WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
@ShawnOL said:
The founders of this country were some of the smartest men who ever lived. They had balls, too. If it's worth dying for, it's also worth killing for. They knew this, they lived this. They walked the walk.
They didn't have enough balls to solve slavery. They let their grandsons die for it instead.
Damn Frank, I thought you were way smarter than that. No, never mind. I'm sure that if you had been there you would have had 21st century ethics and taught them all better.
@ShawnOL said:
The founders of this country were some of the smartest men who ever lived. They had balls, too. If it's worth dying for, it's also worth killing for. They knew this, they lived this. They walked the walk.
They didn't have enough balls to solve slavery. They let their grandsons die for it instead.
Damn Frank, I thought you were way smarter than that. No, never mind. I'm sure that if you had been there you would have had 21st century ethics and taught them all better.
Do we excuse behavior based on timeline?
Do we engage in delusional self-congratulatory mental master bay shun as an exercise in fantasy? Pretending that if we had lived then we would think as we do now?
In my teens and 20's, the 1970s, I was a LOUD voice for civil rights. I still believe in civil rights, and equality for everyone. I do not fool myself into believing that if the DNA carbon copy of me was born then that I'd feel the way I do today.
99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% chance that I, and you, would have been a product of our times and upbringing, just like everyone else. If you wish to engage in heroic fantasies about your uniqueness, go right ahead. I did that too. Of course, I was 12 years old. But, you have the right to pretend if you want to.
Imagine for a moment that you could go back in time to, say, sometime between the 10th and 15th centuries. Do you believe that you would have gone to the Kings of Africa and convinced them that their centuries old practice of buying white slaves from Central Europe would one day boomerang on them? Be my guest, but be aware that they would have simply explained to you that the Slavic peoples were inferior, and so were you. Then they'd have castrated you and put you to work.
I'm not into self congratulatory delusion. You are. I don't hold it against you, it's just the way it is.
I do wish that our society today could settle into a new normal where race is not a consideration, hard work, integrity, and merit are what counts.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I'm not into self congratulatory delusion. You are. I don't hold it against you, it's just the way it is.
What a dooosh response....I only asked based on timeline, are they excused for their behaviors due to the times and you wander down a self gratifying road. You sir are an expert in back patting.
Cultural relativity. Look it up. See if you can grasp it. It may exist at a level of Moral Reasoning you haven't yet reached. It's not a matter of "timeline". Again, you may not grasp that, either. Still, you're trying to be a good person, I think. Keep trying, you'll get there eventually.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
@Amos_Umwhat said:
Cultural relativity. Look it up. See if you can grasp it. It may exist at a level of Moral Reasoning you haven't yet reached. It's not a matter of "timeline". Again, you may not grasp that, either. Still, you're trying to be a good person, I think. Keep trying, you'll get there eventually.
Spoken like a true self righteous blowhard. If falling to your level of ad hominem attack is one day becoming a "good person" ..... I'll pass.
Lol I knew I could stir up the hornets nest. You guys are way too easy.
And by the way @Amos_Umwhat, you should know better than to think I am putting 21st century values onto a 18th century group of people. I find that remark either disingenuous or offensive. But whatever.
The majority of those present at constitutional convention understood that that slavery was the biggest difference in the interests of all the states. Madison wrote about it profusely and often. They intentionally compromised to allow slavery, and to allow its spread via natural reproduction, and to allow the counting of slaves as population, even at a 60% rate, all to ensure that the 13 colonies (especially South Carolina) would all sign the document because you couldn't have a strong federal government if you couldn't get all 13 colonies to ratify the Constitution.
The bottom line and the final verdict is that the main goal was to ratify the Constitution not to solve slavery, which is why they didn't do it.
But, a little comment a dozen posts ago gave you all something to do today. Thanks for the entertainment.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
I find it humorous when Pete flexes his large muscles. Comes in handy when stirring the pot. At least I know you get the humor Pete.
