Enough said.

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

68 COMMENTS

  3. And as long as we’re having fun with fantasy Hollywierd scripts….
    up next, Alec Baldwin says “damn my clumsy fat trigger finger ! “

    • Antifa or BLM mass shooter?

      “A Friday shooting spree in Tate County, Mississippi, has left six people dead, according to state officials. The suspected shooter is in custody.

      The shootings all happened within Arkabutla, a small, unincorporated community about 20 miles south of the Mississippi-Tennessee border on the south side of Arkabutla Lake. Residents on Friday described the area as having a small-town feel and said tragedies like this do not regularly happen. According to the most recent census data, the town is home to fewer than 300 residents.“

      https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/news/crime/2023/02/17/arkabutla-mississippi-shooting-tate-county-six-dead-suspect-in-custody/69916289007/

      • Biden refers to Maryland’s first Black governor as ‘boy’ in speech

        “President Biden on Wednesday used the term “boy” while referring to Wes Moore, Maryland’s first Black governor, in a speech about the economy.

        “Speaking in Maryland, Mr. Biden gave a shout to the governor, recalling Mr. Moore’s days playing wide receiver on Johns Hopkins University’s football team.

        ““You got a hell of a new governor in Wes Moore. He’s the real deal and the boy looks like he can still play,” the 80-year-old Mr. Biden said. “He’s got some guns on him.”

        “Using the word “boy” to describe a Black man is often viewed a racial slur. That’s because, historically, racist Whites used the term to suggest Blacks weren’t on equal footing with them, both before and after slavery.

        “Neither the White House nor a spokesman for Mr. Moore responded to requests for comment from The Washington Times.”

  7. “Well, WHATABOUT…” is a favorite
    tactic of argumentative mentally unhealthy people and liars. It’s as ironclad as a three-year-old’s “WHY?”
    The purpose is to bully you into defending your position without them having to defend theirs. So treat them like a 3-year-old.
    And don’t cave.

  8. Off-topic, but we did have a long discussion the other day regarding whether or not demons actually exist.

    Thankfully, Fox News investigative journalist Tucker Carlson has done some excellent investigative reporting and finally located the demonic forces in America:

    “On Jan. 6, 2021, the day the U.S. Capitol was stormed by a pro-Trump mob as Congress sought to certify the results of the 2020 election, Carlson texted his producer that Trump is “a demonic force, a destroyer. But he’s not going to destroy us.”

    I think we can all agree that’s good news, the first step in any tactical plan is to clearly identify the enemy.

    “Host Tucker Carlson said as early as Nov. 16, 2020, that Trump ally Sidney Powell was “lying” about election fraud, according to the filing. He texted an individual whose name was redacted that her claims, made without evidence, were “shockingly reckless.”
    In a deposition, host Sean Hannity said of Powell’s election fraud narrative that he “did not believe it for one second,” according to the filing. But in the meantime, he told his audience that “it will be impossible to ever know the true, fair, accurate election results, that’s a fact,” the filing says.
    Host Laura Ingraham told Carlson that Powell is “a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy,” referring to former New York mayor and Trump supporter Rudy Giuliani. Carlson replied that he found Powell’s lies “unbelievably offensive” because their “viewers are good people and they believe it,” according to the filing.“

    https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23685186-fox-dominion-216-filing

      • Sadly, these real-world demons are causing mass destruction in America right now. It’s not something we can ignore and we should be grateful to Tucker Carlson for identifying the threat.

        For instance, all those folks’ health and homes poisoned by the Ohio train wreck, reportedly caused by overheated brakes on train car axles, is a direct result of the demonic forces that Tucker Carlson has revealed.

        “Trump Rolls Back Train-Braking Rule Meant to Keep Oil Tankers from Exploding Near Communities
        BYGLENN FLEISHMAN
        September 24, 2018, 8:21 PM EDT

        Trains that carry oil and other flammable material won’t have to install electronically controlled brakes that reduce the risk of train derailments and explosions after the reversal by Trump officials of an Obama-era safety rule.”

        That article is from 2018, showing the infinite patience of these demons, a five-year plan to poison literally millions of American citizens.

        https://fortune.com/2018/09/24/train-explosion-prevention-rule-reversed-by-trump-officials/

        • Liar49er, you’re really reaching.

