Buck's Bogart: The poor defenseless gay

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
It's ironic that you level unfounded accusations of raping slaves on Washington, while turning a blind eye to his hiring of one of the most flamboyant Prussian Generals in history who's name was Friedrich Von Steuben, who was well known to be overly friendly with "young boys"..... In otherwords the man was gay, and Washington knew it, but Von Steuben was a organizational genius and very much needed by Washington.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/07/us/descendants-of-slave-s-son-contend-that-his-father-was-george-washington.html

I'm really not very patriotic and I don't understand the hero worship of a bunch of slave owners. Who knows, we may have been a better and less warlike people if we never had a revolution -- much like Canada.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
The only perspective that claim can be had from is an anti American one, I mean if you want to be a hypocrite about this, imagine the historical perception that is given in the many women that Martin Luther King Jr had sex with while married... Some maybe not consensual themselves.
so MLK had consensual sex with women?

is that kind of like raping someone who you own as property?

why bring that up here? i never saw you posting that washington was a slave rapist in any MLK threads. the balance seems to be off with you.
 

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
The only perspective that claim can be had from is an anti American one, I mean if you want to be a hypocrite about this, imagine the historical perception that is given in the many women that Martin Luther King Jr had sex with while married... Some maybe not consensual themselves.


good day to you sir, enjoy it however you can. It is obvious you're a very angry little man that has a problematic perception of reality for the sake of political expediency.
I do not approve of cheating, but it is far less odious than being a slave owner and slave raper. I am not an angry little man, I am a happy medium sized man who loves all the different types of people in this world. I hope you can love people different from yourself and realize that they deserve equal protection too, you will be much happier. :)
 

BenFranklin

Well-Known Member
This is my last post on this, I had to point out the obvious troll.......

it it is obvious that spell correct probably took over but.. Someone had to provocatively misconstrue consensual, while knowing precisely what was intended.

Now have a nice day making false claims and accusations from revised history.

and when you historically ignorant traitors wish to inform yourselves about the real face of slavery, look up the book by Robert M Grooms called Black Slave Owners of the Civil War.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
This is my last post on this, I had to point out the obvious troll.......

it it is obvious that spell correct probably took over but.. Someone had to provocatively misconstrue consensual, while knowing precisely what was intended.

Now have a nice day making false claims and accusations from revised history.

and when you historically ignorant traitors wish to inform yourselves about the real face of slavery, look up the book by Robert M Grooms called Black Slave Owners of the Civil War.
see ya later.

good luck on the ellipses abuse.
 

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
but you do.

here you explain why you are opposed to civil rights: I don't think its a good idea....

Check it:

If I wont let purples in my resturaunt, gubbment shuts me down, makes me comply, whats left residually in me?
Do I now hate purples less or more?
Same?
Nope, I hate em more now.....and money we don't have was spent.


here is how i characterize your opposition to civil rights: your belief that racist business owners' rights reign supreme over the rights of blacks to expect equal protection of the law


you care as much about that cause as i do. we are both content to argue our causes on the internet and not stake our personal fortunes on it.

i believe that all races, blacks included, deserve equal protection of the law, as civil rights codifies.

you believe that blacks should have no recourse if they are charged twice as much for gas as a white man, or assigned substandard motel rooms, or denied a lunch at the town's cafe.

you believe that the black should just drive over to the next town to get lunch, or get gas at the same price, or get a decent place to rest his head, simply because it would make the racist business owner more hateful if he had to give equal treatment to all races.

tell me more about why you espouse this line of thought, and if you would like to retract previous statements and simply express support for civil rights.
Nice out of text cross post.

And telling the other what they believe.

Clues you are debating well.
 
Top