I’m also of the opinion that when one reaches the decades old ripe age, that wisdom would naturally override emotion. Unless of course, self righteous intellectual arrogance is your thing.
Gawd I love these posts. It’s a microcosm of our current society and culture. Opinions are subjective, and oftentimes, multi dimensional. Forum arguments are singular dimensional.
@OutdoorsSmoke_21191 said:
I find it humorous when Pete flexes his large muscles. Comes in handy when stirring the pot. At least I know you get the humor Pete.
I’m also of the opinion that when one reaches the decades old ripe age, that wisdom would naturally override emotion. Unless of course, self righteous intellectual arrogance is your thing.
Gawd I love these posts. It’s a microcosm of our current society and culture. Opinions are subjective, and oftentimes, multi dimensional. Forum arguments are singular dimensional.
good post-trial analysis:
Donald Trump’s conviction over a hush-money payment to an adult film actress complicated his already-fraught path back to the White House. The unprecedented ruling against a former US president played out in predictable ways among Republican and Democratic partisans. But it was nevertheless likely to reverberate among swing voters, giving those “who don’t much like [Joe] Biden … an emphatic, unambiguous reminder of why they don’t like Trump,” Politico’s global editor-in-chief wrote, while Semafor’s Washington bureau chief noted “low-engagement voters look like the main characters in this election.” One group appeared unmoved by Trump’s legal travails, though: Billionaires are lining up behind the Republican candidate, with one saying, “This verdict will have less than zero impact on my support.”
The Trump trial was held in ultra liberal New York. Had it been in Texas or Florida, do you think it would have gone the same way? New York is famous for legally attacking those it disfavors.
Trapped in the People's Communits Republic of Massachusetts.
@VegasFrank said:
Lol I knew I could stir up the hornets nest. You guys are way too easy.
And by the way @Amos_Umwhat, you should know better than to think I am putting 21st century values onto a 18th century group of people. I find that remark either disingenuous or offensive. But whatever.
It was what surprised me. That's why I said I thought you were smarter than that.
I was mostly agreeing with @ShawnOL , The Founding Fathers were intellectual giants in their time, creating the nation we enjoy today, imperfectly at first as happens with all things human.
For me, the trigger point is that upon discovering that these giants were human, some people think that they may dismiss all of the great accomplishments by pointing out the flaws, flaws inherent to the age they lived in. They, and we, are all products of our environments. In our case, an environment that would not exist without the results of their endeavors.
It feels as though, by fixating on the areas that weren't instantly perfect, you and Pete believe yourselves worthy of passing judgement on those men to whom we all owe so much. Like vandals desecrating history.
Yep, I'm easy. Just another blowhard trying to stand up for what's right. Sorry if I've offended anyone, other than Pete. I'll live with that.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
@VegasFrank said:
Lol I knew I could stir up the hornets nest. You guys are way too easy.
And by the way @Amos_Umwhat, you should know better than to think I am putting 21st century values onto a 18th century group of people. I find that remark either disingenuous or offensive. But whatever.
It was what surprised me. That's why I said I thought you were smarter than that.
I was mostly agreeing with @ShawnOL , The Founding Fathers were intellectual giants in their time, creating the nation we enjoy today, imperfectly at first as happens with all things human.
For me, the trigger point is that upon discovering that these giants were human, some people think that they may dismiss all of the great accomplishments by pointing out the flaws, flaws inherent to the age they lived in. They, and we, are all products of our environments. In our case, an environment that would not exist without the results of their endeavors.
It feels as though, by fixating on the areas that weren't instantly perfect, you and Pete believe yourselves worthy of passing judgement on those men to whom we all owe so much. Like vandals desecrating history.
Yep, I'm easy. Just another blowhard trying to stand up for what's right. Sorry if I've offended anyone, other than Pete. I'll live with that.
I literally only asked a question...... please post evidence of me passing judgement.... nope... won't find it. But I'm definitely not offended.... thank you for the material.
