If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   Thomas Jefferson's Bible reveals that he could have REALLY used a word processor. Oh, and he didn't believe any of that miracle hocus-pocus either   (latimes.com) divider line 329
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

18032 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jul 2008 at 9:18 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



329 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-07-20 11:02:28 PM
Say nothing of my religion. It is known to God and myself alone. Its evidence before the world is to be sought in my life: if it has been honest and dutiful to society the religion which has regulated it cannot be a bad one.
Thomas Jefferson (1743 - 1826)
 
2008-07-20 11:03:07 PM
DamnYankees: mandingueiro: wow we agree on something. realism does not equal morality. His policies based on hypocritical morality is his downfall as a great president (although i do take into account the time period.). to put into perspective: mount rushmore is called the four thieves. Historical analysis of american policy vindicates the statement.

I never said he was the most moral American ever, nor am I judging him purely on his presidency.

And I've never heard Mt. Rushmore called the "four thieves".


Well you seem to have a pretty good distinction on just what designates "pedophile" (why that's such a contention with you I don't know but we'll fark with it anyway) so I'm at a bit of a loss how you haven't heard that phrase already. Hell, I heard it 30 years ago and I never even visited the place.
 
2008-07-20 11:04:49 PM
fanbladesaresharp: Well you seem to have a pretty good distinction on just what designates "pedophile" (why that's such a contention with you I don't know but we'll fark with it anyway) so I'm at a bit of a loss how you haven't heard that phrase already. Hell, I heard it 30 years ago and I never even visited the place.

Yes, I know the definition of the word "pedophile". Apparently, this is weird to do. If you don't see the difference between having sex with a 6 year old and a 16 year old, I don't know what to say.

And maybe I'm just ignorant about Mt. Rushmore nicknames, but I've never heard that one, and google isn't helping.
 
2008-07-20 11:04:58 PM
They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.
Thomas Jefferson
 
2008-07-20 11:05:22 PM
DamnYankees: ninjakirby: DamnYankees: A relationship between a man and a post-pubescent woman is merely illegal in the US. There's no name for it.

"Statutory"?

That's a legal term. It's not a psychological or social condition like pedophilia and pederasty. We may think a 40 year old guy and a 16 year old woman is weird and emotionally wrong (this illegal), but that's a whole different can of worms than child molesting.


You can try to define it all you want. There's a better application of it: Common Sense. As in, Just. Don't. Farking. Do. It. Moran.
 
2008-07-20 11:05:25 PM
DamnYankees: mandingueiro: well, maybe you should delve into historical events and the factual renderings on the people they affect.

A google search for "four thieves mount rushmore" serves up nothing. What are you talking about? Is this your personal nickname for those 4 men?


I have no idea if this is a reputable journal or not, but putting "four thieves" in quotes turned this^ up:

The Lakota dubbed the Mt. Rushmore result "the four thieves" as each had taken vast tracts of Indian land.
 
2008-07-20 11:06:23 PM
i2.photobucket.com
 
2008-07-20 11:07:08 PM
fanbladesaresharp: You can try to define it all you want. There's a better application of it: Common Sense. As in, Just. Don't. Farking. Do. It. Moran.

Did... did you just call Thomas Jefferson a moran?
 
2008-07-20 11:07:10 PM
DamnYankees: mandingueiro: well, maybe you should delve into historical events and the factual renderings on the people they affect.

A google search for "four thieves mount rushmore" serves up nothing. What are you talking about? Is this your personal nickname for those 4 men?


Wow. No shiat? It didn't come up on google, therefore it doesn't exist? Try Wikipedia.
 
2008-07-20 11:07:47 PM
DamnYankees: mandingueiro: well, maybe you should delve into historical events and the factual renderings on the people they affect.

A google search for "four thieves mount rushmore" serves up nothing. What are you talking about? Is this your personal nickname for those 4 men?


mount rushmore is carved into the black hills. A place that is historically sacred to the Sioux. Legal treaties were broken to force them to give up this land. I, however, am tired of given you a history lesson. "the four thieves" refers to the ways the american gov't used political leverage, modified, and broke their own laws to gain access to sacred land.It is a common moniker among native americans.
 
2008-07-20 11:09:08 PM
fanbladesaresharp: You can try to define it all you want. There's a better application of it: Common Sense. As in, Just. Don't. Farking. Do. It. Moran.

In the 18th century, it was not uncommon to be married at that age. In Jefferson's day, it was not at all 'common sense' to avoid post-pubescent girls. Martha Washington, for example, was married at age 18, Abigail Adams met John when she was 15, and Martha Jefferson had a kid by age 19.

Frank Anthrax: I have no idea if this is a reputable journal or not, but putting "four thieves" in quotes turned this^ up:

The Lakota dubbed the Mt. Rushmore result "the four thieves" as each had taken vast tracts of Indian land.


Putting "four thieves" in quotes with Mt. Rushmore gives you 8 results on google. It's clearly not that famous a nickname.
 
2008-07-20 11:09:23 PM
DamnYankees: Having sex with a 16 year old isn't right and I'm not defending it

It is not even illegal in most countries1.

I know it is not in Canada for one. Adults in Canada don't tend to have sex with 16 year-olds simply because they tend to be very annoying.

Over the centuries the age that people marry has varied widely and it is not reasonable to judge them by your current morals. 200 years from now the age may be 21 ... you want people thinking you were a pedophile because you liked 18 year-olds??

/And let's not forget the whole ridiculous countdown clock for the Olsen twins ... guess the whole USA were pedos.

1 This 'fact' was completely made up on the spot and may not be remotely true.
 
2008-07-20 11:10:16 PM
fanbladesaresharp: Wow. No shiat? It didn't come up on google, therefore it doesn't exist? Try Wikipedia.

It's not there at all. You think Wikipedia has more information than google?

mandingueiro: "the four thieves" refers to the ways the american gov't used political leverage, modified, and broke their own laws to gain access to sacred land.It is a common moniker among native americans.

Fair enough. I'm not an Indian, so I don't know that. All I have access to is internet research at the moment, and it wasn't helping.
 
2008-07-20 11:10:57 PM
I wonder how many of these Jefferson critics think George W. Bush is awesome.
 
2008-07-20 11:11:13 PM
Frank Anthrax: fanbladesaresharp: You can try to define it all you want. There's a better application of it: Common Sense. As in, Just. Don't. Farking. Do. It. Moran.

Did... did you just call Thomas Jefferson a moran?


Him? Nah. Jefferson wasn't stupid by any means. Hypocrite? Oh yeah. Just an open statement of common sense.
 
2008-07-20 11:11:38 PM
Frank Anthrax: fanbladesaresharp: You can try to define it all you want. There's a better application of it: Common Sense. As in, Just. Don't. Farking. Do. It. Moran.

Did... did you just call Thomas Jefferson a moran?


Also, just realized this. Martha Jefferson, the wife of Thomas, married her first husband at the age of 16.
 
2008-07-20 11:11:56 PM
ninjakirby

HEY! I got banned for posting one of those.

/i got better though
 
2008-07-20 11:13:10 PM
nmathew01: From the little reading I've done, I'm under the impression that the genetic markers linking Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings's children are found on the y chromosome providing a male to male link. Jefferson had several male cousins and nephews (My memory is vague here. At least one of the two) who would have carried this marker. I recall reading in 12th grade a letter penned by one such relative who was deeply disturbed that he may have done something to besmirch Thomas Jefferson's honor.

I was going to sit this one out, but instead after reading some much misinformation I feel the need to congratulate you as being the first person in this thread to get the facts correct.

You are correct that there is no proof that there Jefferson fathered a child with any of his slaves, only that DNA evidence concludes that a male in his family had.

mandingueiro: [snip]policies based on hypocritical morality[snip]

Why is he a hypocrite simply because years later he took a different opinion. He was apparently an intelligent person who continued to push the boundaries of his knowledge until the day he died. Isn't it possible that he simply changed his opinion based on additional information and sound reflection?

My views and deeply held beliefs are very different than those I held even 5 or 7 years ago. There is no motivation in my change in beliefs. I am not running for office or trying to impress anyone. I have simply kept an open mind and have a willingness to admit that I didn't have all the facts when I initially formed my opinions. I don't consider that to be open minded, not hypocritical.
 
2008-07-20 11:13:34 PM
bullock.: It is against the law. And gross.

DamnYankees: What is? Sex with a 16 year old? Nowadays it is. But Jefferson lived 200 years ago


Since we are being pedantic here... it is against the law only because he lived in Virginia, and not say Maryland of North Carolina. It's not illegal in most states. There are only 11 states where the age of consent is greater than 16. In some states it is even lower, as low as 14 (particularly if the "adult" partner is under 21).

Jefferson lived in Virginia, where the current age of consent law wasn't written until 1950. Before that I'm not even sure there was a law on the books. To to apply today's law to what he did 200 years ago, having sex with a 16 year old is a misdemeanor, and the same crime as giving them booze ("contributing to the delinquency of a minor" -- not even a sex crime). It is not a felony unless the person is 14 or younger. If the child is 12 or under then it becomes statutory rape, but I don't think there's even a hint of evidenc that Jefferson was farking 12 year olds.
 
