The left's destruction of history
Comments
-
Given the opportunity back then, you’d have owned slaves, too. Asshole.HardlyClothed said:Yes, transgressions just as relevant to his legacy as owning humans as property while authoring the lines “all men are created equal”. What would we do without our brain trust SFGBob.
-
WOOF!!!
-
Contextual judgments are way beyond the grasp of your average SJW. To them, slavery is still going on, but in lesser forms of oppression.creepycoug said:
But they were, in fact, fallible. What someone does with that is a matter of personal belief. It's subjective. There is no point in canonizing anyone. There are no Gods walking amongst us, and most of us know that. That's why I have no issue nailing anyone for hypocrisy. If MLK cheated to get his PhD, then fucking talk about it all you want. Doesn't make his life's work or message any less compelling. At least not to me. I love JFK, and he used to fuck 'em 5 at a time when Jackie went on shopping trips. I'm able to divorce that from his actions as President. Actually, ... nevermind.Sledog said:
Agree but promoting false accusations is a way to diminish the founders. Since the founders are flawed so is what they wrote.PurpleThrobber said:The Throbber could give zero fucks about whether or not TJ dipped his quill in Sally Hemmings' vajayjay. If one of his little swimmers made it upstream and latched onto one of SH's eggs, big fucking deal.
If the two ends of the bell curve want to dick around arguing about whether little Eston Jeff came from the loins of Thomas or Randolph Jefferson, have the fuck at it.
What the Throbber cares about is the words TJ put down on paper that continue to be the fucking bedrock of the US system of governance.
That's where the left is going with this.
Sure, there is a point at which what someone does privately fundamentally calls into question whether they can be trusted in other aspects of their lives.
But a slave owner fucking one of his slaves 225 years ago? Not worried about it, so I can read about it w/o bleeding out my tampon. -
Agreed. It's somewhat complicated, though, when you think about it. If you're a religious person, the very basic point of religion is a belief in objectively measurable morality. Matters of right and wrong aren't relative ... to anything. Things are either right or they're wrong, like math. It doesn't change. It's the very point of religion ... to give our existence meaning by establish immutable, objective truth that doesn't change with the tides.TurdBomber said:
Contextual judgments are way beyond the grasp of your average SJW. To them, slavery is still going on, but in lesser forms of oppression.creepycoug said:
But they were, in fact, fallible. What someone does with that is a matter of personal belief. It's subjective. There is no point in canonizing anyone. There are no Gods walking amongst us, and most of us know that. That's why I have no issue nailing anyone for hypocrisy. If MLK cheated to get his PhD, then fucking talk about it all you want. Doesn't make his life's work or message any less compelling. At least not to me. I love JFK, and he used to fuck 'em 5 at a time when Jackie went on shopping trips. I'm able to divorce that from his actions as President. Actually, ... nevermind.Sledog said:
Agree but promoting false accusations is a way to diminish the founders. Since the founders are flawed so is what they wrote.PurpleThrobber said:The Throbber could give zero fucks about whether or not TJ dipped his quill in Sally Hemmings' vajayjay. If one of his little swimmers made it upstream and latched onto one of SH's eggs, big fucking deal.
If the two ends of the bell curve want to dick around arguing about whether little Eston Jeff came from the loins of Thomas or Randolph Jefferson, have the fuck at it.
What the Throbber cares about is the words TJ put down on paper that continue to be the fucking bedrock of the US system of governance.
That's where the left is going with this.
Sure, there is a point at which what someone does privately fundamentally calls into question whether they can be trusted in other aspects of their lives.
But a slave owner fucking one of his slaves 225 years ago? Not worried about it, so I can read about it w/o bleeding out my tampon.
From that perspective, it was wrong then and there's no apologizing for it. Not even with historical context.
Still, IDRGAF about it. I agree - no SJW wants to let anyone off the hook for any reason. But chintrestingly, they ought to share this view in common with the religious right. But, they don't, in part because the religious right is full of shit too.
