17 genders. 17 genders. Science no good. I make my own fantasy world.

Science not my friend.

Go, plastic straws go. Go, plastic stand go.

I dress myself.

GrowlTowel said:

---

17 genders. 17 genders. Science no good. I make my own fantasy world.

Science not my friend.

Go, plastic straws go. Go, plastic stand go.

I dress myself.

---

You having a stroke?

She was only seventeen. . .genders.

Pick a hole.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

El Oso said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

The census is supposed to count EVERYONE. Not just citizens.

I thought you guys cared about decorum and the constitution and honor?

---

Not true.

Constitutional Text: 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 actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

So:
1. We definitely aren't supposed to count Indians (Native Americans under current terminology).
2. Later on this thread you argue the founders wouldn't have called them illegals. True, but they damn sure wouldn't of called them free persons either. So, let's count the illegals, but at the 3/5 rate prescribed by the document.

This argument that illegals are more likely to follow laws than regular citizens is true only if you ignore the fact that their mere existence in the country is a violation of law. The 14th amendment is clear: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;

The 14th amendment only extends voting protection to men over the age of 21--and they must be citizens.

---

It's right there. You're counting everyone, even non-citizens. How much more clear does it have to be? You're the only one trying to make this argument.

---

If it's right there, you should be able to highlight where it says count everybody. I've highlighted the count protocol. Not everyone gets counted. And those that do get counted aren't counted equally.

El Oso said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

El Oso said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

The census is supposed to count EVERYONE. Not just citizens.

I thought you guys cared about decorum and the constitution and honor?

---

Not true.

Constitutional Text: 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 actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

So:
1. We definitely aren't supposed to count Indians (Native Americans under current terminology).
2. Later on this thread you argue the founders wouldn't have called them illegals. True, but they damn sure wouldn't of called them free persons either. So, let's count the illegals, but at the 3/5 rate prescribed by the document.

This argument that illegals are more likely to follow laws than regular citizens is true only if you ignore the fact that their mere existence in the country is a violation of law. The 14th amendment is clear: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;

The 14th amendment only extends voting protection to men over the age of 21--and they must be citizens.

---

It's right there. You're counting everyone, even non-citizens. How much more clear does it have to be? You're the only one trying to make this argument.

---

If it's right there, you should be able to highlight where it says count everybody. I've highlighted the count protocol. Not everyone gets counted. And those that do get counted aren't counted equally.

---

They listed multiple disparate groups of people, only one of whom is citizens. If I tell you to count cars, trucks, jeeps and motorcycles (but only 3/5 count) then I'm not only telling you to count cars.

This isn't difficult.

Yet you keep making it so.

Not everybody gets counted. The text is clear. It actually uses the word excluding.

Those that do get counted dont get counted equally.

The goal is not to know how many people there are, the goal is to determine representatives.

And since not all groups are counted, and those that are are counted differently, it stands to reason that an illegal, unauthorized, whatever word works for you, would not have been counted the same way a citizen is counted by the writers of the document.

Ergo, the intent of the document would allow the question.

El Oso said:

---

Yet you keep making it so.

Not everybody gets counted. The text is clear. It actually uses the word excluding.

Those that do get counted dont get counted equally.

The goal is not to know how many people there are, the goal is to determine representatives.

And since not all groups are counted, and those that are are counted differently, it stands to reason that an illegal, unauthorized, whatever word works for you, would not have been counted the same way a citizen is counted by the writers of the document.

Ergo, the intent of the document would allow the question.

---

^^^ Much too difficult for Socialists like BBL to comprehend

In short, Socialists are trying to make more democrat Socialist representatives by cheating and counting illegals as citizens

They will go to any lengths to destroy our country. We will have to go to any lengths to destroy them or the Socialists will destroy our country too!

Florda_mike said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Yet you keep making it so.

Not everybody gets counted. The text is clear. It actually uses the word excluding.

Those that do get counted dont get counted equally.

The goal is not to know how many people there are, the goal is to determine representatives.

And since not all groups are counted, and those that are are counted differently, it stands to reason that an illegal, unauthorized, whatever word works for you, would not have been counted the same way a citizen is counted by the writers of the document.

Ergo, the intent of the document would allow the question.

---

^^^ Much too difficult for Socialists like BBL to comprehend

In short, Socialists are trying to make more democrat Socialist representatives by cheating and counting illegals as citizens

They will go to any lengths to destroy our country. We will have to go to any lengths to destroy them or the Socialists will destroy our country too!

---

I wouldn't go this far either.

The text is also clear that anybody living in the US is entitled to the protections offered by the constitution.

I'd be all for counting illegals (your word, so I will use it), but I am not for counting them equally for the purposes of representation. I think we do need to know how many non citizens there are (or as reasonably close as we can get to that number).

I think the founders did a good job of wording the document in such a way that there are advantages (representation, ability to hold office, voting etc) to those of us who are citizens, yet equal protection in all other areas (bill of rights and most other amendments) regardless of .citizenship status.

It is clear from the text that the founders felt voting and representation were exclusive benefits to citizens. On the latter, part of that right is extended by counting non citizens but not for representation in the house--and that is the true purpose of the 14th amendment.

Count the citizenry so it can be represented fairly.

James Madison. Federalist 54 and Federalist 58.

Y'all all need to read those.

Good to see Americans still have common sense of a census that had a question in it up until 2010.

If Obama can legally remove the question why can't Trump put it back in?

Plus as has been said before, there is already a question about your race so this whole citizen question is another fake outrage for libs to call the President a racist.