I literally only asked a question...... please post evidence of me passing judgement.... nope... won't find it. But I'm definitely not offended.... thank you for the material.
What do I say? The obvious didn't work.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I literally only asked a question...... please post evidence of me passing judgement.... nope... won't find it. But I'm definitely not offended.... thank you for the material.
What do I say? The obvious didn't work.
Ahhahhahhaaaaaa! You have nothing. Evidence my friend, which you don't have.
Edit..... You know how you use the "Quote" feature. Quote me passing judgement.
@VegasFrank said:
Lol I knew I could stir up the hornets nest. You guys are way too easy.
And by the way @Amos_Umwhat, you should know better than to think I am putting 21st century values onto a 18th century group of people. I find that remark either disingenuous or offensive. But whatever.
It was what surprised me. That's why I said I thought you were smarter than that.
I was mostly agreeing with @ShawnOL , The Founding Fathers were intellectual giants in their time, creating the nation we enjoy today, imperfectly at first as happens with all things human.
For me, the trigger point is that upon discovering that these giants were human, some people think that they may dismiss all of the great accomplishments by pointing out the flaws, flaws inherent to the age they lived in. They, and we, are all products of our environments. In our case, an environment that would not exist without the results of their endeavors.
It feels as though, by fixating on the areas that weren't instantly perfect, you and Pete believe yourselves worthy of passing judgement on those men to whom we all owe so much. Like vandals desecrating history.
Yep, I'm easy. Just another blowhard trying to stand up for what's right. Sorry if I've offended anyone, other than Pete. I'll live with that.
Lol whatever. Don't move the goal posts, please, and also don't compare me with others, if it's not too much trouble. I didn't say that the delegation from Virginia and South Carolina and Georgia were evil men. I didn't say anything about the morality of holding slaves in the 18th century. Not one word or syllable.
My statement stands unadulterated and undisputed: every man at the constitutional convention understood that slavery was the biggest and most dangerous obstacle to forming a more perfect union of 13 states. In the interest of forming that Union, they punted on slavery. Based on insights of the writings of the members of that convention, most hoped that future generations would solve the problem.
Future generations solved it with guns and cannon.
That was a bad and unnecessary outcome. ← that statement is a revisionist statement. Absolutely.
So what? It's still correct. I have no way of knowing, but I don't imagine that any of the members of that convention thought that punting on the issue would result in a country almost being torn apart and hundreds of thousands of lives being lost. Had they had the insight, I'm sure they would have solved it at the constitutional convention Even if it would have cost them South Carolina and Georgia.
By the way, I also know that I said that they weren't brave enough to do it. I didn't say they weren't moral enough to do it. I didn't say they weren't godly enough to do it. I didn't say they weren't 21st century enough to do it. I said they weren't brave enough to do it. If you're going to attribute words to me, be fuçking accurate. Please.
Look man, it's the same as me questioning the Lions coach for not kicking the field goal at the end of the game. I'm allowed to do it. I didn't say the coach was immoral for passing up the field goal. I didn't say that he should burn in hell for it. I said he made a mistake by passing it up. And that it was a poor coaching decision. And it cost them the game.
Same with the constitutional convention. That is my opinion and that is what you can attribute to me and that is what you can hold me responsible for. Everything else is you making up words and shoving them down my throat.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Folks, I will try to wrap this up as quickly as possible, and then will say no more.
Guys, this is not our first go around with this argument, nor is it an uncommon argument these days. Based on our history with it, and the popular social trends of passing 21st century judgement on 18th century actions, I am probably indeed guilty of reading into it more than has been openly stated.
Beginning with what Shawn had to say, a statement which I agree with, and Franks response in this current iteration of this discussion, it breaks down in my mind as this: (paraphrasing and reducing to syllogism)
Statement: The Founding Fathers were great men, worthy of respect.
Argument: The Founding Fathers were slaveholders, (and all the moral evils that attend that position) therefore none of their accomplishments are worthy of respect, nor are they worthy of honored remembrance.
