We have become cowards

[Harpy Eagle]

That experiment was evil and it has zero to do with people standing by and watching a woman get assaulted.

Nobody said it had anything to do people standing by and watching a woman get assaulted.

Would you have just sat by?

I would not have.

 

[Blues Man]

What crime against humanity is the US responsible for?

Here we go again

Read a fucking book or google it.

And the word is crimes because there's more than 1

 

[Superbadbrutha]

What does it have to do with an innocent woman attacked on a train yday and people just watching it happen?

In the grand scheme of things nothing at the moment, when it comes to atrocities in this country everything.

 

[Blues Man]

Slavery will be his answer because he is a leftist retard. It happened 200 yrs ago but he doesn’t care

There's more recent ones than that.

You'd know if you ever choose not be ignorant

 

[ding]

Was it against the Law to own slaves?
Was Jim Crow segregation against the Law?

Our Founding Fathers believed that slavery was against the Law of Nature but did not know how to end it at the time of founding but did intend for slavery to perish.

The Constitution was ratified in 1789. ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 states, "The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person."

In 1808, Congress abolishing the slave trade at the earliest date allowed per ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution. Thus proving that the intent of ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution was to end the slave trade.

Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves - Wikipedia

"The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 (2 Stat. 426, enacted March 2, 1807) is a United States federal law that stated that no new slaves were permitted to be imported into the United States. It took effect in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution."

Daniel Webster testifies to the fact that the Founding Fathers intended for slavery to perish.

Daniel Webster, THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION 1, March 7, 1850 (In the Senate)

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Webster7th.pdf

Page 271​

​

"And now, let us consider, sir, for a moment, what was the state of sentiment, North and South, in regard to slavery at the time this Constitution was adopted. A remarkable change has taken place since, but what did the wise and great men of all parts of the country then think of slavery? In what estimation did they hold it in 1787, when this Constitution was adopted? Now it will be found, sir, if we will carry ourselves by historical research back to that day, and ascertain men's opinions by authentic records still existing among us, that there was no great diversity of opinion between the North and the South upon the subject of slavery; and it will be found that both parts of the country held it equally an evil, a moral and political evil. It will not be found, that either at the North or at the South, there was though there was some, invective against slavery as inhuman and cruel. The great ground of objection to it was political; that it weakened the social fabric; that, taking the place of free labor, society was less strong, and labor was less productive; and, therefore, we find, from all the eminent men of the time, the clearest expression of their opinion that slavery was an evil. They ascribed its existence here, not without truth, and not without some acerbity of temper and force of language, to the injurious policy of the mother country, who, to favor the navigator, had entailed these evils upon the colonies. I need hardly refer, sir, to the publications of the day. They are matters of history on the record. The eminent men, the most eminent men, and nearly all the conspicuous politicians of the South, held the same sentiments, that slavery was an "evil," a "blight," a "blast," a "mildew," a "scourge," and a "curse." There are no terms of reprobation of slavery so vehement in the North at that day as in the South. The North was not so much excited against it as the South, and the reason is, I suppose, that there was much less at the North; and the people did not see, or think they saw, the evils so prominently as they were seen, or thought to be seen, at the South. Then, sir, when this Constitution was framed, this was the light in which the convention viewed it..."​

​

Page 273​

​

"...there was an expectation that on the ceasing of the importation of slaves from Africa, slavery would begin to run out. That was hoped and expected."​

Alexander Stephens, the Vice President of the Confederate States, testifies to the fact that the Founding Fathers believed that slavery was against the Law of Nature, that it was evil, that it was not possible for them to end it at the time of the founding, but did intend for it to perish.

“Corner Stone” Speech, Alexander H. Stephens, Savannah, Georgia, March 21, 1861

"Cornerstone" Speech - Teaching American History

"The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature – that it was wrong in principle – socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent [temporary] and pass away. " Alexander Stephens​

So while Stephens acknowledged that the Founding Fathers knew it was against God's will, had no idea how to end it quickly, and designed for slavery to pass away, Stephens then turned around and said that the Founding Fathers had it all wrong.

"Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. . . . and the idea of a government built upon it. . . . Our new government [the Confederate States of America] is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid – its cornerstone rests – upon the great truth that the Negro is not equal to the white man. That slavery – subordination to the superior [white] race – is his natural and moral condition. This – our new [Confederate] government – is the first in the history of the world based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." Alexander Stephens​

Proof that Stephens and Webster were correct that the founders intended for slavery to perish can be found in their actions following the ratification of the Constitution in 1789.

In 1789, following the ratification of the Constitution, Congress expanded its fight to end slavery by passing the Northwest Ordinance. That law - establishing how territories could become States in the new United States - forbade slavery in any federal territories then held; and for this reason, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin all eventually came into the nation as free States.

Northwest Ordinance - Wikipedia

 

[ding]

Was it against the Law to own slaves?
Was Jim Crow segregation against the Law?

Frederick Douglas believed that the 3/5th clause is an anti-slavery clause. Not a pro-slavery clause. Frederick Douglas believed that the Constitution was an anti-slavery document.

(1860) Frederick Douglass, "The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-slavery?" •

What Did Frederick Douglass Believe About the U.S. Constitution? | Synonym

The Constitution Did Not Condone Slavery

 

[ding]

People forget that slavery was a British institution that America inherited.

 

[22lcidw]

I don't eat soy.

And you're an internet tough guy you'd probably shit yourself if you ever had to actually defend yourself

Blues Man...perhaps role models have changed a bit. In those days we were coming off of a depression. Many today have never missed a meal and have lived comfortable lives.

 

[Godboy]

Here we go again

Read a fucking book or google it.

And the word is crimes because there's more than 1

Oh, youre talking about people who are dead. What does those people have to do with us in 2021? In 2021 we have the moral high ground.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

I read a scientific study on this type of event.

All it takes is for one person to call the assailant out and other bystanders will join in.

It's getting that one person to stand up in what might be a risky situation that's the hard part.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Not really.

See my link above. That happened when men were men and a Marlboro tasted good like a cigarette should

That would be Winston.

 

[ESay]

Nothing new there.

Murder of Kitty Genovese - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Many years later, the NY Times admitted that its report had been inaccurate and the number of witnesses had been vastly exaggerated and some of them did try to call the police.

 

[Viktor]

‘No One Did Anything': Woman Raped on SEPTA Train and Riders Didn't Call 911, Police Say

A man was arrested late Thursday night for allegedly attacking a woman on a SEPTA train at 69th Street Station in Upper Darby, the transit agency said.

www.google.com

This is inexcusable. As a father of two daughters I am both angry and ashamed at my fellow Americans. We have become a nation of pussies and wimps.

If I were on that train I would have beaten the living hell out of that rapist.

You are very illogical. Only a few people were on that train and saw the incident, yet you rant about all of us being cowards. You need to go back to school and take several courses in Logic.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Nobody said it had anything to do people standing by and watching a woman get assaulted.



I would not have.

That’s what my OP is about. Idiot leftist Blues Man made it about past US ills.

 

[ESay]

As a whole, stories like this make me a staunch supporter of the right to own and carry a firearm. For most people, it is psychologically very hard to intervene, especially if the perps exceed them in size or in number.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

You are very illogical. Only a few people were on that train and saw the incident, yet you rant about all of us being cowards. You need to go back to school and take several courses in Logic.

This is just one example. Another is electing a potted plant to run our country. Don’t talk down to me, loser.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

This is just one example. Another is electing a potted plant to run our country. Don’t talk down to me, loser.

we went from a petulant child to a potted plant and you somehow think one is better than the other...

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

we went from a petulant child to a potted plant and you somehow think one is better than the other...

The child is better than the plant IMO

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The child is better than the plant IMO

some people think that syphilis is better than gonorrhea....I say both suck

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

some people think that syphilis is better than gonorrhea....I say both suck

They do? What people?