• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When?

Fledermaus said:
That is why you can't answer questions with anything but regurgitated talking points?

What do you imagine "eminent domain" means and how would you exercise it in this case?
Click to expand...

It is in our federal Constitution. All you have is appeals to the inferior fallacy of ignorance in argumentation to discover Sublime Truth (value).
 
The warrior thing...


We've always had a bit of Native American stuff leak into the military. The Pathfinder units in WWII used to cut their hair into Mohawks and paint their faces, for example.



45thInfDiv.jpg





The swastika isn't a swastika, it's a Native American symbol.


So it's not hugely surprising that our military adopts the term for the Native American fighting men.
 
danielpalos said:
You are an example of a person who is appealing to ignorance. "You are in it", just like the eminent domain clause in our federal Constitution.
Click to expand...

Another non answer.

What does "Appeal to Ignorance" mean to you?

I have already posted the definition. And you ignored it.
 
Fledermaus said:
Another non answer.

What does "Appeal to Ignorance" mean to you?

I have already posted the definition. And you ignored it.
Click to expand...

lol. You are appealing to ignorance, like usual. I am right even though I am on the left and that means, You must be Wrong, even though you are on the Right.
 
Fledermaus said:
Another response that does not answer the question.

You really don't know. Do you?
Click to expand...

This is even more retarded because this is not even the same Constitution he is trying to discuss. The US Constitution in no way applies to the Confederate States, they had their own Constitution.

And no, there was no "Citizenship for Blacks" in 1808, I have absolutely no idea where that even comes from. Were blacks able to vote? Own property? Enter into a legal contract? Those are just some of the rights of a "Citizen", and they were excluded to blacks. Even free blacks could rarely vote, even in free states let alone in the CSA. I would love to see the legal clause which gave them that right in 1808.

Now what did happen in 1808 is that a "sunset clause" written into Article V kicked in, which prohibited Congress from enacting any laws regarding slavery, and also prohibited any changes in the Constitution regarding slavery kicked in. When the document was written, these restrictions were put into place, and would expire in 1808. And almost as soon as they did, a law was passed prohibiting the importation of slaves from other nations.

It in no way gave them "citizenship". In fact, at most the free blacks of the South only had "Residency", not "Citizenship". There are some huge differences between the two, but to give an idea it was essentially the same as Apartheid in South Africa. They could live there, they could work there, but that is about it. Other than that the Government has no interaction. They can not vote, but they also can not be drafted. They can not hold office, but they also can not be forced to stand on a jury.

As usual, things just made up out of nowhere, with absolutely no attempt to validate his claim at all. Then insulting those that prove he is wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom