why do dems claim this little one has no protections or rights ?

[progressive hunter]

Let me remind you, a quick history lesson. That 3/5ths is what prolonged the era of slavery.

Since slave states were able to use that 3/5ths advantage to vote against abolition.

let me remind you,, if not for the 3/5ths clause the country would have never been created,,

if they didnt get to count their slaves they would have never agreed to the union,,

 

[progressive hunter]

Actually they should have been counted only if they were allowed to vote. Legislators in the north proposed that if the south could have their non-voting property counted as voters, that they should have their pigs and cows counted toward their representation.

what about their chairs tables buckets and other possessions??

dont they get to vote too??

 

[meaner gene]

let me remind you,, if not for the 3/5ths clause the country would have never been created,,

A compromise that created the united states as a slave country in legislative perpetuity.

The constitution guaranteed slavery could not be legislated out of existence.

 

[progressive hunter]

A compromise that created the united states as a slave country in legislative perpetuity.

The constitution guaranteed slavery could not be legislated out of existence.

and if the country wasnt created there would still be slaves today,, OK theres still slaves today that total more than all of human history of that time but I digress,,

we all know democrats didnt like giving up their slaves,,,

 

[meaner gene]

what about their chairs tables buckets and other possessions??

dont they get to vote too??

Only their livestock.

 

[progressive hunter]

Only their livestock.

why stop there,,, oh thats right democrats dont consider black people human,,

 

[meaner gene]

and if the country wasnt created there would still be slaves today,,

Hardly. Had the united states existed of only the northern states, the war of 1812 would have been england reclaim the agricultural production they lost in the revolutionary war. And as you know, England outlawed slavery a couple of decades later.

 

[progressive hunter]

Hardly. Had the united states existed of only the northern states, the war of 1812 would have been england reclaim the agricultural production they lost in the revolutionary war. And as you know, England outlawed slavery a couple of decades later.

got a link??

 

[meaner gene]

why stop there,,, oh thats right democrats dont consider black people human,,

The irony of that statement is that conservative judges including Clarence Thomas, would agree with the Dredd Scott decision, as the correct application of the original meaning of the constitution.

 

[progressive hunter]

The irony of that statement is that conservative judges including Clarence Thomas, would agree with the Dredd Scott decision, as the correct application of the original meaning of the constitution.

if you say so..

 

[meaner gene]

got a link??

Speculation as to English strategy to regain what they lost in the revolutionary war.

Before its civil war, America supplied 80 per cent of the raw material for Britain’s largest industry, the cotton trade.

 

[progressive hunter]

Speculation as to English strategy to regain what they lost in the revolutionary war.

Before its civil war, America supplied 80 per cent of the raw material for Britain’s largest industry, the cotton trade.

so you just made it up,, got it,,

 

[meaner gene]

if you say so..

The Dredd Scott decision reads just like Scalia in Heller V DC, and like the many descents written by Thomas.

 

[progressive hunter]

The Dredd Scott decision reads just like Scalia in Heller V DC, and like the many descents written by Thomas.

your breath smells like a buffulo fart,, doesnt make you a buffulo,,

 

[meaner gene]

your breath smells like a buffulo fart,, doesnt make you a buffulo,,

Have you read USSC decisions, and the judicial philosophy behind their construction. I would start with Heller V DC, and compare it to Scott V Sandford.

Their logic is identicle.

 

[progressive hunter]

Have you read USSC decisions, and the judicial philosophy behind their construction. I would start with Heller V DC, and compare it to Scott V Sandford.

Their logic is identicle.

in your mind it is,,

 

[meaner gene]

Read who Scalia called "the people" and who Tanney called "the people" and how they arrived as their usage in various parts of the constitution.

They agree.

 

[theHawk]

Now you're being stupid. It meant that the white slave owners got extra representation due to the number of slaves they owned. Whereas the slaves got representation that was OPPOSITE to their wishes. They would have been better off not having any representation at all.

Nope, you’re being stupid. You claimed the Founding Fathers said a slave had no rights. But nothing in the Constitution forbid slaves from voting or having any other rights. In fact the groundwork laid in the Constitution led to them being freed from there Democrat masters.

 

[Curried Goats]

Nope, you’re being stupid. You claimed the Founding Fathers said a slave had no rights. But nothing in the Constitution forbid slaves from voting or having any other rights. In fact the groundwork laid in the Constitution led to them being freed from there Democrat masters.

No. War did that you historically ignorant fucktard.

 

[yidnar]

To listen to these pro-abortionists rant, you would think they were talking about a tumor, not a living being.

some are even calling babies in the womb nothing more than parasites ..