As should be plainly shown in the quoted text above, this is nothing but a textbook example of an Ad Hominem argument, and not worthy of consideration. Certainly surprised me coming from Frank, as I know he knows better. It was this syllogistic reduction that I responded to. Perhaps unfairly?
Frank, I have no dispute with your expanded argument, one which I have gone over in my head many times long before you and I knew of each other. Taken only at face value, without the attending implications from past conversations or the use of the word "balls" as you stated it in this conversation, I agree with you completely and have made the same argument before. Again, many years before we knew each other, and in the face of actual racists.
I apologize, Frank, if I was shoving words down your throat, as you say, although I doubt I am the only one who read it that way.
Pete, the argument that the founding fathers were slaveholders and therefore not worthy of respect, and argument you've made before, is an actual Ad Hominem argument. So is dismissing an argument by calling someone a "****". Your insistence on proof falls under the heading of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam I believe, but it's not worth the time or effort to go into all that, for me anyway. Life's too short.
When I said that I think you are trying to be a good person, my meaning was that I feel that you believe yourself to be standing up for what you think is right, not that you should be like me, although that is what I try to do, as explained at length above. Unfortunately, you seem to think that if you can find any flaw, that cancels all else. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps not. Doesn't affect my bottom line.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Statement: The Founding Fathers were great men, worthy of respect.
Argument: The Founding Fathers were slaveholders, (and all the moral evils that attend that position) therefore none of their accomplishments are worthy of respect, nor are they worthy of honored remembrance.
Steve, this is simply false. Here are the two statements, as written, unadulterated by innuendo:
You interpreted my statement incorrectly, and that's fine. You invoked Ad hominem, which as your textbook says, takes two to tango. Perhaps I earned your prejudgements of me and/or my statement through our past interactions. I'll take that responsibility.
No hard feelings....
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Statement: The Founding Fathers were great men, worthy of respect.
Argument: The Founding Fathers were slaveholders, (and all the moral evils that attend that position) therefore none of their accomplishments are worthy of respect, nor are they worthy of honored remembrance.
Steve, this is simply false. Here are the two statements, as written, unadulterated by innuendo:
As I said, what I presented was my minds interpretation, a paraphrasing of the actual conversation based on a history. I take responsibility for that.
You interpreted my statement incorrectly, and that's fine. You invoked Ad hominem, which as your textbook says, takes two to tango. Perhaps I earned your prejudgements of me and/or my statement through our past interactions. I'll take that responsibility.
No hard feelings....
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
@dirtdude said:
I'm glad we got that cleared up.
On to a 21st century problem. Can a convicted felon even run for president?
As long as the felon is part of the rich elite class, I don't see why not.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Folks, I will try to wrap this up as quickly as possible, and then will say no more.
Guys, this is not our first go around with this argument, nor is it an uncommon argument these days. Based on our history with it, and the popular social trends of passing 21st century judgement on 18th century actions, I am probably indeed guilty of reading into it more than has been openly stated.
Beginning with what Shawn had to say, a statement which I agree with, and Franks response in this current iteration of this discussion, it breaks down in my mind as this: (paraphrasing and reducing to syllogism)
Statement: The Founding Fathers were great men, worthy of respect.
Argument: The Founding Fathers were slaveholders, (and all the moral evils that attend that position) therefore none of their accomplishments are worthy of respect, nor are they worthy of honored remembrance.
As should be plainly shown in the quoted text above, this is nothing but a textbook example of an Ad Hominem argument, and not worthy of consideration. Certainly surprised me coming from Frank, as I know he knows better. It was this syllogistic reduction that I responded to. Perhaps unfairly?
Frank, I have no dispute with your expanded argument, one which I have gone over in my head many times long before you and I knew of each other. Taken only at face value, without the attending implications from past conversations or the use of the word "balls" as you stated it in this conversation, I agree with you completely and have made the same argument before. Again, many years before we knew each other, and in the face of actual racists.