2008-07-20 11:14:34 PM
DamnYankees: fanbladesaresharp: Wow. No shiat? It didn't come up on google, therefore it doesn't exist? Try Wikipedia.

It's not there at all. You think Wikipedia has more information than google?


Try Alta Vista and Dogpile.
 
2008-07-20 11:14:55 PM
JeffreyScott: Why is he a hypocrite simply because years later he took a different opinion. He was apparently an intelligent person who continued to push the boundaries of his knowledge until the day he died. Isn't it possible that he simply changed his opinion based on additional information and sound reflection?

I don't think even the biggest Jefferson fans deny he had hypocritical parts of his life. It's one of the great mysteries of the man.
 
2008-07-20 11:15:41 PM
fanbladesaresharp: Try Alta Vista and Dogpile.

Try no. I've looked, there's very few references t it. One on all of google. In this thread it's been explained to me what it means. I didn't deny the nickname existed, but its hardly a well-known one.
 
2008-07-20 11:16:47 PM
DamnYankees
\bullock.: I'm just saying that showing support for having sex with little girls is akin to showing support for enslaving black people.

Yes, both had no social repercusions, legal or otherwise years ago, but it makes you look extremely stupid defending it now.

You're a freaking moron. Thomas Jefferson did not have sex with "little girls". Jesus, what the hell is wrong with you? Having sex with a 16 year old isn't right and I'm not defending it, but its lightyears different from having sex with "little girls", especially given the time period, when people married and gave birth alot younger than nowadays.

And fix your tags, its not hard. You don't need a maid.


Neh w/ the html tags, I'm a lazy rebel. Deal w/ it.

I am just saying that you angrily defending having sex w/ underaged girls certainly casts you in the light of pedophelia.

Do you think that having sex with underaged girls is ok, today?

Yes or no?

What about slaves?

/laughing.
 
2008-07-20 11:18:51 PM
bullock.: Neh w/ the html tags, I'm a lazy rebel troll. Deal w/ it.

FTFY
 
2008-07-20 11:19:12 PM
Why has DamnYankees been surrounded by crazy people yelling "pedophile"?
 
2008-07-20 11:19:21 PM
bullock.: Neh w/ the html tags, I'm a lazy rebel. Deal w/ it.

He's a loner, DamnYankees. A rebel.
 
2008-07-20 11:19:25 PM
DamnYankees: I don't think even the biggest Jefferson fans deny he had hypocritical parts of his life.

Oh yeah. The guy basically was a hypocrite. Usually, though, his wife could talk him down. That Weezy had common sense.
 
2008-07-20 11:20:06 PM
I'm always amused at those who so desperately want to believe that the founding fathers were not Christian. The fact is that the majority were Christian and the variety of their beliefs was probably no greater than the variety of Christians found today. Deists were a fringe minority amongst the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention. Those of you who are too sophisticated to believe in God or Christianity may look down your noses at us as much as you wish but that doesn't change the fact that more than 85% of Americans believe in God, the vast majority of those are Christians of some sort.

The other undeniable fact is that our Declaration of Independence and the Constitutional notions of equality before the law, the right of every individual to acquire and keep real property and pass that to his heirs are Judeo-Christian principles. The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans: no early civilization believed in the equality of all men before the law as did the Jews. Every other system of laws differentiates between rulers and the ruled. It is the difference between subjectship and citizenship. Subjects are ruled by other men who may change the laws. Citizens sign up to be governed by a system of laws which do not change on a whim but by consent of the governed. In the Judeo-Christian belief system, those rules came from God.

You don't have to believe in God to recognize that the system of God's Laws are the basis of our Declaration and Constitution. Whether or not you believe in God does not change the fact that wherever those laws came from, whether divinely inspired or cleverly devised by some group of surgically mutilated proto-capitalists out in the Sinai wilderness, they have made the United States the greatest country in the world, not because of God but because of the individual rights of all citizens and the supremacy of the rule of law.
 
2008-07-20 11:20:19 PM
DamnYankees: fanbladesaresharp: Try Alta Vista and Dogpile.

Try no. I've looked, there's very few references t it. One on all of google. In this thread it's been explained to me what it means. I didn't deny the nickname existed, but its hardly a well-known one.


Change your keywords in the search box.
 
2008-07-20 11:20:25 PM
mandingueiro: "the four thieves" refers to the ways the american gov't used political leverage, modified, and broke their own laws to gain access to sacred land.It is a common moniker among native americans."