#creepycougisareligiousbigot. -
How chinteresting then that moral codes in religion have shifted over time? Proof yet again that it's a man made construct.creepycoug said:
Agreed. It's somewhat complicated, though, when you think about it. If you're a religious person, the very basic point of religion is a belief in objectively measurable morality. Matters of right and wrong aren't relative ... to anything. Things are either right or they're wrong, like math. It doesn't change. It's the very point of religion ... to give our existence meaning by establish immutable, objective truth that doesn't change with the tides.TurdBomber said:
Contextual judgments are way beyond the grasp of your average SJW. To them, slavery is still going on, but in lesser forms of oppression.creepycoug said:
But they were, in fact, fallible. What someone does with that is a matter of personal belief. It's subjective. There is no point in canonizing anyone. There are no Gods walking amongst us, and most of us know that. That's why I have no issue nailing anyone for hypocrisy. If MLK cheated to get his PhD, then fucking talk about it all you want. Doesn't make his life's work or message any less compelling. At least not to me. I love JFK, and he used to fuck 'em 5 at a time when Jackie went on shopping trips. I'm able to divorce that from his actions as President. Actually, ... nevermind.Sledog said:
Agree but promoting false accusations is a way to diminish the founders. Since the founders are flawed so is what they wrote.PurpleThrobber said:The Throbber could give zero fucks about whether or not TJ dipped his quill in Sally Hemmings' vajayjay. If one of his little swimmers made it upstream and latched onto one of SH's eggs, big fucking deal.
If the two ends of the bell curve want to dick around arguing about whether little Eston Jeff came from the loins of Thomas or Randolph Jefferson, have the fuck at it.
What the Throbber cares about is the words TJ put down on paper that continue to be the fucking bedrock of the US system of governance.
That's where the left is going with this.
Sure, there is a point at which what someone does privately fundamentally calls into question whether they can be trusted in other aspects of their lives.
But a slave owner fucking one of his slaves 225 years ago? Not worried about it, so I can read about it w/o bleeding out my tampon.
From that perspective, it was wrong then and there's no apologizing for it. Not even with historical context.
Still, IDRGAF about it. I agree - no SJW wants to let anyone off the hook for any reason. But chintrestingly, they ought to share this view in common with the religious right. But, they don't, in part because the religious right is full of shit too.
#creepycougisareligiousbigot. -
The SJWs are simply the other end of the bell curve of the religious nuts.creepycoug said:
Agreed. It's somewhat complicated, though, when you think about it. If you're a religious person, the very basic point of religion is a belief in objectively measurable morality. Matters of right and wrong aren't relative ... to anything. Things are either right or they're wrong, like math. It doesn't change. It's the very point of religion ... to give our existence meaning by establish immutable, objective truth that doesn't change with the tides.TurdBomber said:
Contextual judgments are way beyond the grasp of your average SJW. To them, slavery is still going on, but in lesser forms of oppression.creepycoug said:
But they were, in fact, fallible. What someone does with that is a matter of personal belief. It's subjective. There is no point in canonizing anyone. There are no Gods walking amongst us, and most of us know that. That's why I have no issue nailing anyone for hypocrisy. If MLK cheated to get his PhD, then fucking talk about it all you want. Doesn't make his life's work or message any less compelling. At least not to me. I love JFK, and he used to fuck 'em 5 at a time when Jackie went on shopping trips. I'm able to divorce that from his actions as President. Actually, ... nevermind.Sledog said:
Agree but promoting false accusations is a way to diminish the founders. Since the founders are flawed so is what they wrote.PurpleThrobber said:The Throbber could give zero fucks about whether or not TJ dipped his quill in Sally Hemmings' vajayjay. If one of his little swimmers made it upstream and latched onto one of SH's eggs, big fucking deal.
If the two ends of the bell curve want to dick around arguing about whether little Eston Jeff came from the loins of Thomas or Randolph Jefferson, have the fuck at it.
What the Throbber cares about is the words TJ put down on paper that continue to be the fucking bedrock of the US system of governance.
