Michele Bachmann signed marriage pact suggesting black families were better off during slavery

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gift_from_God
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think this thread should be closed or corrected in the OP on the new infomation. Apparantly the 1860 date was wong, and it is not clear whether Santorum or Bachmann knew of the passage on slavery before they signed the pledge.

Family Leader has withdrawn the original statement:

“After careful deliberation and wise insight and (name removed by moderator)ut from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued, and such misconstruction can detract from the core message of the Marriage Vow: that ALL of us must work to strengthen and support families and marriages between one woman and one man," the group’s officials said in a statement. "We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow.”

politico.com/news/stories/0711/58631.html
 
Liberals will do anything to fan the fires of racial strife and hatred. Look at the hater Jeremiah Wright,Barack’s spiritual advisor. Attorney General Holder who stated hate crimes cannot be commited against whites because they have not suffered enough as a race or his statement America is a nation of cowards!! Feel the love.
Stop Jihad
 
I think this thread should be closed or corrected in the OP on the new infomation. Apparantly the 1860 date was wong, and it is not clear whether Santorum or Bachmann knew of the passage on slavery before they signed the pledge.

Family Leader has withdrawn the original statement:

“After careful deliberation and wise insight and (name removed by moderator)ut from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued, and such misconstruction can detract from the core message of the Marriage Vow: that ALL of us must work to strengthen and support families and marriages between one woman and one man," the group’s officials said in a statement. "We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow.”

politico.com/news/stories/0711/58631.html
You mean Bachmann and Santorum signed something without reading it! I thought only Democrats did that.
 
They look so happy! They are also working! And look at that nice home their owners have! Just think! They may actually live near it in some barn or shack!

Anyway, I think this whole thing just shows some true feelings and thoughts some of these people have. Sadly, most people here will not realize that because it is critical of the republican party. Glad I don’t follow that church.
Smug, smarmy remarks are what we have come to expect from liberals.You whitewash the truth by enveloping yourselves in specious slogans and images. There is never an attempt to address serious points raised. I suppose if *I* had to rationalize the truth that MY party's policies have lead to the collapse of black families, or have caused the slaughter of tens of millions of perfectly created babies, I'd resort to cliches as well. :rolleyes: Rob
 
Smug, smarmy remarks are what we have come to expect from liberals.You whitewash the truth by enveloping yourselves in specious slogans and images. There is never an attempt to address serious points raised. I suppose if I had to rationalize the truth that MY party’s policies have lead to the collapse of black families, or have caused the slaughter of tens of millions of perfectly created babies, I’d resort to cliches as well. :rolleyes: Rob
The truth is in their wildest dreams white supremacists could not have killed as many African-Americans as modern liberalism has. They picked up Margaret Sanger’s mantle and continue to promote her agenda today
 
They look so happy! They are also working! And look at that nice home their owners have! Just think! They may actually live near it in some barn or shack!

Anyway, I think this whole thing just shows some true feelings and thoughts some of these people have. Sadly, most people here will not realize that because it is critical of the republican party. Glad I don’t follow that church.
Yes, it’s illuminating isn’t it? It’s garbage like the sentiments expressed here that ensures I will NEVER vote for a right-winger.

“War Between the States” Makes me want to throw up. . . . .
 
Yes, it’s illuminating isn’t it? It’s garbage like the sentiments expressed here that ensures I will NEVER vote for a right-winger.

“War Between the States” Makes me want to throw up. . . . .
Funny how people are so upset over a euphemism like “War Between the States” but have no problem supporting those who aid and abette the slaughter of 1.2 million children a year, 400,000 of whom are the descendents of the slaves they calim so much empathy for
 
Yes, it’s illuminating isn’t it? It’s garbage like the sentiments expressed here that ensures I will NEVER vote for a right-winger.

“War Between the States” Makes me want to throw up. . . . .
You have a more appropriate name for it?
 
Funny how people are so upset over a euphemism like “War Between the States” but have no problem supporting those who aid and abette the slaughter of 1.2 million children a year, 400,000 of whom are the descendents of the slaves they calim so much empathy for
Oh will you lay off it already. Everything isn’t about abortion. You try to shut down every conversation with that. . . It’s not noble. It’s not courageous.

It’s intellectually dishonest.
 
She felt that if the South lost, slavery would end and so would the racemixing that it often led to.
She sounds like Abraham Lincoln which is why he pushed expatriation to Liberia. Much of the dislike of slavery was because of race mixing.
 
Yeah, the War of Northern Agression. . . right?

I’m from the South. I know the game. . . .
Since the South never tried to exert control over the North, it isn’t properly a “civil” war, now is it? And the South had no intention of expanding into the North, so it wasn’t a war of “southern aggression”. The War for Southern Independence would be more appropriate. But, since they lost, the North gets to rewrite history to say whatever it wants.

Feeling a little ragey? Maybe you need to go for a walk or something.
 
You mean Bachmann and Santorum signed something without reading it! I thought only Democrats did that.
Code:
This is the kind of silly remark that I have come to expect here. It dismisses two tragic issues with a quip. First, the issues raised about Democrat policies which have destroyed black families, and second, the fact that the Democrats passed 3000 pages of new bureaucracies and regulations which are supposed to simplify and improve health care in America, WITHOUT ANY OF THEM reading it. Of course, Obamacare will destroy all that is good in our current system, despite its present problems. Liberals NEVER answer questions substantively; you never notice the disastrous results, and instead focus on creating superficial, foolish slogans. 
As to your direct point, I'm sure that Michele and Rick read the statement they signed. *I* did, and I support it 100%, no apology.
 
Since the South never tried to exert control over the North…
Ha…tell that to the ex-slaves who escaped North, and who were recaptured because of the Fugitive Slave laws supported by Southern slave-owners.:rolleyes:
Finally, California would be admitted as a free state. To pacify slave-state politicians, who would have objected to the imbalance created by adding another free state, the Fugitive Slave Act was passed.
Of all the bills that made up the Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Act was the most controversial. It required citizens to assist in the recovery of fugitive slaves. It denied a fugitive’s right to a jury trial. (Cases would instead be handled by special commisioners – commisioners who would be paid $5 if an alleged fugitive were released and $10 if he or she were sent away with the claimant.) The act called for changes in filing for a claim, making the process easier for slaveowners. Also, according to the act, there would be more federal officials responsible for enforcing the law.
 
Oh will you lay off it already. Everything isn’t about abortion. You try to shut down every conversation with that. . . It’s not noble. It’s not courageous.

It’s intellectually dishonest.
What is intellectually dishonest is to try to dismiss ones support of abortion as “just another issue”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top