Sociopolitical paradigm shifts often do result in bloodshed, human exploitation and all manner of other atrocities. When these paradigm shifts succeed, we eagerly excuse everything that was done to achieve them. When they don't, we regard them as misguided endeavors and demonize those we believe to be responsible.

I'm 50% native. If it weren't for the systematic conquest and rape of my ancestors, I'd be squatting in a hut and eating fermented bison meat seasoned with burnt dung right now. Take that as you will.

/Declined reparations money
 
2008-07-20 11:21:36 PM
bullock.: Do you think that having sex with underaged girls is ok, today?

Question 1:
Were they 'underage' during the life of Thomas Jefferson?

Point 1:
In the vast majority of countries in modern times, the AoC is ~15.
 
2008-07-20 11:22:12 PM
DeathByUngaBunga: Why has DamnYankees been surrounded by crazy people yelling "pedophile"?

Because Sunday night witch hunts are fun. Caturday, TSG Fridays....it's something to do.
 
2008-07-20 11:24:07 PM
bullock.: I am just saying that you angrily defending having sex w/ underaged girls certainly casts you in the light of pedophelia.

Your insistance on incorrectly labeling people casts you in the light of a moron.

I suspect that you think you are coming off as an intellectual in your attacks on DamnYankees but you are wrong. He has not defended pedophilia in any way ... he has merely pointed out that you do not understand the term. And he is correct.
 
2008-07-20 11:25:01 PM
No matter what his sexual preferences may have been, the man founded a damn fine university.

/Wahoo-wa
 
2008-07-20 11:25:23 PM
bullock.: Do you think that having sex with underaged girls is ok, today?

Yes or no?


No. Are we done?
 
2008-07-20 11:26:37 PM
From what is readily available on the web (wiki, etc.), it is pretty clear that Jefferson (or someone sharing his exact Y-chromosome) was the father of some or all of her children. And since she stayed close to him (in his house!) from age 14 until he died, I personally doubt some "other male relative" was banging her.

But Jefferson a pedophile? Nah. Even if one accepts that she had a child at age 17, that doesn't come close to fulfilling the charge. 16 was prime breeding age back then. Heck, it was prime breeding age in this country until the middle of the 20th Century!

Furthermore, IMO America's gross fascination with the sex lives of teenagers today has more to do with the politics and religion of those in power than in any really rational basis.
 
2008-07-20 11:27:08 PM
Mr. Right: The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans: no early civilization believed in the equality of all men before the law as did the Jews.

As a Jew, I feel fine saying...what the hell are you talking about? Jewish Law is far from this.
 
2008-07-20 11:27:21 PM
Farking Canuck: bullock.: I am just saying that you angrily defending having sex w/ underaged girls certainly casts you in the light of pedophelia.

Your insistance on incorrectly labeling people casts you in the light of a moron.

I suspect that you think you are coming off as an intellectual in your attacks on DamnYankees but you are wrong. He has not defended pedophilia in any way ... he has merely pointed out that you do not understand the term. And he is correct.


And yet here he is trying to define it and come off as an intellectual. Which way do you want it, chief?
 
2008-07-20 11:28:05 PM
Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ.
Ephesians 6:5
 
2008-07-20 11:28:37 PM
Jefferson himself makes reference in his writings to an age of consent being 12 years old.
 
2008-07-20 11:29:07 PM
Farking Canuck
bullock.: I am just saying that you angrily defending having sex w/ underaged girls certainly casts you in the light of pedophelia.

Your insistance on incorrectly labeling people casts you in the light of a moron.

I suspect that you think you are coming off as an intellectual in your attacks on DamnYankees but you are wrong. He has not defended pedophilia in any way ... he has merely pointed out that you do not understand the term. And he is correct.

So you think it is ok to have sex with underaged girls, right?

Underaged means less than 18 years of age, fyi.

This is the point you meant to make, correct?
 
2008-07-20 11:29:15 PM
fanbladesaresharp: And yet here he is trying to define it and come off as an intellectual. Which way do you want it, chief?

This is how far out country has fallen? Now knowing what words mean is considered elitist.
 
2008-07-20 11:30:03 PM
Well that was interesting!
 
2008-07-20 11:31:17 PM
fanbladesaresharp: And yet here he is trying to define it and come off as an intellectual. Which way do you want it, chief?

It's a sad day when this can be considered a valid troll, and not merely the insane ramblings of a moran. God help America that knowing the definitions of words is "intellectualism." And that being accused of being an intellectual is an insult.