I apologize, Frank, if I was shoving words down your throat, as you say, although I doubt I am the only one who read it that way.
Pete, the argument that the founding fathers were slaveholders and therefore not worthy of respect, and argument you've made before, is an actual Ad Hominem argument. So is dismissing an argument by calling someone a "****". Your insistence on proof falls under the heading of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam I believe, but it's not worth the time or effort to go into all that, for me anyway. Life's too short.
When I said that I think you are trying to be a good person, my meaning was that I feel that you believe yourself to be standing up for what you think is right, not that you should be like me, although that is what I try to do, as explained at length above. Unfortunately, you seem to think that if you can find any flaw, that cancels all else. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps not. Doesn't affect my bottom line.
You are just putting words into my mouth and claiming it as fact. I'll take the "but it's not worth the time or effort to go into all that, for me anyway. Life's too short." as a white flag. Thank you.
@ShawnOL said:
The Trump trial was held in ultra liberal New York. Had it been in Texas or Florida, do you think it would have gone the same way? New York is famous for legally attacking those it disfavors.
Lol, that shitt right there Shawn is comedy gold. You could literally have a Netflix special with material like that.
I suppose New York is the only state like that. Or maybe it's just New York, California, Massachusetts and all of the blue States. I know for a fact that Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, and Florida never partake in this kind of show trial.
Or lynching.
See Frank, that's what everybody is talking about. You have to take it too far. You never listen. You always think you're right and smarter than everyone. The truth is you have no idea what a lynching feels like or that they ever existed. You read something in a third grade social studies book in liberal grade school that brainwashed you when you were nine!
There you go again, Frank! Stop it!
I also to suppose that any conservative who is tried and convicted for anything in a liberal state should be set free? Definitely don't free the liberals in the conservative States though. They're evil! 😨
Besides, we have to focus on black people who quietly kneel during the national anthem and the rights of criminals to shoot kindergartners!
Okay Frank, this is why no one likes you.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
@ShawnOL said:
The Trump trial was held in ultra liberal New York. Had it been in Texas or Florida, do you think it would have gone the same way? New York is famous for legally attacking those it disfavors.
Lol, that shitt right there Shawn is comedy gold. You could literally have a Netflix special with material like that.
I suppose New York is the only state like that. Or maybe it's just New York, California, Massachusetts and all of the blue States. I know for a fact that Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, and Florida never partake in this kind of show trial.
Or lynching.
See Frank, that's what everybody is talking about. You have to take it too far. You never listen. You always think you're right and smarter than everyone. The truth is you have no idea what a lynching feels like or that they ever existed. You read something in a third grade social studies book in liberal grade school that brainwashed you when you were nine!
There you go again, Frank! Stop it!
I also to suppose that any conservative who is tried and convicted for anything in a liberal state should be set free? Definitely don't free the liberals in the conservative States though. They're evil! 😨
Besides, we have to focus on black people who quietly kneel during the national anthem and the rights of criminals to shoot kindergartners!
Okay Frank, this is why no one likes you.
Who TF said anything about the rights of crazy people to school children, @VegasFrank ? Do murderers and crazy people have rights? Didnt see that in the bill of rights. I'm more concerned with criminals to worry about America-hating people that won't respect our flag, either.
Trapped in the People's Communits Republic of Massachusetts.
@ShawnOL said:
The Trump trial was held in ultra liberal New York. Had it been in Texas or Florida, do you think it would have gone the same way? New York is famous for legally attacking those it disfavors.
Lol, that shitt right there Shawn is comedy gold. You could literally have a Netflix special with material like that.
I suppose New York is the only state like that. Or maybe it's just New York, California, Massachusetts and all of the blue States. I know for a fact that Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, and Florida never partake in this kind of show trial.
Or lynching.
See Frank, that's what everybody is talking about. You have to take it too far. You never listen. You always think you're right and smarter than everyone. The truth is you have no idea what a lynching feels like or that they ever existed. You read something in a third grade social studies book in liberal grade school that brainwashed you when you were nine!
