Educate Ben about black women

[Ben Kenobi]

The constitution specifically sanctions an income tax. Denying the legitimacy of the income tax by calling it "theft" is a denial of the constitution's legitimacy.

The original? No. It was only passed by Woodrow Wilson and his buddies in 1913. Of course I could believe in a 'living tree' where apparently anything goes. Or I could be an originalist, and acknowledge that the constitution as written said nothing about an income tax.

[Ben Kenobi]

Homosexuals?

I don't inquire into the sexual proclivities of my students. Perhaps in your world that's relevent to teaching history.

[giblets]

The original? No. It was only passed by Woodrow Wilson and his buddies in 1913. Of course I could believe in a 'living tree' where apparently anything goes. Or I could be an originalist, and acknowledge that the constitution as written said nothing about an income tax.

Woodrow Wilson wasn't even president when the sixteenth amendment was ratified. And guess what... the sixteenth amendment was ratified by following the amendment process created by the 'original' constitution.

[MrFun]

The original? No. It was only passed by Woodrow Wilson and his buddies in 1913. Of course I could believe in a 'living tree' where apparently anything goes. Or I could be an originalist, and acknowledge that the constitution as written said nothing about an income tax.

The original Constitution said nothing about abolishing slavery. It said nothing about granting women equal suffrage.

You're right - our revised, current Constitution is a ****ing mess.

[Ben Kenobi]

Maybe you're pleased but I'm not to fond of the idea that my state should being the dumping ground for Canadian conservatards. Maybe there should be an exchange program or something.

What, exchanging Texas liberals for Canadian conservatives? That would be a great deal!

[giblets]

The original Constitution said nothing about abolishing slavery. It said nothing about granting women equal suffrage.

You're right - our revised, current Constitution is a ****ing mess.

I guess he shouldn't complain about the 'slavery' of the income tax, seeing how his version of the constitution allows slavery.

[Ben Kenobi]

The original Constitution said nothing about abolishing slavery. It said nothing about granting women equal suffrage.

You're right - our revised, current Constitution is a ****ing mess.

So apparently because all amendments are good, that means any revision to the constitution would also be good. This is the 'living tree'. Yes, the current constitution is a mess. How can you say otherwise? It says nothing about discrimination wrt sexual preferences. Don't you want that included, Fun?

[MrFun]

So apparently because all amendments are good, that means any revision to the constitution would also be good. This is the 'living tree'. Yes, the current constitution is a mess. How can you say otherwise? It says nothing about discrimination wrt sexual preferences. Don't you want that included, Fun?

I never said that all amendments are good. Where did you read that?

[giblets]

If the founding fathers didn't want the constitution to be a 'living tree' they wouldn't have included an amendment process. ffs.

[Ben Kenobi]

I guess he shouldn't complain about the 'slavery' of the income tax, seeing how his version of the constitution allows slavery.

'My' version? What, I wrote a constitution for the united states? No. Facts are facts. The original constitution had neither an income tax nor prohibition of slavery. The current one prohibits slavery, but permits an income tax. Instead of enslaving one group, it enslaves everyone. I'm not sure how that's an improvement.

[Asher]

'My' version? What, I wrote a constitution for the united states?

You are so unbelievably stupid. You fail to comprehend English on a regular basis...

[Ben Kenobi]

If the founding fathers didn't want the constitution to be a 'living tree' they wouldn't have included an amendment process. ffs.

You can't argue for a living tree and argue in favour of the status quo. Those are diametrically opposed positions. You can argue in favour for reform of the constitution and reform of the living tree, but with the understanding that you will 'improve' the constitution. So you could argue that the current constitution was the best, but only by arguing that every amendment makes the constitution better.

[Lonestar]

I could do what most of my friends have done and move to Alberta. Why go for the substitute when you can get the real deal? As I said, TX is awesome.

You're dodging the question possibly because you know how stupid it sounds to go "wa wa II have no money in my home town, already live in a first world country, therefore I should EMIGRATE instead of moving to another town within the country".

No, I just spend money differently then most folks. I really don't have much 'stuff', and I've been planning this move for a long time. If I were rich I could have just gone, but I had to wait and save until I had enough to go. You also presume that I didn't have to move within BC to find work. I have lived in Vancouver for about half the last 5 years, for work and for school. There's never been much available in my hometown.

Yeah, okay. :roll:

The per pupil cost is about 1/2 what the public schools spend, and yes, those who can't pay can talk to the principal and work things out. Apparently someone who envies the rich also hates the poor.

So, (1) yes there is a tuition, and I note that you said it wasn't waived, but "something was worked out".

(2)How do you figure I "hate the poor?" Because I pointed out, correctly, that there is some kind of extra cost to attending your school, and you even admit that tuition isn't waived? As for being someone who "envies the rich" I owed Uncle Sam an additional 2 grand when I filed taxes this year, which puts me in the well-to-do bracket.

And that is perfectly okay, because I am an adult and know I receive benefits from being in a well-functioning society, with open access to public education for all. I don't barricade myself in my ivory tower(or in your case, private schools) and pretend that the free market equals an egalitarian society.

[giblets]

We don't have a different constitution. It changes over time, which is exactly what the people who wrote it intended, seeing how they explicitly included a process for adding to it. Income tax is constitutional, not as a matter of opinion but as a matter of fact, and if you don't like that you free to try to persuade people that the constitution needs to be amended get rid of the income tax.

[Asher]

BTW, if we're playing with words, Christianity is far more akin to slavery than income tax.
They even have a Master they serve.