that is your interpretation.
The fact that you have begun to use personal insults proves you have no more valid arguments.
That right there is the only proof that I need that you acknowledge that you've lost the debate. ANY time someone comes up with "that's your opinion", or "that's your interpretation", that is an acknowledgement that they've lost, that they KNOW that they've lost, and they've got nothing left but to equivocate and obfuscate.
As for the "insults", when someone insists on perpetuating a lie as you have throughout this discussion, and willfully refusing to accept facts, they deserve to be insulted, harshly, and publically.
As I said, California may have been the first. I said that for a couple of very specific reasons; 1) I don't know, and 2) I don't really care because it simply doesn't matter, and is not germane to the discussion as I have already shown that your entire premise was flawed.
It is germane in that, if Missouri or if California were the first, then there weren't any before that. That's what first usually means.
But you never specified a State that had a law on the books specifically designed to protect a womans right to own property, you said, repeatedly, that women were not allowed to own property in America, which I clearly demonstrated was an incorrect statement.
I see you have descended yet again into personal insult and shouting. See my answer above.
If you don't like being insulted, stop be willfully stupid.
The words you quoted were from the Constitution.
The words "All men are created equal" is from the Declaration of Independence.
Your point? And what's with the shouting yet again, have you no further valid arguments?
Hey, you're the one that conflated the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence, not me.
I have all kinds of very valid arguements, but apparantly they're WAY over your head, so I was making sure that you could hear them.
Which, of course, you said earlier was playing word games.
You made an incorrect statement, I tried very hard to point out the fallicy of that statement and to give you the ability to correct it, but you persisted with your fallacious statements. It's not "word games" to try to get someone to say what they really mean.
It happens
I must say, I'm relieved to note you're not arguing for black slavery,
Of course not, who would? I'm for GREEN SLAVERY, and LIBERAL SLAVERY!
or for the 18th. century idea that they aren't human.
And then you go and spoil it by making another of your silly a$$ed "broad brush" statements! Not everyone in the 18th century shared that idea, and by saying it the way you did is intellectually disingenuous.
Of course, there were some European explorers who wondered whether the natives were human, too.
There are people walking around today who seriously wonder if the person they're standing next to is "human"! For that matter, if you ask Sen. Robert KKK Byrd, he'd probably say to this day that Blacks aren't human.
Sure. And Bush, for example, would still have attended Harvard Business School and then become president had he been born in Appalachia to a coal mining family. His cocaine use would never have resulted in prison, either. Everyone has the same opportunities, regardless of the circumstances of their birth.
(That, in case you're wondering, was sarcasm. I thought it was funny. Did you?)
Not really. But then again, the fact that Barry Obliviot can be selected President even though he's not even an American citizen, a self avowed doper, who's parents weren't legally married, and came from a broken home after his bigamist Kenyan father abandoned he and his mother to go back to Kenya and his other wives pretty much proves that anything can happen in America today.
How is it, then, that the man who penned those words kept black slaves himself?
First of all, he inherited them, along with the 2,400 acre farm at 14 years of age when the elder Jefferson suddenly died. The fact is that freedmen were routinely kidnapped and sold "down the river" to slavery in the Lousiana Territory or other places outside the Colonies where their life expectancy was very short. Jefferson knew this, and though he unsuccessfully worked throughout his lifetime to get slavery abolished, he couldn't condemn the people he had grown up with to certain death, so he kept them, essentially to save their lives.
Were these 187 human beings also included in that statement?[/URL]
Asked and answered.
As I said before, I don't choose to spend my money that way. If that's what you want to do, go for it.
I'm saving up for some of those SAMs you said I could have.
I've got mine, having bought it shortly after I got out of the service nearly 30 years ago, and I maintain my proficiency regularly.
As far as the SAM's, why buy when you can build your own a lot cheaper, and with a much better guidance system than you can with anything you're going to buy "off the shelf" (and no "permits")?
