Discussion in 'Politics' started by Padawanbater2, Dec 21, 2017.
that's the exact opposite of what happened, pedophile
you are on the klan side of that photo since you oppose civil rights
since you chose a side and didn't read the sign then you're a larper, shill.
you and the KKK stand united in your opposition to civil rights
Weren't children born on a plantation from a slave mother automatically the property of the plantation owner? Maybe you're thinking of that ?
Oh certainly many white people did horrible things to black people in the past. It sure was wrong when people were forced to use their bodies and their property in ways they hadn't consented to wasn't it? Yep forced associations were certainly bad waaay back then.
So, today, you'd force a black person to use his body and property to serve a white person against his will though, wouldn't you?
That's not the opposite of what happened a long time ago, it's the same thing, forcibly depriving a person of their self determination. Yep, forced associations sure are bad, STILL, today. You're a little slow aren't you?
Cute. I'm impressed you stopped stroking your humongous dick long enough to think that up.
He's right though
no, that is the exact opposite of what happened, klanman.
Can I use your SS# since you have no need for it...or do you
He signed his kids up to be (what he believes to be) slaves. What a shit parent?
What fuck shit kind of parent would do that.
@Rob Roy why the hell would you sell your kids to slavery ? I bet you would be ok with child sex trafficking because the child agreed to the promise of a better way of life.
When your kids were born why did you sign the State's ownership papers and make them slaves on the great plantation you keep prattling on about?
Because rob roy moore is a hypocritical windbag.
Children born on the plantation are assumed to be subjects (slaves) of the political system (plantation) whether or not they or their parents agree or not, isn't that right?
If it's not correct, could you prattle on and tell me how it is inaccurate?
Have you been drinking laundry detergent again?
So, today, you would force a black person to serve a white person, on the black persons own property, against his will?
You're in the net, little fishy. Shall I fry you up or let you go is the only question remaining.
That's not a very good argument and relies on a fallacious insinuation.
I think you might just be mad, because you can't articulate a good argument against the obvious.
You would force a black person to serve a white person, against his will. I wish you weren't such a racist.
Separate names with a comma.