Firearms

[Something completely different]

You are beyond wrong. Slavery is not even mentioned until the amendment that freed the slaves. I'm sorely tempted to call you a retard because of the vehemence with which you just delivered that lie. Read the fucking thing. It's hardly a few pages.

what the?!!!

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1. It states:
"The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight. . ."

It was clear after the revolution that the document wouldnt be signed if it explicitly was against slavery or permitted it. So the writers of the constitution simply put in a clause which determined that the issue should be resolved 20 years later. What the document did explicitly say thereby was that slavery shouldnt be abolished until 1808.

Also:

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labor may be due . . .

Your constitution underlines in it`s original form, that a slave escaping his master has to be returned.

And yes! The term "slave" or "slavery" is never used! Because instead of these terms the euphemisms "person" and "ownership" are used!

How naive are you?!

My argument still stands even if you would have proven me wrong!
What was law or right 200 years ago, is certainly not right today!


So you are the one who is eigther lieing or being ignorant here!

---

source:


http://caho-test.cc.columbia.edu/ps/10199.html