          Care to comment on any gun-related topic?

          Hopefully no one is interested in engaging you on your attempts to stir the pot. So far you’ve struck out.

        • Like I said, we had an extensive discussion about the reality of demons.

          I was surprised by how enthusiastic many of you were about the reality of demons, so I thought you would enjoy discovering that you were indeed correct.

          I’m admitting you guys are right and that demons do exist in America.
          And it’s clear they aren’t some magical thinking supernatural deity, it’s actual humans.

          And no, I’m not paid by the hour or by any other device, I’m just a WV hillbilly sitting up the holler expressing my opinion for free.

          Aren’t you lucky!

        • troll boy is a paid spokesman. Which makes him smarter than dacian. dacian does it for free. Of course, being smarter than dacian is a low bar.

    • The tragedy Minor is that most Morons who watch Fox news do not watch any accredited news programs and since Fox is not discussing this their glazed eyed followers will never know that the popular Fox News personalities all knew that Trump was full of B.S. about election fraud and admitted it to their fellow workers but not to their followers.

        • Yes. The fascist left has made it acceptable to step on human and civil rights. They set the stage for the anti abortion ruling from scotus. And they’ve set the stage for an oversight board for media.

          After all. It’s for the greater good.

        • To Man with no sense

          quote————-Good idea, dacian. “Journalists” should be “accredited” by a government agency in order to exercise their Fourth Estate privileges.

          We could call it the “Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment.”———-quote

          No you moron my post meant that Journalists should tell the truth and not put ratings and profit over telling the public what was actually happening. Fox News admitted that they were afraid they would lose too many viewers to other right wing news media if they told the truth that Trump’s lies about election fraud were total B.S.

          It’s obvious you knew nothing about this even though this story has been broadcast all over the world for the last 2 days. Get your nose out of Foxy News and watch some other news media outlets for a change.

        • “Journalists should tell the truth and not put ratings and profit over telling the public what was actually happening.”

          Which is why your idea of state-controlled media is such a good idea. Who else should decide what constitutes the “truth” but our betters in government?

          Besides, since citizens have to get the approval of government to exercise our 2A rights, it’s only fair that “journalists” obtain government approval of what “truth” they are allowed to report under the 1A.

          Your hero Josef Goebbels said it best: “Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”

          The Reich will always live on in your heart, dacian.

        • “Which is why your idea of state-controlled media“

          are you having difficulties understanding the post, little D never made any suggestion about ‘state controlled media‘.

          His actual statement was:

          “most Morons who watch Fox news do not watch any accredited news programs”

        • to Man with no sense

          quote———–Which is why your idea of state-controlled media is such a good idea.———quote

          You are an abject unabashed liar. I never advocated a state run media. I advocated truth in journalism something Fox News has proven and even admitted in the last two days that they do not practice.

          Now what part of this do you not understand??????

        • D-Man, please go easy on these folks, it’s just that in the past few days they have learned that everyone at Fox News, and Donald Trump, Sydney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, et al are nothing but a conspiratorial crew of lying grifters, so they’re having real problems now reconciling their worldview.

          Fear not, within 24–48 hours they’ll have worked out some pretzel logic justification for their continued veneration and worship of Donald Trump.

          Let the entertainment continue!

        • “I never advocated a state run media.”

          You most certainly did.

          “… accredited news programs …

          accredited

          Given official approval after meeting certain standards, as an accredited university … given official approval to act

          “Journalists should tell the truth and not put ratings and profit over telling the public what was actually happening.”

          And you want government to determine what will be broadcast as “the truth.” As your hero once said:

          It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion. — Josef Goebbels

        • In point of fact, journalists seeking credentials utilize ‘accreditation’ to circumvent government restrictions And gain access to organizations and events.

          “A letter of accreditation from USPA identifies you as a USPA journalist. It establishes legitimate motives for your reporting and allows you to pursue your journalistic work without running into unnecessary hurdles. Many events require prior accreditation if you plan to use content or photos for commercial gain. Accreditation is also required to enter areas reserved for VIPs or photographers.“

          https://www.unitedstatespressagency.com/en/accredation.html

          And no matter what word games one wish to play, sworn depositions by the Fox News producers, reporters and executives show their clear duplicity and blatant corruption.

