- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Were the founders full of shite?
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:28 pm to 4cubbies
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:28 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I'm trying to approach this through a sociological lens, taking into consideration common opinions/beliefs at the time,
the thought of someone as intellectually void as you trying to interpret any document is laughable. But please go on as it will lead to some very entertaining conclusions as you've already demonstrated here. quote:
Did the founders believe their own bullshite?
a more valid question is how can you believe your own?
1
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:29 pm to 4cubbies
It's almost like they founded a country that was already 13 British colonies just before the founding. Lol, the fact I have to tell you this speaks volumes. Perhaps you think we should have started the civil war right after the founding of the new country? You do realize that a shite ton of people already lived here on their own property right and already owning slaves right? You do realize that we didn't start the country and then have people move here right? People like you who are eaten up with presentism and don't seem to understand we are an evolving people are just dense.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:29 pm to GRTiger
quote:
She has admitted to using language and phrasing in order to elicit as much attention as she can get.
Wait, what?
quote:
She does it so she can eventually do the "omg you creeps can't stay away from me and it nakes me feel unsafe" bit.
I've never posted anything like this. 
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:30 pm to GRTiger
quote:
She does it so she can eventually do the "omg you creeps can't stay away from me and it nakes me feel unsafe" bit.
She ignores me.. because I'm a woman and have occasionally gotten snarky with her. I believe you that she's seeking the predominantly male attention.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:30 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
The paper isn't actually about slavery, but I'm sure I'd find something useful to cite.
quote:
Jefferson collaborated with his mentor, George Wythe, to write an emancipation amendment. This amendment contained three elements: emancipation, education, and colonization for the freed slaves. These elements were designed to balance justice with an appeal to the prejudiced, tight-fisted Virginia slaveholders: emancipation applied only to babies born after the passage of the bill, ensuring that slaveholders would not lose any of their current property. The freed children would be educated at the state’s expense, indicating Jefferson’s concern that the race so viciously wronged by the injustice of slavery would receive the best chance to succeed in life. Finally, in a move designed to appeal both to racism and justice, once educated the youths would be colonized to some yet-to-be-determined destination, receiving state-sponsored aid, in addition to “alliance and protection, till they shall have acquired strength” to exist as an independent black nation.[13] The racial prejudices and fears of white Virginians were overcome, in this Wythe/Jefferson plan, by a process of gradual emancipation and separation. However, as Jefferson recalled in his Autobiography, this emancipation amendment was never presented to the legislature, because “it was found that the public mind would not yet bear the proposition.”[14]
LINK
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:31 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
t's the sanctimony, though. Or maybe I'm just reading sanctimony into these documents? (touching on your perception vs reality point from earlier)
During the time of the writing of the D of I and the Constitution there were only 3 other democratic republics in the world. It was the culmination of centuries of western philosophy (still pretty radical for its time) framed into a form of governance that has lasted 250 years. Im not usually a blowhard when it comes to greatness of our country , but Im grateful everyday that we were lucky enough to have those men...at that time in history as our founding fathers. It okay imo if you see sanctimony. They had a right to be sanctimonious.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:31 pm to 4cubbies
You absolutely have. You've also claimed that you've been propositioned by married male friends consistently for 2 decades. It's all very vain, but that's a common ailment on messgae boards.
This post was edited on 10/14/25 at 1:33 pm
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:34 pm to Hitman67
I am truly disappointed that the erudite posters of PT have chosen to engage with this insincere, mentally challenged provacateur....going on 11 pages.
It is truly fitting for SFPchubbies.
It is truly fitting for SFPchubbies.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:37 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:
Im grateful everyday that we were lucky enough to have those men...at that time in history as our founding fathers
They were definitely brave, innovative and articulate. No one is perfect, though.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:42 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Were the founders full of shite?
They were thoughtful and pragmatic.
Seems a bizarre question for a supposed educated adult American to be wrestling with and undecided upon.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:44 pm to 4cubbies
quote:We are all imperfect souls in an imperfect world, each just trying to make things a little better as we go. Some are better at that than others.
No one is perfect, though.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:51 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I'm trying to approach this through a sociological lens, taking into consideration common opinions/beliefs at the time, but still...
No you're not, when you make your headline something like this:
quote:
Were the founders full of shite?
you're simply trolling for reactions
Posted on 10/14/25 at 1:55 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Ouch! this is the most offensive thing I've read in this entire thread.
