Five minutes of hate news

King Arts

Well-known member
Also Sally Hemings was between the ages of 14 to 16 during this intimate relationship which resulted in her first pregnancy as well. So if Jefferson wants people castrated for sodomy, I hope he has an even more stern punishment for pedophilia.

And it occurred in Paris before they returned to Monticello. So that's international child sex trafficking or something. ;)

"God's Children Are Not For Sale" IMHO.



Oh that reminds me of a Norm MacDonald joke about how the worst thing about Bill Cosby was the hypocrisy.
*sigh* Husky are you going to just parrot brain dead liberal takes about "Muh evil founding fathers." Look up the age of consent laws in 1777, even if Jefferson did sleep with Sally at age 14 that is not pedophillia and was not illegal.

Also ironically that brain dead quote about God's children not being for sale? Umm sweetie have you read the Bible? It allows slavery. Now true American chattel slavery was different from Hebrew slavery in the old testament, but your objection is towards slavery itself not towards "cruel slavery" I mean if the slaves were not mistreated you would still be for going to war to free them right?

Though having sex with your slaves in Christianity is strictly forbidden(this is not Islam lol) If you want to have sex with your slave you would have to marry her. So if I'm not saying Jefferson did it, but if he was with Sally then he did do something evil.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
*sigh* Husky are you going to just parrot brain dead liberal takes about "Muh evil founding fathers." Look up the age of consent laws in 1777, even if Jefferson did sleep with Sally at age 14 that is not pedophillia and was not illegal.
Again, this is about what is moral, not legal at the time, concerning the question of if Jefferson is a reliable authority to appeal to for modern day sexual mores.

Jefferson cleanly lines up as someone we shouldn't follow for that. From being anti-race mixing, to having sex with 14-16 year old slave girls, we shouldn't use him as a reliable figure here.
 

King Arts

Well-known member
Husky "She shit posts with facts."

Is Husky a woman?

Also looking it up

Husky is wrong about Sally being 14 when it happened. Obviously we can't know for certain but rumours started in 1790's Let's say it happens in the earliest 1790, because the first public report was in 1802. Sally was born in 1773 subtract 1790 from 1773 and she was 17, fully grown and not that strange.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Husky "She shit posts with facts."

Is Husky a woman?

Also looking it up

Husky is wrong about Sally being 14 when it happened. Obviously we can't know for certain but rumours started in 1790's Let's say it happens in the earliest 1790, because the first public report was in 1802. Sally was born in 1773 subtract 1790 from 1773 and she was 17, fully grown and not that strange.
Yes husky is a woman.
Again, this is about what is moral, not legal at the time, concerning the question of if Jefferson is a reliable authority to appeal to for modern day sexual mores.

Jefferson cleanly lines up as someone we shouldn't follow for that. From being anti-race mixing, to having sex with 14-16 year old slave girls, we shouldn't use him as a reliable figure here.
The Slave stuff is false
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
Holy shit I did not know that.


Umm it's true though. Jefferson had slaves, like he inherited them so he did not go out and acquire them but they were legally his, whether he wanted them or not.
Jefferson was vehemently anti-slavery. He did inherit slaves. He also felt they would not benefit from being set free, but would merely be re-enslaved or mistreated if he didn't lay a legal groundwork for establishing democratic freedom for all first.


He likened simply freeing a slave who wasn't properly prepared with life skills to abandoning a child.

As is, he passed laws making it illegal to import any more slaves first as soon as he possibly could.

And encouraged others to pass similar laws.

He proposed a law that would illegalize slavery in the year 1800.

And was enraged when it failed to pass by one vote.

I could go on with many pages of his writings and quotations about his efforts to abolish slavery gradually and lay a groundwork for slaves to have a decent future rather than just declaring they were free and abandoning them.
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul
Jefferson was vehemently anti-slavery. He did inherit slaves. He also felt they would not benefit from being set free, but would merely be re-enslaved or mistreated if he didn't lay a legal groundwork for establishing democratic freedom for all first.

...snip...

I could go on with many pages of his writings and quotations about his efforts to abolish slavery gradually and lay a groundwork for slaves to have a decent future rather than just declaring they were free and abandoning them.
Jefferson's slow role to complete Emancipation was our best chance to avoid the Civil War.
 