          It’s just a matter of academic interest to me, waiting for the moment when reality sinks in to all those MAGA ‘Stop The Steal!’ Dupes of the Conspiracy.

        • “A letter of accreditation from USPA identifies you as a USPA journalist.”

          Which means diddly-squat; it’s not a professional, ethical organization for journalists. There’s no such thing as a “USPA-accredited news program” that would qualify for dacian’s descriptor.

          “And no matter what word games one wish to play …”

          Spoken by the expert in word games, dishonest diatribes, selective misquoting and outright lying.

  9. “The Devil Wears Gun Control”

    A true statement.

    And bringing religion into this makes many gun grabbers mad.

    • “And bringing religion into this makes many gun grabbers mad“

      I think it is important that we bring religion into the discussion.

      In my opinion, anyone who harbors a confident conviction that any particular God or deity is real, may be too delusional to be trusted with lethal weapons in our society.

      Remember Jimmy Stewart in ‘Harvey’, was his belief in the imaginary 6 foot rabbit a ‘Disqualification’ for firearms ownership?

      • It is always been atheists who were constantly working to disarm the civilian population. Or 400 years ago it was royalty, many who believed they were appointed by god. But never did they ever use God as a reason to confiscate Weaponry from the civilian population. They always said that because I am king, or I am queen, I have the power to take your property from you when I choose to do so.

        But it was religious people who wrote the Second Amendment into the bill of rights. And you can debate “until the cows come home” about how religious the founding fathers actually were. But they were certainly not atheists.

        • “400 years ago it was royalty, many who believed they were appointed by god“

          Exactly, the rulers used religion to justify their authority, once again proving religion, in this case English Christianity, is used to control the masses.

          “But they were certainly not atheists”

          “Undoubtedly the majority of the United States population has always been Christian. However, neither Christianity, the Bible, nor Jesus is mentioned in any of our founding documents. Our Constitution was the first in history not to mention god, and mentions religion only to restrict its prejudicial influence, as with banning religious tests for office. The presidential oath, despite modern fashions, doesn’t mention god or include a request for god’s help; nor is a Bible required. Certain early documents like the Treaty of Tripoli state explicitly that The United States is not in any sense a Christian nation.“

          “The Europeans are all deeply tainted with prejudices both Ecclesiastical, and Temporal which they can never get rid off, they are all infected with Episcopal and Presbyterian Creeds, and confessions of faith, they all believe that great principle, which has produced this boundless Universe. Newtons Universe, and Hershells universe, came down to this little Ball, to be spit-upon by Jews; and untill this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world.”
          John Adam’s

          https://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=FOEA-print-04-02-02-4899

        • False. Our founding document, The Declaration of Independence, mentions God multiple times. It describes why we have any rights to begin with (God-given, not government-given), and therefore, why we should fight for our independence. That philosophy carried over to the Constitution which limits the government, not religion. Our government doesn’t place one religious sect or belief over any other because they have no right to do so.

        • “Our founding document, The Declaration of Independence“

          Nope, the declaration is an aspirational document, produced by citizens of the United Kingdom residing in the King’s Colonies in North America.

          “That philosophy carried over to the Constitution which limits the government, not religion“

          No, while the constitution does limit government, it does not authorize the abuse of citizens’ rights by religion either.

          “Article VI Supreme Law
          Clause 3 Oaths of Office
          The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.“

          And if Almighty God was so important to the founding fathers, why didn’t they enshrined him or any other gods in the Constitution of the United States of America, the actual formative document of our Country?

          Why doesn’t the Constitution’s Presidential Oath require swearing before God Almighty?

          “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

          The founding fathers knew, no matter what their religious beliefs or disbeliefs were, God and religion has no place in the government of the United States of America.

        • Nope. The Declaration of Independence literally declared our independence from Great Britain. We have a holiday in our country called Independence Day to celebrate it.

          “it does not authorize the abuse of citizens’ rights by religion either.”

          Who said it does? Who are you even speaking to? Yourself?

          “And if Almighty God was so important to the founding fathers, why didn’t they enshrined him or any other gods in the Constitution of the United States of America, the actual formative document of our Country?”

