Official Debate Thread Round III

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
\\((|))// said:
Really?

Explain.
Click to expand...

Easy.. If the Constitution clearly stated who/when/how on voting rights, whenever the decisions were made to not include people who didn't own property, someone would have challenged that and said, the Constitution says we can't do that! Same with denying women and blacks the right to vote... someone would have mentioned that it was not in accordance with the Constitution.

Who said they didn't?
Click to expand...

No one, but they couldn't have happened if the Constitution was clear and unambiguous on the subject.

I didn't make a claim.

You did.
Click to expand...

No, you indicated the Constitution would prevent such a plan as I described and I challenged you to show us where you get that idea, and you have yet to do so. You made the claim and I challenged your claim.

Can you prove the Constitution is vague and ambiguous, or not?
Click to expand...

I've already done so three or four times... non-property owners, blacks, women, poll tax, et. al.
 
Haiku said:
Do you post elsewhere on American forums? If so do you find this attitude? I'm very surprised...but that's just me.
Click to expand...

No, I don't. I came with some others from the AOL forum where I made my entry on the day of the New York disaster having watched two middle eastern gentlemen holding up pictures of the twin towers and laughing and dancing in the main street of HK. I remonstrated with them and became determined that I at least would offer sympathy and understanding from outside America. There are some good people here who may remember that.
Little was I to know, at the time, how the bush babies would contort the event and use it to instil fear into the American public so they could continue with their PNAC plan and invade yet more countries. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! :)
 
\\((|))// said:
What sort of reaction do you think an American would get (and deserve) if they posted constant carping criticisms of British people and their culture on a UK internet forum?
Click to expand...

Quite probably a similar reaction to yours against me.
So?
I won't lose any sleep over it, I suggest you don't either.
 
Dixie said:
Easy.. If the Constitution clearly stated who/when/how on voting rights, whenever the decisions were made to not include people who didn't own property, someone would have challenged that and said, the Constitution says we can't do that!
Click to expand...

And nobody did?

Dixie said:
Same with denying women and blacks the right to vote... someone would have mentioned that it was not in accordance with the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Nobody ever questioned the denial of suffrage to women and Blacks, according to you?

Dixie said:
No one, but they couldn't have happened if the Constitution was clear and unambiguous on the subject.
Click to expand...

They couldn't?

Would you say the Second Amendment is "vague"?

Dixie said:
No, you indicated the Constitution would prevent such a plan as I described and I challenged you to show us where you get that idea, and you have yet to do so. You made the claim and I challenged your claim.
Click to expand...

What claim?

Link up.

Now, declare victory again, and use lots of capitals and exclamation points.

Dixie said:
I've already done so three or four times... non-property owners, blacks, women, poll tax, et. al.
Click to expand...

So racism, paternalistic sexism, and economic oppression are all the fault of the Framers, and you've proven it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top