/You'll all weep with me, won't you?
 
2008-07-20 11:31:36 PM
Zamboro: mandingueiro: "the four thieves" refers to the ways the american gov't used political leverage, modified, and broke their own laws to gain access to sacred land.It is a common moniker among native americans."

Sociopolitical paradigm shifts often do result in bloodshed, human exploitation and all manner of other atrocities. When these paradigm shifts succeed, we eagerly excuse everything that was done to achieve them. When they don't, we regard them as misguided endeavors and demonize those we believe to be responsible.

I'm 50% native. If it weren't for the systematic conquest and rape of my ancestors, I'd be squatting in a hut and eating fermented bison meat seasoned with burnt dung right now. Take that as you will.

/Declined reparations money


completely correct. However, socio-technological advances does not excuse or justify past criminal activity. "indian" casinos can be considered hardly a step forward. Some would consider such type of assimilation further attempts to assimilate the "red man". An economical subversive action akin to the "bow and arrow pageant" that took place in early 20th century.
 
2008-07-20 11:31:53 PM
SkinnyHead: Jefferson himself makes reference in his writings to an age of consent being 12 years old.

Right, and it's not like he made the laws...

Uh oh.

/Off to light a candle for Jefferson, weep over Declaration
 
2008-07-20 11:32:41 PM
bullock.: So you think it is ok to have sex with underaged girls, right?

Underaged means less than 18 years of age, fyi.

This is the point you meant to make, correct?


You're really, really bad at this. You know that, right?
 
2008-07-20 11:32:41 PM
fanbladesaresharp: DeathByUngaBunga: Why has DamnYankees been surrounded by crazy people yelling "pedophile"?

Because Sunday night witch hunts are fun. Caturday, TSG Fridays....it's something to do.


Oh.

Well, I know better than to be on the witch side of a witch hunt. Is there a uniform I should be wearing to show I'm not a pervert dictionary quoter like DamnYankees? Should I throw something?
 
2008-07-20 11:32:54 PM
Ignorance abounds here.

IN Jefferson's time, having sex with a woman of 14, 15, or 16 was not unusual, nor was it considered deviant, since many people didn't often live to see fifty years of age, and many died much earlier than that due to disease and health concerns which we have since addressed with modern medicine.

In fact, if a woman hadn't been with a man by the time she was 16, people would whisper the word "spinster" in regards to her. Marriages often took place between women in their teens, and men who ranged in age from slightly older to decades older. Some were arranged, some were not.

When it came to slaves, it was not unusual for the master of the estate to have his way with slave women. It was wrong, but it was also not always unwilling on the part of the woman. Sometimes, a slave who was cozy with her master had a very comfortable life in comparison to that of other slaves.

All this aside, it is NOT, nor has it every been "pedophilia" when someone has sex with a teenager who has gone through puberty, and barring some disorder, Sally Hemmings had most likely experienced puberty when she was around 12 years old. She would have been a WOMAN by nature's standards when she was 14.

In the modern era, now that we've decided on some arbitrary age where it's "OK" to have sex, we call attraction to post-pubescent teenagers "hebephelia" and whether or not it's legal has to do with what country, state, and county you're in. In some states it's 14, in others it's 16, and still others require a person to be 18 before they can have sex.

For those who are STUPID, "Pedophelia" is the deviant mental condition which makes an adult (defined as: someone who is past puberty) attracted to children who have not experienced puberty. This is its ONLY meaning. It does not mean "when an old dude farks a teenager" in ANY dictionary or law-book on Earth.

But pedophelia and hebephelia aside, relationships between people past the age of 18 and those who had experienced puberty but were not yet 18 years of age were the SOCIETAL NORM in Jefferson's day. I guarantee you that EVERY ONE of the founding fathers nailed a teenager at some point in his life. (Ben Franklin probably did it weekly.)

My own grandmother, wife to a Quaker, was married when she was 14 years old. She had twelve kids, starting as soon as she was married, and remained with her husband for over 75 years. My grandfather, then 17 years old, met her when she was 12 and told her he was going to be his wife some day. Two years later, when she was at "marrying age", he asked for her hand in marriage, and her father's blessing, and got both. My grandmother was born in the late 1800s, and it was still pretty normal for women to marry young at that point in time.

People in this thread trying to lay 21st century sexual repression on 18th century historical figures need to shut up. You're way off-base.
 
2008-07-21 12:15:17 AM
If I can't see it, it isn't real! Nyah! Nyah! Nyah!

/Buries head in sand
//Ignores everything
///Acts intellectually superior
 
Displayed 50 of 329 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report