          I don’t see anyone claiming we live under a theocracy. What is your point? No one’s forcing you to accept any religion, Miner. Why does any mention of it upset you so much? You aren’t just intolerant of it, you hate on it every chance you get. Like I said above, our government doesn’t place one religious sect or belief over any other because it has no right to do so. It really isn’t complicated.

        • Regardless of your claims, the declaration of independence has no legal weight within the United States of America. No provision within the declaration of independence holds any sway whatsoever upon the people residing in the United States of America.

          The best you can do is point to similarities between the declaration and the much later constitution.

          And your claim the declaration “mentions God multiple times” is misleading at best.

          “In the Declaration there are three references to God, and each one is different. In one reference, Jefferson uses the term “Nature’s God.” Later, he uses “Creator” and lastly “Divine Providence.”

          The word God is used exactly one time, and then with the qualifier “Nature’s God”. Nothing about Jehovah, Allah, Zeus or even any personified ‘God’ of any kind.

          https://www.ushistory.org/declaration/lessonplan/doi_introduction.html

        • “Regardless of your claims”

          You mean my claim that the Declaration is a founding document? It’s the founding document. You’re welcome to cover your ears and yell, if you like. We don’t celebrate the Aspirational, One Day We’ll Be Our Own Country Day. Our Independence Day isn’t celebrated on the day we signed the Constitution.

          They intentionally left God as generic so that it would apply to everyone. This is fourth grade level civics. Why would they begin a new country by placing one religious belief or sect over any other when the entire point is liberty? That means you get to worship, or not, however you choose.

          Do you know what else isn’t explicitly mentioned in the Constitution? Slavery. Now why wouldn’t a bunch of racist slaveholders make sure to protect white supremacy when they had the chance? Does that bother you too? Things that make you go hmm…

      • So miner is no longer lying about not wanting to disarm folks. He wants to start with religious folks. Good to know.

        Carry on with your bigotry, miner.

        • He’s an atheist. Eventually they always let their guard down. Especially when you put them under pressure. They can’t help themselves, it’s who they are.
          Are there atheists who believe in civil rights? Yes there are. But unfortunately there are very few in number.

        • He is not an atheist, Chris. He has a religious fervor for the .gov of men like hitler, stalin, mao, pol pot. Let no subject put anything above .gov.

        • Nope, I never said disarming Christians or any particular group is the goal.

          But would you want someone who truly believes that a 6 foot rabbit (which no one else can see) actually exists, having access to lethal weapons?

          An imaginary rabbit or a six armed God, or an old white guy with a beard living beyond the North Star?

          Isn’t it interesting, Christians celebrate Easter, with the rabbit the symbol of the ancient germanic goddess Ostara (‘Easter’) who has nothing to do with Christianity or Jesus whatsoever.

          There are none so deluded as the self-deluded.

        • Double speak miner. Believing in any deity is enough for you to disarm folks. Good to know.

          Keep riding that bigotry. I’ll keep using you and dacian as examples to show folks what direction big .gov is going.

        • “show folks what direction big .gov is going“

          I’m sorry to disappoint you, but I really don’t have anything to do with government, big or little.

        • Miner: “Nope, I never said disarming Christians or any particular group is the goal.”

          Also Miner: “But would you want someone who truly believes that a 6 foot rabbit (which no one else can see) actually exists, having access to lethal weapons?”

          So people can be armed as long as they believe what you believe? That’s why we have the Constitution. It protects us from would-be tyrants like you.

      • Miner49er

        “In my opinion, anyone who harbors a confident conviction that any particular God or deity is real, may be too delusional to be trusted with lethal weapons in our society.”

        Its fact that you are an idiot, not opinion.

        You do not understand religion so stop talking about it.

        You mean like the atheist religion god of your own opinion is real to you? You mean like your own self-proclaimed ‘supremacy’ that you presume to exert as god like judgement and critique upon the faith of others? You mean the self-conceived god you created in worshiping your own self-conceived ideas on the faith of others? You mean your self created god of you is not real?

        You are too delusional to be trust out in public. Those who persecute others, for example the persecution you try to carry out upon faith of others your posts, are mentally ill. Its one thing for you to say “I don’t believe” but you carry it too far in obsession. Every time some mentions God you want to jump in and start this long drawn out argument that in your posts is so full overall of misleading and false statements based upon your out of context use of partial sentences and thoughts. You are trolling to persecute, you have an unhealthy obsession, and you need some help.

