• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trump's Bible omits Amendments 11-17.

Clizby Wampuscat

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
9-10ths_Penguin said:
You're right: this Bible was not carefully crafted by Trump... a man who - AFAICT - has never carefully crafted a thing in his life. This bible shows the hallmarks of the same low effort approach that gave the world Trump University and Trump Steaks.

It's a collection of mostly public domain works, so it's nice and cheap to produce; all they needed to do is slap an American flag and Trump's name on the front and rubes will by it at a ridiculous markup.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It was a means to make money. And I bet it did.

9-10ths_Penguin said:
Last thing: do you really think that the Second Amendment is protection against a dictator? Really?
Click to expand...
I never said it was.
 
Argentbear

Argentbear

Well-Known Member
wellwisher said:
The 16th Amendment or the income tax Amendment was also a rip off and led to corruption. Although we ended slavery, the income tax was a way to add slavery back on a larger scale. You cannot do full time slavery, due the 13th Amendment, but you can do part time slavery. Your tax rate is the percent of time you are a slave to Big Government. Like a slave you have no choice or control over that time; you must pay taxes. If you leave that plantation; do not pay taxes, the IRS will hobble you; old school DNC.
Click to expand...
Trump paid no federal income taxes in 10 of past 15 years
 
Evangelicalhumanist

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
wellwisher said:
The 17th Amendment was a mistake, since it allowed the two National Parties to control the election of Senators in any state. The original Constitution had the State Legislatures pick their two Senators. This made each Senator more beholden to their own states. This also limited outsider interference in state elections.

With the 17th Amendment, national political parties get to decide who runs, based on being able to provide extra outside money, making the Senators less beholden to their own States and more beholden to a national agenda, due to the quid pro quo. For example, all but one Democrat Senator rubber stamped the Biden and Harris Administration agenda, even though it was a disaster for their own states.

The old way would have limited the damage by the Federal Government and National Political Party , with state making their own assessment and tell their Senator. The new way was also cheaper since bribing one Senator was cheaper than bribing 51% of each State's Legislature. The amendment added to the Big Government corruption and influence peddling. My guess is some Amendments were made for the wrong reason and should not be near the Bible.

The 17th is really not about the popular vote, since the two parties tend to walk lockstep with their national agenda. This limits, who you can vote for, based on who the party chooses for their own best interests. Sanctuary States was a party vote, and lock step. It was OK until immigrants were shipped to those States, creating state problems their Senator ignored for party favor..

The 16th Amendment or the income tax Amendment was also a rip off and led to corruption. Although we ended slavery, the income tax was a way to add slavery back on a larger scale. You cannot do full time slavery, due the 13th Amendment, but you can do part time slavery. Your tax rate is the percent of time you are a slave to Big Government. Like a slave you have no choice or control over that time; you must pay taxes. If you leave that plantation; do not pay taxes, the IRS will hobble you; old school DNC.

The Constitution says provide of the common defense and promote the general welfare. Provide and promote are two different things. Before the 16th Amendment the only temporary income tax was connected to provide for war and national defense; Civil War.

The citizens are supposed to have public servants in Government, so why are they acting like slave owners instead of servants? Before that amendment, Government was more beholden to the citizens. The Government had to raise revenue from tariffs; foreign source of income, and usage taxes on things they provided; toll roads, bridge. Income tax was limited to war time; 3% on income over $5000. It was more of. tax on and the rich, only when needed to protect their mutual national interests in time of war.

I was listening to an analysis of the 16th Amendment comparing life before and after, the difference was the income tax led to citizen money being sent over seas. Money from the income tax was used to rebuild Europe and many parts of the world after WWI and WWII. This combined with low tariffs on foreign goods, to hep these country get back on their feet, was a second stab in the back to citizens since that sent money overseas and out of the US economy, harming the worker class.

The buzz is the16th Amendment may be addressed, to make it is less like slavery and more like having to to be earned by the public "servants" in Government. We can expect more accountability and more efficiency. Leasing Federal lands for oil can make the Government a provider and instead of parasite and slave owner. I would also discuss the 17th Amendment and change that back; back to states.
Click to expand...
Have you considered offering your services to Trump to just re-write the Constitution to suit the two of you?
 