Husky_Khan

The Dog Whistler... I mean Whisperer.
Founder
Jefferson was vehemently anti-slavery. He did inherit slaves. He also felt they would not benefit from being set free, but would merely be re-enslaved or mistreated if he didn't lay a legal groundwork for establishing democratic freedom for all first.


He likened simply freeing a slave who wasn't properly prepared with life skills to abandoning a child.

As is, he passed laws making it illegal to import any more slaves first as soon as he possibly could.

And encouraged others to pass similar laws.

He proposed a law that would illegalize slavery in the year 1800.

And was enraged when it failed to pass by one vote.

I could go on with many pages of his writings and quotations about his efforts to abolish slavery gradually and lay a groundwork for slaves to have a decent future rather than just declaring they were free and abandoning them.

Does that website say anything about him banging teenagers that may or may not be enjoying the benefits of non-cruel Christian slavery?
 

bintananth

behind a desk
Jefferson's slow role to complete Emancipation was our best chance to avoid the Civil War.
It was already on its way out the door when he, Franklin, and Adams drafted the Declaration of Independence. If you also read the Articles of Confederation -- which Congress had already started working on when the Declaration of Independence was issued -- you will find no mention of slavery at all.

The Constitution dances around it with the 3/5 compromise and playing "kick the can" with banning the slave trade -- which IIRC, only Georgia still participated in at the time.

The Cotton Gin was the spanner in the works because it turned cotton from a marginal manpower hog into a cash crop for the plantation owners in the South who relied on slaves for manpower.
 

TheRejectionist

TheRejectionist
@Abhorsen While I think you are right about the kiss protest of the 1975 , they did not suffer consequences of their actions compared to those who were supposedly needing the money to go on (organizers, other bands and performers, food sellers and so on...).
The fault IS of the Malay government and remains theirs for being exaggerated borderline theocratic prudes that they give a collective punishment to others.
And while certainly I do not share @mrttao
opinion fully (Which I think is argument is a tad bit too exaggered) I surely would have wanted to slap some sense into the 1975 band members that kissed for having compromised others situation.
And after seeing the Prague Pride where I saw furries in real life for the first time and BDSM "practioners" with dog-like masks, I am having a very difficult time arguing to myself of a libertarian-like attitude and not go fully the opposite way.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
@Abhorsen While I think you are right about the kiss protest of the 1975 , they did not suffer consequences of their actions compared to those who were supposedly needing the money to go on (organizers, other bands and performers, food sellers and so on...).
Yes, there is some definite disconnect here, but they did suffer consequences (for one, not being able to meet tour dates means that the 1975 is not going to be making money from the rest of the tour, and frequently there are contractual penalties for not showing up, and I doubt those contracts had a gay kiss clause). I'm unsure how much of the damage companies will be able to recoup from what the 1975 did, but I know its not everything, but I expect it's not nothing either.

And to be clear, those companies going after 1975 is quite alright by me. 1975 should be the ones to bear the consequences of their political speech (though ideally there wouldn't be any), as it makes the power of the speech more meaningful. No one cares about going in lingerie to a pride parade anymore, which is why Pride is no longer a protest.

Whereas originally, it was clearly a protest, where the people involved were publicly outing themselves at great potential cost, in order to protest discriminatory laws and attitudes.

And after seeing the Prague Pride where I saw furries in real life for the first time and BDSM "practioners" with dog-like masks, I am having a very difficult time arguing to myself of a libertarian-like attitude and not go fully the opposite way.
My general opinion is that if people are comfortable enough to do that in public, a pride parade isn't needed anymore. Also, it's very much a free rider problem: people see that the gays earned Pride, and can now exploit Pride to be for anything, even if it's utterly unrelated to LGBT stuff (and BDSM and furries are not LGBT things, straight people do them too).

It's basically the BLM to the civil rights movement.
 
Last edited:

ThatZenoGuy

Zealous Evolutionary Nano Organism
Comrade

9b7.png

Whenever the FBI are brought up, all I can think back to is how accurate the AI generated greentext was...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top