The first time they tried to block the ports the port workers joined them, but then the Union tried to demand that the workers get paid for, well, not working. The courts sided with the companies and said “You don’t work, you don’t get paid”.
Now the port workers aren’t on the OWS crowd’s side any more.
Getting paid for work? That’s absurd. We should all be provided enough money to live comfortably.
Faulty logic is saying we should look at EVERY issue in the eyes of the founding father and base the outcome on what they believed. Which was the post I was replying to.
You should go back and read the original quote that I replied to, because you’re missing it entirely.
EDIT:
Here’s the quote: “like every issue, this can be resolved by asking ourselves “What would the founding fathers think?””
Really? EVERY issue can be resolved by looking in the eyes of the founding fathers? Does that sound like sound logic? My post was in response to Phenrai. Obviously, the founding fathers did many things right - I never said they didn’t. But to look at EVERY issue and come to a conclusion based on their outdated thinking is obviously incorrect.
Um that is broad generalization. Most people usually only talk about that when dealing with the constitution. They want to know what the people who wrote were intending.
6th:
it doesnt help your argument to profoundly misunderstand some of the arguments of the founding father’s. You might want to do some research, you could start with the history of the 3/5 compromise
Correct. It was a broad generalization, but I was not the one who made that generalization - Phenrai did. I agree, people usually talk about what the Founding Fathers envisioned the constitution to be and that we should try to mirror our decisions based on their thinking, but the statement that was made, was in reference to ALL (“every”) issues - not just constitutional ones. Again, you completely disregard the context of my statement made in regards to the original quote. Sigh.
I already understand the 3/5ths compromise, thanks. It was constitutionally wrong, incredibly immoral and will forever be a stain on American history. And for the founding fathers to go along and ratify it into the constitution was sickening.
So you realize that the slave states were trying to count the leagues and leagues of slaves to inflate their representation further entrenching the institution and opponents of slavery tried to stop this?
Doesnt sound like you realize this. It sounds like you are regurgitating nonsense.
It is because the original quote didn’t have a good point.
I’ll say it again because you didn’t get it in the first place. Sure is easy to say that in hindsight isn’t it? I love it when people over simplify the problems of a generation. It is so easy to condemn past generations when you live in an era that was forged out of the resolution of those conflicts and in general this generation has been spoiled as all hell.
The 3/5s compromise was basically a bandaid to get the states to stop fighting long enough to get the Constitution in place. The South was trying to inflate their representation to ensure their interests by counting slaves as part of the population. The North was saying “No way, you treat them as free men if you want them to count.”
You had massive issues that would have made getting where we are impossible if they weren’t resolved. We were a brand new country trying to get a government in place long enough to keep the country from falling apart which would have made us easy pickings for the European nations to come back in and take control.
If you were raised in that generation you wouldn’t find it so easy to condemn their decisions.
Imagine if the current administration was in charge of creating the country.
If you aren’t the 1%, then you are only .00000000001% of a man. 
Spent from my Ocho, using Fapatalk.