Clizby Wampuscat

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Argentbear said:
Trump paid no federal income taxes in 10 of past 15 years
Click to expand...
Good for him. He did this lawfully. Congress could change the laws to make him pay more taxes but they don't because they are use the same laws that benefit them. This interaction with clinton in 2016 made Trump a contender:

CLINTON: But, of course, there’s no way we can know whether any of that is true, because he hasn’t released his tax returns. He is the first candidate ever to run for president in the last 40-plus years who has not released his tax returns, so everything he says about charity or anything else, we can’t prove it. You can look at our tax returns. We’ve got them all out there.

But what is really troubling is that we learned in the last debate he has not paid a penny in federal income tax. And we were talking about immigrants a few minutes ago, Chris. You know, half of all immigrants—undocumented immigrants in our country—actually pay federal income tax. So we have undocumented immigrants in America who are paying more federal income tax than a billionaire. I find that just astonishing.

WALLACE: I want…

TRUMP: So let me just tell you very quickly, we’re entitled because of the laws that people like her passed to take massive amounts of depreciation on other charges, and we do it. And all of her donors—just about all of them—I know Buffett took hundreds of millions of dollars, Soros, George Soros, took hundreds of millions of dollars…

WALLACE: We…

TRUMP: Let me just explain.

WALLACE: But, no, we heard this…

TRUMP: Most of her donors have done the same thing as I do.

WALLACE: Mr. Trump, we—OK.

TRUMP: You know what she should have done?

WALLACE: Folks, we heard this…

TRUMP: And you know, Hillary, what you should have done, you should have changed the law when you were a United States senator…

WALLACE: Folks, we heard this…

TRUMP: … because your donors and your special interests are doing the same thing as I do, except even more so.

CLINTON: Well, you know…

TRUMP: You should have changed the law. But you won’t change the law, because you take in so much money. I mean, I sat in my apartment today on a very beautiful hotel down the street known as Trump…

CPD: October 19, 2016 Debate Transcript

www.debates.org

Why won't the dems change the tax laws? This explains why.
 
Heyo

Heyo

Veteran Member
Clizby Wampuscat said:
I will ask again, Which states curriculum do not teach about slavery?

From your link:

Guardian analysis finds that private schools, especially Christian schools, use textbooks that tell of a version of history that is racially biased and inaccurate.

I am talking about state run public schools.
Click to expand...
States have not completely erased the discussion of slavery (, yet). They have removed the word "slavery" from textbooks and have removed the topic from some curricula for certain age groups, but not all. Their work isn't done, yet, but the tendency is to whitewash the darker bits of US history.
 
Clizby Wampuscat

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Heyo said:
States have not completely erased the discussion of slavery (, yet). They have removed the word "slavery" from textbooks and have removed the topic from some curricula for certain age groups, but not all. Their work isn't done, yet, but the tendency is to whitewash the darker bits of US history.
Click to expand...
Which ones? All I see is textbooks used in private schools.
 
Clizby Wampuscat

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Pogo said:
Hey, we can use the slippery slope argument too, we can even use it appropriately.
Click to expand...
Ok, good for you. But the statement was made:

Especially, southern states have removed slavery from their curricula and textbooks.

As far as I can tell this is a false statement.
 
Argentbear

Argentbear

Well-Known Member
Clizby Wampuscat said:
Ok, good for you. But the statement was made:

Especially, southern states have removed slavery from their curricula and textbooks.

As far as I can tell this is a false statement.
Click to expand...
McGraw-Hill Education’s “World Geography” textbook [said]...“[t]he Atlantic Slave Trade between the 1500s and 1800s brought millions of workers from Africa to the southern United States to work on agricultural plantations.” From 2012 to 2015 this textbook wa s used in thousands of classrooms across the country.

I'm sure you will deny this in short order
 
Clizby Wampuscat

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Argentbear said:
McGraw-Hill Education’s “World Geography” textbook [said]...“[t]he Atlantic Slave Trade between the 1500s and 1800s brought millions of workers from Africa to the southern United States to work on agricultural plantations.” From 2012 to 2015 this textbook wa s used in thousands of classrooms across the country.

I'm sure you will deny this in short order
Click to expand...
No, but it no longer is in use is it and it said "Atlantic Slave Trade". How is that eliminating slavery being taught? There is not one state that does not teach about slavery in the US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top