There you go again, Frank! Stop it!
I also to suppose that any conservative who is tried and convicted for anything in a liberal state should be set free? Definitely don't free the liberals in the conservative States though. They're evil! 😨
Besides, we have to focus on black people who quietly kneel during the national anthem and the rights of criminals to shoot kindergartners!
Okay Frank, this is why no one likes you.
Who TF said anything about the rights of crazy people to school children, @VegasFrank ? Do murderers and crazy people have rights? Didnt see that in the bill of rights. I'm more concerned with criminals to worry about America-hating people that won't respect our flag, either.
Oh man that's so funny bro. Thank you.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Comments
^^I don't know whether to laugh or agree.^^
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Do we excuse behavior based on timeline?
Do we engage in delusional self-congratulatory mental master bay shun as an exercise in fantasy? Pretending that if we had lived then we would think as we do now?
In my teens and 20's, the 1970s, I was a LOUD voice for civil rights. I still believe in civil rights, and equality for everyone. I do not fool myself into believing that if the DNA carbon copy of me was born then that I'd feel the way I do today.
99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% chance that I, and you, would have been a product of our times and upbringing, just like everyone else. If you wish to engage in heroic fantasies about your uniqueness, go right ahead. I did that too. Of course, I was 12 years old. But, you have the right to pretend if you want to.
Imagine for a moment that you could go back in time to, say, sometime between the 10th and 15th centuries. Do you believe that you would have gone to the Kings of Africa and convinced them that their centuries old practice of buying white slaves from Central Europe would one day boomerang on them? Be my guest, but be aware that they would have simply explained to you that the Slavic peoples were inferior, and so were you. Then they'd have castrated you and put you to work.
I'm not into self congratulatory delusion. You are. I don't hold it against you, it's just the way it is.
I do wish that our society today could settle into a new normal where race is not a consideration, hard work, integrity, and merit are what counts.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
What a dooosh response....I only asked based on timeline, are they excused for their behaviors due to the times and you wander down a self gratifying road. You sir are an expert in back patting.
Cultural relativity. Look it up. See if you can grasp it. It may exist at a level of Moral Reasoning you haven't yet reached. It's not a matter of "timeline". Again, you may not grasp that, either. Still, you're trying to be a good person, I think. Keep trying, you'll get there eventually.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Spoken like a true self righteous blowhard. If falling to your level of ad hominem attack is one day becoming a "good person" ..... I'll pass.
Lol I knew I could stir up the hornets nest. You guys are way too easy.
And by the way @Amos_Umwhat, you should know better than to think I am putting 21st century values onto a 18th century group of people. I find that remark either disingenuous or offensive. But whatever.
The majority of those present at constitutional convention understood that that slavery was the biggest difference in the interests of all the states. Madison wrote about it profusely and often. They intentionally compromised to allow slavery, and to allow its spread via natural reproduction, and to allow the counting of slaves as population, even at a 60% rate, all to ensure that the 13 colonies (especially South Carolina) would all sign the document because you couldn't have a strong federal government if you couldn't get all 13 colonies to ratify the Constitution.
The bottom line and the final verdict is that the main goal was to ratify the Constitution not to solve slavery, which is why they didn't do it.
But, a little comment a dozen posts ago gave you all something to do today. Thanks for the entertainment.
I find it humorous when Pete flexes his large muscles. Comes in handy when stirring the pot. At least I know you get the humor Pete.
I’m also of the opinion that when one reaches the decades old ripe age, that wisdom would naturally override emotion. Unless of course, self righteous intellectual arrogance is your thing.
Gawd I love these posts. It’s a microcosm of our current society and culture. Opinions are subjective, and oftentimes, multi dimensional. Forum arguments are singular dimensional.
A good cigar and whiskey solve most problems.