        • “You mean like the atheist religion god of your own opinion is real to you?“

          Mmmm, tasty word salad.

          Why do I often comment when religion is discussed on a forum designed to discuss ownership and use of lethal weapons?

          Because religionists are dangerous and unpredictable.

          “The level of intensity fluctuates according to time and place, but it can be stated as a truth with its own marvelous claims and sublime assurances. It must seek to interfere with the lives of nonbelievers, or heretics, or adherents of other faiths. It may speak about the bliss of the next world, but it wants power in this one. This is only to be expected. It is, after all, wholly man-made. And it does not have the confidence in its own various preachings even to allow coexistence between different faiths.“
          Chris Hitchens

        • “Dangerous and unpredictable.’ Describing the classic atheists like hitler, stalin, mao.

          I prefer to call myself a non believer. An atheist is a term soaked in blood.

        • “Dangerous and unpredictable.’ Describing the classic atheists like hitler, stalin, mao.“

          Yes, the old ‘Hitler was an atheist’ fable.

          Again, the ignorance of the facts of history is breathtaking.

          Hitler was a German Catholic who followed the Church’s teachings calling for the punishment of the Jews. Hitler hated atheists and saw them as a threat to the Holy German empire he wished to create.

          This is a perfect example of why religion, in this case Christianity, is destructive to mankind. The Holocaust was motivated entirely by the religious teachings of Christianity.

          “As long as leadership from above was not lacking, the people fulfilled their duty and obligation overwhelmingly. Whether Protestant pastor or Catholic priest, both together and particularly at the first flare, there really existed in both camps but a single holy German Reich, for whose existence and future each man turned to his own heaven.
          – Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 3”

          “ ….the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.
          – Adolf Hitler (following the position of Martin Luther), Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 11“

          “And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. But at that time Christ was nailed to the Cross for his attitude towards the Jews; whereas our modern Christians enter into party politics and when elections are being held they debase themselves to beg for Jewish votes. They even enter into political intrigues with the atheistic Jewish parties against the interests of their own Christian nation.
          – Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 11“

          “My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. …Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. …
          – Adolf Hitler, speech on April 12, 1922“

          “The fact that the Curia is now making its peace with Fascism shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms. …The fact that the Catholic Church has come to an agreement with Fascist Italy …proves beyond doubt that the Fascist world of ideas is closer to Christianity than those of Jewish liberalism or even atheistic Marxism…
          – Adolf Hitler in an article in the Völkischer Beobachter, February 29, 1929, on the new Lateran Treaty between Mussolini’s fascist government and the Vatican“

          “By its decision to carry out the political and moral cleansing of our public life, the Government is creating and securing the conditions for a really deep and inner religious life. The advantages for the individual which may be derived from compromises with atheistic organizations do not compare in any way with the consequences which are visible in the destruction of our common religious and ethical values. The national Government sees in both Christian denominations the most important factor for the maintenance of our society. …
          – Adolf Hitler, speech before the Reichstag, March 23, 1933, just before the Enabling Act is passed.“

          “Today Christians … stand at the head of [this country]… I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity .. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit … We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press – in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past … (few) years.
          – Adolf Hitler, quoted in: The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872“

          https://www.learnreligions.com/adolf-hitler-on-christianity-quotes-248190

          Now scurry to your mommy’s basement to check those quotes in your own personal copy of Mein Kamp.

        • You’re the fascist here, miner. You’re the one wishing to violate the human and civil rights of your fellow citizens based on their beliefs.

          And you seem to know a lot about and put a lot of faith and trust in hitlers speeches. Did you not learn that hitler was not to be trusted to tell the truth?

          hitler’s primary focus against religion was the Jews. You’ve just taken it to his next logical step.

          Now. What religion were stalin or mao or pol pot? Let’s see you defend them the way you defended hitler.

        • Let me help you understand.

          Stalin didn’t kill millions because of a religious belief, he killed them because he wanted control and would tolerate no dissidents. His religion, whatever it might be, played no part in his decision to slaughter millions who opposed him.

