Does this sound like civil war?

[Estrid]

The U.S. Constitution does not relegate blacks to “three-fifths of a person” status. Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states: “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.” The “other Persons” were slaves.
Understanding the three-fifths compromise | Constitutional Accountability Center

Here's some more on the compromise which some are pleased to turn
via the grim spectre of historical revisionism, into some evil.

It's typical, sadly, of today's Americans, who find tearing down their
own country is a form of virtue signaling.

Understanding the three-fifths compromise | Constitutional Accountability Center

 

[TLK Valentine]

Beats me! I forgot to ask them for their names.

Well, at least one of them was named "Toby," if that helps.

 

[Aldebaran]

Well, at least one of them was named "Toby," if that helps.

Ok, so their names were Tom, Dick, Harry, and Toby.
Any other questions?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ok, so their names were Tom, Dick, Harry, and Toby.
Any other questions?

Does it sound like Civil War?

 

[Aldebaran]

Does it sound like Civil War?

If Tom and Toby banned business with Harry and Dick, then it absolutely does.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If Tom and Toby banned business with Harry and Dick, then it absolutely does.

Clearly the definition of "civil war" has changed drastically in the last 160 years.

 

[Aldebaran]

Clearly the definition of "civil war" has changed drastically in the last 160 years.

As has the word "war", as in Cold War where we can be at war with another country without firing a single nuke at each other.

 

[TLK Valentine]

As has the word "war", as in Cold War where we can be at war with another country without firing a single nuke at each other.

But in all fairness, the threat was always there.... how realistic it was is up for debate.

It's been argued that "MAD" is what kept the nukes from being fired -- be that as it may, at times we still came a lot closer than most people realize... or would like to admit.

 

[Aldebaran]

But in all fairness, the threat was always there.... how realistic it was is up for debate.

It's been argued that "MAD" is what kept the nukes from being fired -- be that as it may, at times we still came a lot closer than most people realize... or would like to admit.

Right. That's why it was a "war". What we've been discussing as the subject of this thread is a civil (cold) war.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Right. That's why it was a "war". What we've been discussing as the subject of this thread is a civil (cold) war.

Ah -- well, this is news to me that the imminent "Civil War" has been identified as a "cold" one.

As there is no danger whatsoever of it turning in any way "hot," it still sounds like a lot of panic over nothing.

As soon as the Supreme Court tosses out the Texas law -- as even some GOP congressmen predict it will -- this whole thing will blow over.

 

[Aldebaran]

As soon as the Supreme Court tosses out the Texas law -- as even some GOP congressmen predict it will -- this whole thing will blow over.

They've already refused to do so, which means it remains law.

 

[Norbert L]

Civil war by any other name is still civil war.

Is it a war of blood or an economic war? Here in Canada our Provinces do have their fair share of legislation regarding what can be imported and exported across provincial boundaries.

Issues like Ontario doesn't want to sell liquor that's 99% alcohol by volume that can be found being sold in Quebec.

I imagine it can be level of civility through legislation when it's about challenging the free flow of goods within a country.

 

[TLK Valentine]

They've already refused to do so, which means it remains law.

For now -- but SCOTUS declined to hear the case due to lack of standing, not Constitutionality... and even that was a 5-4 decision. What do you think will happen when a Texas woman who actually has a bounty called in on her sues?

 

[RDKirk]

Ya know, we do have lots of vegans here but everyone else is obsessed with bacon so it seems to even out.

Brazilian steakhouses...oh, my!

 

[RDKirk]

They are banning travel, good and services from that state of Texas. <snip> Instead, Portland authorities are going after businesses and any other entity in Texas.

No, they have voted to prohibit the city government from doing business with Texas. There is no effect on private businesses or individuals.

 

[Estrid]

Our Constitution literally says that a black person counts as 3/5 of a human being. If that doesn't reflect a bias of its time, then nothing does.

For those who may think this is true, it is not.
1. "Says" is present tense. The 3/5 compromise has been dedad for
153 years.
2. It never did say that a black person is other than equal to
others.
3. Slaves were counted at 3/5 of their percent of the population
for appropriation purposes.
4. The bias, if one wishes to call it that, was anti slavery

The claim made in the post above is invidious nonsense.

The Three-Fifths Clause of the United States Constitution (1787) •

 

[Estrid]

As an American, I agree wholeheartedly. Problem is, it's not just some groups of people doing this. It's being orchestrated within our leadership, which means we're being destroyed from within.

It looks from over here that the leadership of whichever group,
is reflecting as much as creating the divide.

 

[RDKirk]

Our federal government is even labeling our own Constitution as being "harmful". National Archives Slaps 'Harmful Content' Warning On Constitution

Off topic, and it was your own topic. That's a sign of losing the debate.

 

[RDKirk]

Securing our national borders was not a past mistake. Withdrawing American troops in a haphazard way from Afghanistan that cost hundreds of lives and abandoned hundreds of Americans to the Taliban certainly was.

Off topic. And it was even your own topic. That's a sign of losing the debate.

 

[RDKirk]

But in all fairness, the threat was always there.... how realistic it was is up for debate.

It's been argued that "MAD" is what kept the nukes from being fired -- be that as it may, at times we still came a lot closer than most people realize... or would like to admit.

Since everyone, including the OP is already 'way off topic, I'll invited you to check Wikipedia and YouTube for "ABLE ARCHER 83."

I was working on the Strategic Air Combat Operations Staff of the Strategic Air Command (in the Underground Command Post) at the time. While we presumed American diplomats were trying to calm the Soviets down, we OTOH were preparing for nuclear war as furiously as we could...in case the diplomats failed. That was four days of sheer terror for us. I was praying constantly, "Jesus, please stop us!"