💪
good post-trial analysis:
Donald Trump’s conviction over a hush-money payment to an adult film actress complicated his already-fraught path back to the White House. The unprecedented ruling against a former US president played out in predictable ways among Republican and Democratic partisans. But it was nevertheless likely to reverberate among swing voters, giving those “who don’t much like [Joe] Biden … an emphatic, unambiguous reminder of why they don’t like Trump,” Politico’s global editor-in-chief wrote, while Semafor’s Washington bureau chief noted “low-engagement voters look like the main characters in this election.” One group appeared unmoved by Trump’s legal travails, though: Billionaires are lining up behind the Republican candidate, with one saying, “This verdict will have less than zero impact on my support.”
The Trump trial was held in ultra liberal New York. Had it been in Texas or Florida, do you think it would have gone the same way? New York is famous for legally attacking those it disfavors.
Trapped in the People's Communits Republic of Massachusetts.
It was what surprised me. That's why I said I thought you were smarter than that.
I was mostly agreeing with @ShawnOL , The Founding Fathers were intellectual giants in their time, creating the nation we enjoy today, imperfectly at first as happens with all things human.
For me, the trigger point is that upon discovering that these giants were human, some people think that they may dismiss all of the great accomplishments by pointing out the flaws, flaws inherent to the age they lived in. They, and we, are all products of our environments. In our case, an environment that would not exist without the results of their endeavors.
It feels as though, by fixating on the areas that weren't instantly perfect, you and Pete believe yourselves worthy of passing judgement on those men to whom we all owe so much. Like vandals desecrating history.
Yep, I'm easy. Just another blowhard trying to stand up for what's right. Sorry if I've offended anyone, other than Pete. I'll live with that.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I literally only asked a question...... please post evidence of me passing judgement.... nope... won't find it. But I'm definitely not offended.... thank you for the material.
What do I say? The obvious didn't work.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Ahhahhahhaaaaaa! You have nothing. Evidence my friend, which you don't have.
Edit..... You know how you use the "Quote" feature. Quote me passing judgement.
Lol whatever. Don't move the goal posts, please, and also don't compare me with others, if it's not too much trouble. I didn't say that the delegation from Virginia and South Carolina and Georgia were evil men. I didn't say anything about the morality of holding slaves in the 18th century. Not one word or syllable.
My statement stands unadulterated and undisputed: every man at the constitutional convention understood that slavery was the biggest and most dangerous obstacle to forming a more perfect union of 13 states. In the interest of forming that Union, they punted on slavery. Based on insights of the writings of the members of that convention, most hoped that future generations would solve the problem.
Future generations solved it with guns and cannon.
That was a bad and unnecessary outcome. ← that statement is a revisionist statement. Absolutely.
So what? It's still correct. I have no way of knowing, but I don't imagine that any of the members of that convention thought that punting on the issue would result in a country almost being torn apart and hundreds of thousands of lives being lost. Had they had the insight, I'm sure they would have solved it at the constitutional convention Even if it would have cost them South Carolina and Georgia.
By the way, I also know that I said that they weren't brave enough to do it. I didn't say they weren't moral enough to do it. I didn't say they weren't godly enough to do it. I didn't say they weren't 21st century enough to do it. I said they weren't brave enough to do it. If you're going to attribute words to me, be fuçking accurate. Please.
Look man, it's the same as me questioning the Lions coach for not kicking the field goal at the end of the game. I'm allowed to do it. I didn't say the coach was immoral for passing up the field goal. I didn't say that he should burn in hell for it. I said he made a mistake by passing it up. And that it was a poor coaching decision. And it cost them the game.
Same with the constitutional convention. That is my opinion and that is what you can attribute to me and that is what you can hold me responsible for. Everything else is you making up words and shoving them down my throat.
I'm glad we got that cleared up.
On to a 21st century problem. Can a convicted felon even run for president?
@VegasFrank , @Vision
Folks, I will try to wrap this up as quickly as possible, and then will say no more.
Guys, this is not our first go around with this argument, nor is it an uncommon argument these days. Based on our history with it, and the popular social trends of passing 21st century judgement on 18th century actions, I am probably indeed guilty of reading into it more than has been openly stated.