That's where the left is going with this.
Sure, there is a point at which what someone does privately fundamentally calls into question whether they can be trusted in other aspects of their lives.
But a slave owner fucking one of his slaves 225 years ago? Not worried about it, so I can read about it w/o bleeding out my tampon.
From that perspective, it was wrong then and there's no apologizing for it. Not even with historical context.
Still, IDRGAF about it. I agree - no SJW wants to let anyone off the hook for any reason. But chintrestingly, they ought to share this view in common with the religious right. But, they don't, in part because the religious right is full of shit too.
#creepycougisareligiousbigot.
They are exactly the same zealots. -
That's kinda what I was loading up but was waiting for bob to swing by and call me a Kunt.PurpleThrobber said:
The SJWs are simply the other end of the bell curve of the religious nuts.creepycoug said:
Agreed. It's somewhat complicated, though, when you think about it. If you're a religious person, the very basic point of religion is a belief in objectively measurable morality. Matters of right and wrong aren't relative ... to anything. Things are either right or they're wrong, like math. It doesn't change. It's the very point of religion ... to give our existence meaning by establish immutable, objective truth that doesn't change with the tides.TurdBomber said:
Contextual judgments are way beyond the grasp of your average SJW. To them, slavery is still going on, but in lesser forms of oppression.creepycoug said:
But they were, in fact, fallible. What someone does with that is a matter of personal belief. It's subjective. There is no point in canonizing anyone. There are no Gods walking amongst us, and most of us know that. That's why I have no issue nailing anyone for hypocrisy. If MLK cheated to get his PhD, then fucking talk about it all you want. Doesn't make his life's work or message any less compelling. At least not to me. I love JFK, and he used to fuck 'em 5 at a time when Jackie went on shopping trips. I'm able to divorce that from his actions as President. Actually, ... nevermind.Sledog said:
Agree but promoting false accusations is a way to diminish the founders. Since the founders are flawed so is what they wrote.PurpleThrobber said:The Throbber could give zero fucks about whether or not TJ dipped his quill in Sally Hemmings' vajayjay. If one of his little swimmers made it upstream and latched onto one of SH's eggs, big fucking deal.
If the two ends of the bell curve want to dick around arguing about whether little Eston Jeff came from the loins of Thomas or Randolph Jefferson, have the fuck at it.
What the Throbber cares about is the words TJ put down on paper that continue to be the fucking bedrock of the US system of governance.
That's where the left is going with this.
Sure, there is a point at which what someone does privately fundamentally calls into question whether they can be trusted in other aspects of their lives.
But a slave owner fucking one of his slaves 225 years ago? Not worried about it, so I can read about it w/o bleeding out my tampon.
From that perspective, it was wrong then and there's no apologizing for it. Not even with historical context.
Still, IDRGAF about it. I agree - no SJW wants to let anyone off the hook for any reason. But chintrestingly, they ought to share this view in common with the religious right. But, they don't, in part because the religious right is full of shit too.
#creepycougisareligiousbigot.
They are exactly the same zealots. -
You are an objective kunt. In today's real world the young earthers have no impact on my life. AOC and the green gaia religionists want to destroy it. You vote for this shit. Scratch a leftist find a fascist.
-
Trying to remember the last time a Christian fractured a guy’s skull with a bike lock. Methinks one end of the curve is worse than the other, at present.PurpleThrobber said:
The SJWs are simply the other end of the bell curve of the religious nuts.creepycoug said:
Agreed. It's somewhat complicated, though, when you think about it. If you're a religious person, the very basic point of religion is a belief in objectively measurable morality. Matters of right and wrong aren't relative ... to anything. Things are either right or they're wrong, like math. It doesn't change. It's the very point of religion ... to give our existence meaning by establish immutable, objective truth that doesn't change with the tides.TurdBomber said:
Contextual judgments are way beyond the grasp of your average SJW. To them, slavery is still going on, but in lesser forms of oppression.creepycoug said:
But they were, in fact, fallible. What someone does with that is a matter of personal belief. It's subjective. There is no point in canonizing anyone. There are no Gods walking amongst us, and most of us know that. That's why I have no issue nailing anyone for hypocrisy. If MLK cheated to get his PhD, then fucking talk about it all you want. Doesn't make his life's work or message any less compelling. At least not to me. I love JFK, and he used to fuck 'em 5 at a time when Jackie went on shopping trips. I'm able to divorce that from his actions as President. Actually, ... nevermind.Sledog said:
Agree but promoting false accusations is a way to diminish the founders. Since the founders are flawed so is what they wrote.PurpleThrobber said:The Throbber could give zero fucks about whether or not TJ dipped his quill in Sally Hemmings' vajayjay. If one of his little swimmers made it upstream and latched onto one of SH's eggs, big fucking deal.