          (Hitler did indeed kill millions following the teachings of the Catholic Church and Martin Luther in his quest to exterminate the Jews as the killers of Christ)

          Here’s a much better exposition on the fallacy of your position:

          “Apologists often point to people like Pol Pot, trying to make a point about atheism:

          Pol Pot was an evil murderer.
          Pol Pot was an atheist.
          Thus, Pol Pot’s atheism has something to do with him being an evil murderer.
          Therefore, atheism causes evil.
          The point of the argument is to try establish that it’s wrong to be an atheist, because if too many people are atheists, bad things will happen.

          This apologetic is an example of an association fallacy. If Pol Pot had a mustache, we wouldn’t conclude that anyone with a mustache is like Pol Pot. This particular implementation of the fallacy is rampant, whether the example is Pol Pot, Stalin or Hitler .“

          https://religions.wiki/index.php/Pol_Pot_was_an_atheist

          I will agree, Karl Marx seemed to actually hate God. Which does not make him an atheist, rather, it makes him a theist who believes in a deity but just makes a personal decision to hate him.

          Atheists don’t hate God, they just don’t think he or any other deity exists.

        • Control and will tolerate no dissidents. Like you and dacian. No guns for those that don’t think as you do. Any excuse to regulate a civil and human right.

          Poll taxes and literacy tests were a tactic your type employed. Now its mandatory classes and permits and ubc’s.

          Just remember that if the time comes that you have to have a permit to exercise your freedom of speech it will have been you that paved the way for that suppression of rights.

          Or a permit to vote. Just like gun control paved the way for the recent scotus decision on abortion, remember you did away with the right to privacy by installing gun control. You also paved the way for permits on all rights.

  10. No need to put the word slavery in the constitution if the constitution honors the idea that Black people are not fully human:

    “The Three-fifths Compromise was an agreement reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention over the inclusion of slaves in a state’s total population. This count would determine the number of seats in the House of Representatives; the number of electoral votes each state would be allocated; and how much money the states would pay in taxes. The compromise counted three-fifths of each state’s slave population toward that state’s total population for the purpose of apportioning the House of Representatives. Even though slaves were denied voting rights, this gave Southern states more representatives and more presidential electoral votes than if slaves had not been counted. It also gave slaveholders similarly enlarged powers in Southern legislatures; this was an issue in the secession of West Virginia from Virginia in 1863. Free blacks and indentured servants were not subject to the compromise, and each was counted as one full person for representation.

    In the United States Constitution, the Three-fifths Compromise is part of Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3.“

    And the importation clause imposed a Constitutional prohibition on Congress banning the importation of slaves for 20 years, intentionally limiting the power of the People’s representatives in Congress to prohibit slavery for decades:

    “Article I Legislative Branch

    Section 9 Powers Denied Congress
    Clause 1 Migration or Importation
    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.”

    And Article 1 Section 8 was intentionally aimed at enslaved peoples, prohibiting freedom for slaves even if they were able to escape to a Free State:

    “No Person held to Service or Labour 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 Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom
    such Service or Labour may be due.“

    https://www.colorado.edu/herbst/sites/default/files/attached-files/brooks_lunch_seminar_day_2.pdf

    It’s possible the founding fathers didn’t like the institution of slavery, but it sure didn’t stop over 90% of them from owning slaves, profiting from the human misery.

    Just more hypocrisy enshrined in the United States Constitution.

    Like all institutions of man, it is an imperfect instrument.

    • No explicit mention of God means they want nothing to do with God. No explicit mention of slavery means they want slavery. Got it thanks.

      • “No explicit mention of slavery“

        Really? That’s the best you’ve got?
        Just because the wealthy white slaveowning aristocrats were smart enough to not actually use the word ‘slave’, you’re giving them a complete pass on the racism and bigotry?

        “No Person held to Service or Labour 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 Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom
        such Service or Labour may be due.“

        Just like your lame lies about the Declaration of Independence having “multiple mentions of God”, this same word game bullshit falls flat.

        • It’s only “word game bullshit” in your mind. It’s real simple. Unlike slave, God is explicitly mentioned, multiple times, as shown above. I’m not denying they’re referring to slavery here. But you denied they referred to God, while saying they referred to slavery. One was explicitly mentioned. One was not. The truth is, they acknowledged both. You just can’t come to grips with it due to your hatred of religion. And where am I giving anyone a pass on anything? Where do you come up with this stuff? You ignore the individual in front of you, and continue to speak to some creation in your head.