Beginning with what Shawn had to say, a statement which I agree with, and Franks response in this current iteration of this discussion, it breaks down in my mind as this: (paraphrasing and reducing to syllogism)
Statement: The Founding Fathers were great men, worthy of respect.
Argument: The Founding Fathers were slaveholders, (and all the moral evils that attend that position) therefore none of their accomplishments are worthy of respect, nor are they worthy of honored remembrance.
As should be plainly shown in the quoted text above, this is nothing but a textbook example of an Ad Hominem argument, and not worthy of consideration. Certainly surprised me coming from Frank, as I know he knows better. It was this syllogistic reduction that I responded to. Perhaps unfairly?
Frank, I have no dispute with your expanded argument, one which I have gone over in my head many times long before you and I knew of each other. Taken only at face value, without the attending implications from past conversations or the use of the word "balls" as you stated it in this conversation, I agree with you completely and have made the same argument before. Again, many years before we knew each other, and in the face of actual racists.
I apologize, Frank, if I was shoving words down your throat, as you say, although I doubt I am the only one who read it that way.
Pete, the argument that the founding fathers were slaveholders and therefore not worthy of respect, and argument you've made before, is an actual Ad Hominem argument. So is dismissing an argument by calling someone a "****". Your insistence on proof falls under the heading of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam I believe, but it's not worth the time or effort to go into all that, for me anyway. Life's too short.
When I said that I think you are trying to be a good person, my meaning was that I feel that you believe yourself to be standing up for what you think is right, not that you should be like me, although that is what I try to do, as explained at length above. Unfortunately, you seem to think that if you can find any flaw, that cancels all else. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps not. Doesn't affect my bottom line.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Steve, this is simply false. Here are the two statements, as written, unadulterated by innuendo:
You interpreted my statement incorrectly, and that's fine. You invoked Ad hominem, which as your textbook says, takes two to tango. Perhaps I earned your prejudgements of me and/or my statement through our past interactions. I'll take that responsibility.
No hard feelings....
As I said, what I presented was my minds interpretation, a paraphrasing of the actual conversation based on a history. I take responsibility for that.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
As long as the felon is part of the rich elite class, I don't see why not.
I still think politics drives folks crazy.
You are just putting words into my mouth and claiming it as fact. I'll take the "but it's not worth the time or effort to go into all that, for me anyway. Life's too short." as a white flag. Thank you.
Good 🚽💩🧻 intermission.
Closing arguments??
A good cigar and whiskey solve most problems.
Lol, that shitt right there Shawn is comedy gold. You could literally have a Netflix special with material like that.
I suppose New York is the only state like that. Or maybe it's just New York, California, Massachusetts and all of the blue States. I know for a fact that Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, and Florida never partake in this kind of show trial.
Or lynching.
See Frank, that's what everybody is talking about. You have to take it too far. You never listen. You always think you're right and smarter than everyone. The truth is you have no idea what a lynching feels like or that they ever existed. You read something in a third grade social studies book in liberal grade school that brainwashed you when you were nine!
There you go again, Frank! Stop it!
I also to suppose that any conservative who is tried and convicted for anything in a liberal state should be set free? Definitely don't free the liberals in the conservative States though. They're evil! 😨
Besides, we have to focus on black people who quietly kneel during the national anthem and the rights of criminals to shoot kindergartners!
Okay Frank, this is why no one likes you.
And just to be fair, Jeff put me up to it.
No one likes Frank!
Who TF said anything about the rights of crazy people to school children, @VegasFrank ? Do murderers and crazy people have rights? Didnt see that in the bill of rights. I'm more concerned with criminals to worry about America-hating people that won't respect our flag, either.
Trapped in the People's Communits Republic of Massachusetts.
Oh man that's so funny bro. Thank you.
Please elaborate. You're coming off soo partisan.
Trapped in the People's Communits Republic of Massachusetts.