If the two ends of the bell curve want to dick around arguing about whether little Eston Jeff came from the loins of Thomas or Randolph Jefferson, have the fuck at it.
What the Throbber cares about is the words TJ put down on paper that continue to be the fucking bedrock of the US system of governance.
That's where the left is going with this.
Sure, there is a point at which what someone does privately fundamentally calls into question whether they can be trusted in other aspects of their lives.
But a slave owner fucking one of his slaves 225 years ago? Not worried about it, so I can read about it w/o bleeding out my tampon.
From that perspective, it was wrong then and there's no apologizing for it. Not even with historical context.
Still, IDRGAF about it. I agree - no SJW wants to let anyone off the hook for any reason. But chintrestingly, they ought to share this view in common with the religious right. But, they don't, in part because the religious right is full of shit too.
#creepycougisareligiousbigot.
They are exactly the same zealots.
But it’s only a matter of seconds before somebody brings Eric Rudolph off the bench. -
Are you saying religiously slavery was forbidden?creepycoug said:
Agreed. It's somewhat complicated, though, when you think about it. If you're a religious person, the very basic point of religion is a belief in objectively measurable morality. Matters of right and wrong aren't relative ... to anything. Things are either right or they're wrong, like math. It doesn't change. It's the very point of religion ... to give our existence meaning by establish immutable, objective truth that doesn't change with the tides.TurdBomber said:
Contextual judgments are way beyond the grasp of your average SJW. To them, slavery is still going on, but in lesser forms of oppression.creepycoug said:
But they were, in fact, fallible. What someone does with that is a matter of personal belief. It's subjective. There is no point in canonizing anyone. There are no Gods walking amongst us, and most of us know that. That's why I have no issue nailing anyone for hypocrisy. If MLK cheated to get his PhD, then fucking talk about it all you want. Doesn't make his life's work or message any less compelling. At least not to me. I love JFK, and he used to fuck 'em 5 at a time when Jackie went on shopping trips. I'm able to divorce that from his actions as President. Actually, ... nevermind.Sledog said:
Agree but promoting false accusations is a way to diminish the founders. Since the founders are flawed so is what they wrote.PurpleThrobber said:The Throbber could give zero fucks about whether or not TJ dipped his quill in Sally Hemmings' vajayjay. If one of his little swimmers made it upstream and latched onto one of SH's eggs, big fucking deal.
If the two ends of the bell curve want to dick around arguing about whether little Eston Jeff came from the loins of Thomas or Randolph Jefferson, have the fuck at it.
What the Throbber cares about is the words TJ put down on paper that continue to be the fucking bedrock of the US system of governance.
That's where the left is going with this.
Sure, there is a point at which what someone does privately fundamentally calls into question whether they can be trusted in other aspects of their lives.
But a slave owner fucking one of his slaves 225 years ago? Not worried about it, so I can read about it w/o bleeding out my tampon.
From that perspective, it was wrong then and there's no apologizing for it. Not even with historical context.
Still, IDRGAF about it. I agree - no SJW wants to let anyone off the hook for any reason. But chintrestingly, they ought to share this view in common with the religious right. But, they don't, in part because the religious right is full of shit too.
#creepycougisareligiousbigot.