          The clause you’re quoting was created due to some free states that might otherwise give a slave, who escaped, sanctuary. But why would there be free states from the very beginning if everyone was a white supremacist and the country was founded on slavery? Why would anyone want to help slaves? Why didn’t they lock down nationwide white supremacy when they had the chance? Then they had the gall to make slavery illegal. Did black people rise up and do that or was it those white supremacists you keep telling us about?

  11. “God is explicitly mentioned, multiple times, as shown above“

    Nope, I have shown that there is zero mention of GOD in the United States Constitution, and one mention of ‘Nature’s God’ In the Declaration of Independence.

    “everyone was a white supremacist and the country was founded on slavery”

    Total obfuscation, I, nor anyone else, has ever claimed “everyone was as white supremacist” or “the country was founded on slavery”.

    “Why didn’t they lock down nationwide white supremacy when they had the chance?“

    Because a great many people in the colonies and early United States knew slavery was wrong and opposed it from the very beginning.

    As did England, who outlawed slavery 50 years before the United States.

    “It became illegal to purchase enslaved people directly from Africa under the Abolition Act 1807. However, the condition of slavery remained legal in the British Caribbean until 1834, when the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 came into force.“

    https://historicengland.org.uk/research/inclusive-heritage/the-slave-trade-and-abolition/sites-of-memory/ending-slavery/slavery-after-1807/

    But not in the American south, where political and religious leaders used the holy Bible to justify the moral sin of slavery.

    • I never claimed it was mentioned in the Constitution, as you know. As for the Declaration of Independence, are we finished arguing about whether it’s a founding document or, as you put it, an aspirational document?

      The Declaration of Independence makes reference to God in a generic way so they don’t place any one religious belief or sect over any other:

      1) the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

      The laws of Nature’s God entitles us? Not bigfoot or a pet rock, but the God of Nature. We’re entitled by the God of Nature.

      2) We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

      Our Creator endowed us with Rights (with a capital R). This is extremely important because it states our rights come from the divine, not government or a ruler. This is making note of THE moral authority. It isn’t man.

      3) We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions

      Are you noticing a trend yet? They aren’t referring to the Supreme Court. Or a pet rock. Or bigfoot.

      4) And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence

      Is this the part where they’re relying on the protection of the pet rock? No? Why or why not?

    • Miner says: Total obfuscation, I, nor anyone else, has ever claimed “everyone was as white supremacist” or “the country was founded on slavery”.

      Miner, you haven’t been keeping up with your own propaganda very well. You’re saying the 1619 Project, and all of the propaganda that surrounded it’s launch, is a lie. You’re correct. It was so bad, the NYT had to go back and edit it after claiming it was correct.

      Last year, the New York Times declared that the arrival of the captives in Virginia was the “true beginning” of America — an America that the Times characterized as a “slavocracy.” The Times calls its campaign to promote this story The 1619 Project.
      https://nypost.com/2020/11/07/america-wasnt-founded-on-slavery-but-on-pilgrims-ideals/

      It’s there in plain sight. Spelled-out in its mission statement, the New York Times’ 1619 Project seeks to “reframe” American history to mark the year 1619 as the “true founding.” By doing so, the project will “[place] the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center” of the American story.
      https://thefederalist.com/2019/08/21/no-america-wasnt-built-slavery-faith-men-created-equal/

      You can look up the following two articles if you want. WordPress wouldn’t let me post the links:

      How America was built on slavery: Those roots can still be felt today

      How the Slave Trade Built America

      Miner says: Because a great many people in the colonies and early United States knew slavery was wrong and opposed it from the very beginning.

      Miner I agree with you. The current propaganda does not. They even pretend we’re trying to currently enslave black Americans. It’s an easy political move for them. That creates mistrust and division along racial lines. It’s sick, but it helps them stay in power, so they keep doing it. They don’t want us to unite. Fear is a great motivator. The real division should be between the ruling class, and the rest of the country. The propaganda pretends that only white people can be racist because only white people hold power. I learned this under our first black president.
      Joe Biden said, “They’re going to put y’all back in chains.”

Comments are closed.