Yeah, I don't believe you.
quote:
what's wrong with my tone?
Forget it. Carry on. Sorry I wasted my time.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 2:17 pm to SludgeFactory
It is. I really do make an effort to be polite and cordial. I have no idea what kinds of bullshite people are dealing with in their real lives so there's no need for me to be an a-hole to strangers just for the hell of it.
I was being sincere btw.
quote:
Forget it. Carry on. Sorry I wasted my time.
I was being sincere btw.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 2:23 pm to 4cubbies
The answer to this thread is simply found in the flow of people. How many people WANT to live here vs. how many people WANT to leave here? Even you libs that cry and bitch all the time about how much America sucks and is so unfair (perpetual victimhood) still manage to stay instead of moving to your supposed utopia.
Posted on 10/14/25 at 2:33 pm to 4cubbies
Yeah slavery sucked
What a fresh take
What a fresh take
Posted on 10/14/25 at 2:35 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Yes, I come here so strange men I will never be in the same room with can call me fat, ugly and stupid.Like most humans, I love being insulted by strangers. My goodness, do you come here to get attention from men? Is that the actual motivation for posting here for most people? Why else would you accuse me of that?
People have all kinds of motivations for the shite they do. For attention whores like yourself, there’s no such thing as bad press.
quote:
Just ignore me.
You’d fricking die if people did just that. You’d be screaming at the walls “LOOK AT ME!!! LOOK AT ME!!!” Posted on 10/14/25 at 2:55 pm to 4cubbies
No, this country has existed for 250 years. Have their been pains? Yes.
Saying the founders are full of shite makes it look like you are full of shite dude. You seem desperate:
Saying the founders are full of shite makes it look like you are full of shite dude. You seem desperate:
This post was edited on 10/14/25 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 10/14/25 at 2:56 pm to 4cubbies
nope
Posted on 10/14/25 at 3:11 pm to 4cubbies
The founders were nuanced people. It was a mix of pacifists, deists, slave owners, pirates, farmers, merchants, ideologues, and preachers. They all had competing visions for what they wanted their new country to be. Some were opportunistic, others were utilitarian, and some were less pragmatic than they were principled.
What resulted was a Constitution born of compromise. These competing views and economic interests had to be weighed to create a government that everyone could live with. The utopians had to compromise with bean counters. The desires of liberty had to contend with the ability of the government to win wars. The desires for justice had to be balanced with the interests of the wrongfully accused.
They grappled deeply with the issue of slavery. Some argued for immediate abolition. Others recognized such would be economic suicide. In the end, it became clear that the Southern States would not join if slavery was outlawed in the Constitution, so they compromised by essentially tabling any discussions around slavery for 30 years while allowing individual states to make their own decisions on it. They expected slavery to slowly die off naturally as the labor shortage diminished. However, the invention of the cotton gin changed their calculus, and the debate over slavery became the defining political issue of the first century of the American Experiment.
They chose not to touch slavery in the Constitution despite the obvious moral dilemma because they did not want to end the war against England just to wage a civil war amongst themselves. Had slavery been banned in the Constitution, it would not have been ratified. Virginia, Georgia, and the Carolinas (as well as likely Maryland and Delaware) would not have joined the Union.
What resulted was a Constitution born of compromise. These competing views and economic interests had to be weighed to create a government that everyone could live with. The utopians had to compromise with bean counters. The desires of liberty had to contend with the ability of the government to win wars. The desires for justice had to be balanced with the interests of the wrongfully accused.
They grappled deeply with the issue of slavery. Some argued for immediate abolition. Others recognized such would be economic suicide. In the end, it became clear that the Southern States would not join if slavery was outlawed in the Constitution, so they compromised by essentially tabling any discussions around slavery for 30 years while allowing individual states to make their own decisions on it. They expected slavery to slowly die off naturally as the labor shortage diminished. However, the invention of the cotton gin changed their calculus, and the debate over slavery became the defining political issue of the first century of the American Experiment.
They chose not to touch slavery in the Constitution despite the obvious moral dilemma because they did not want to end the war against England just to wage a civil war amongst themselves. Had slavery been banned in the Constitution, it would not have been ratified. Virginia, Georgia, and the Carolinas (as well as likely Maryland and Delaware) would not have joined the Union.
Page 11 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News