chose to insert a caveat into a book. Big fucking deal.

Maggie, I sit on a local school board, and have for several years, it is truly appalling how some of the textbooks we consider buying attempt to alter facts to fit their agenda.

I too sat on a school board from 1990 through 1994, and never once did we have a discussion over "altering" the words of any textbook. The only discussion regarding books was to try to budget enough money to purchase updated versions. But somehow the crowd that wanted new cheerleading uniforms and other fun stuff always won.

 

[ConHog]

Sorry, but in my opinion, it's absurd comments like that which are UNAmerican. The Fox "war room" seems obsessed with creating problems where none would exist if they weren't on such a crusade to "share [their radical views] with the masses."

This is ONE publisher, who chose to insert a caveat into a book. Big fucking deal.

Maggie, I sit on a local school board, and have for several years, it is truly appalling how some of the textbooks we consider buying attempt to alter facts to fit their agenda.

I too sat on a school board from 1990 through 1994, and never once did we have a discussion over "altering" the words of any textbook. The only discussion regarding books was to try to budget enough money to purchase updated versions. But somehow the crowd that wanted new cheerleading uniforms and other fun stuff always won.

Ugh, don't get me started................ but I finally got my way this year , starting next year our high school textbooks will all be laptop based. I even got a company to donate the laptops, Upgraded computer files are much cheaper than actual books.

I dare say things are a little different now than in the early to mid 90s.