Holy Jesus… Well, among all the weirdness of the Trump Bible apparently with the Bill of Rights the amendments 11 through 27 have been excluded… So unlike Jefferson who used to rip pages out of the Bible that he didn’t like, now Trump is screwing with the founding fathers documents and ripping the amendments out
The exclusion of amendments 11 through 27 from the Trump Bible is indeed concerning and raises questions about the integrity of the document. Such actions, akin to Jefferson’s selective approach to the Bible, undermine the principles of transparency and respect for foundational documents. It’s essential to uphold the integrity of our constitutional rights and freedoms, regardless of political affiliation.
Political affiliation has nothing to do with this-this is pure MAGA , which is a CULT. Not a political leaning,
While I am not advocating the Trump Bible, I believe the Bill of Rights consists only of the first ten amendments.
So…you don’t believe in the right to vote…or have a womene vote…
The 19th Amendment
The 19th Amendment is about the right for any citizen of the United States to vote, regardless of their biological sex. Essentially, this was the moment women joined male citizens and were granted the right to vote in the United States. This amendment was ratified on August 18, 1920.
There are also other amendmonts that are important…why do you have no interest in them? Slavery, like?
The first ten amendments are known as “The Bill of Rights.” Of course, I am aware more amendments followed. In the future, please do not speak to me as though I am an idiot.
I did not talk down to you. I asked a question, and you heard derisiveness. Didn’t come from me. I’d apologise with an “IF” apology, but I don’t see where I treated you like an idiot. I, of course am…that’s why I’m thankful of the internet.
But…I guess I will have to see why the following amendments didn’t make the cut with you…or why they are NOT included in YOUR Bill of rights. I’d ask you, but you are already mad at me…
Okay, I looked it up. Technically, I guess you are right. BUT 11-27 were ratified and on the books of law, and included …So…leaving the ratified additions does not cause you distress?
I’m not mad; I mistakenly found your tone aggressive, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. (I should have known better than to partake in a discussion right after leaving the hospital to visit my daughter.) My bad. 
The lack of the other amendments doesn’t bother me too much. Only because I thought that’s what it would be. I do, though, find everything about the Trump Bible distressing in general. (As I do all things Trump-related.)
1 Like
Well, his antics never disappoint! Well, i was pretty shocked, but others have pointed out that leaving out 11 -27 is pure MAGA. Anyway, I learned from our discussion and thank you for enlightening me!
I come from 2 cultures (Spanish and Italion) where we have had the fancy Fascists (Mussilini and Franco). I read up on both of those guys…both their fathers were Socialists,so that’s where Trump breaks the mold. But point being, I am not a fan of Facsists. Anyway, thanks for your insight.
2 Likes
That’s interesting that both their fathers were Socialists. I’m not sure what party Trump’s father, Fred, affiliated with politically (probably Nazi), but he was a crook and racist. Woody Guthrie even wrote about him.
There is an interesting history of the Bill of Rights. Again I am not condoning the perspective I am outlining here, I and just trying to explain why it might have been published like that.
The Bill of Rights was adopted as a single unit in 1791 (up to the first 10 amendments).
The definition of the Bill of Rights had been concisely set out by Thomas Jefferson, one of the framers and a supporter and activist for the Bill of Rights, as: “A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.”
The idea was that these are “GOD” given rights to people even AGAINST the government. Hence it explains why it is attached to the Bible.
At the time of the drafting of the Bill of Rights, there were heated debates between federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Federalists were the group of people who believed in a strong national government which would have power over the states. They were of the opinion that the federal government would be able to protect them against the British and European powers as well as against the arbitrariness and whimsicalities of the state government. Some of the best-known leaders such as George Washington, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison.
On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists included Thomas Jefferson, George Mason and Patrick Henry who believed in strong local government and that the states should have most of the power. Most Americans, who had lived through the Revolutionary War, were Anti-Federalists. The Bill of Rights is often considered the ‘product’ of the American Revolution.
AKA Bill of rights was see as a document for “states’ rights”
There was a massive heated debate for this bill to be included in the US constitution which at that time was a document based of Federalist papers. Pro inclusion people (anti federalists) wanted a guarantee of these rights and protection from even the government. While anti inclusion people (federalists) said it wasn’t necessary because the democratic process would guarantee the rights anyway. (LOL)
This is actually the core of the institution of government in America - is it a constitutional republic or a democracy.
Democracy as discussed in this issue, was merely majority rule by people who were allowed to vote. At this time I believe it was white men of a certain age who passed a religious test and owned property.
While a constitutional republic guaranteed certain rights even AGAINST the will of the majority or even the government.
Constitution is the check on the majority ( nd the government) infringing on the rights of the minority. So technically, women’s right to vote and civil rights wouldn’t be possible without the Constitution.
1 Like
Anti-inclusion people argued that this implies these are the only rights allowed to people and hence the 9th amendment was added which says that these arent the ONLY rights, and neither is the list exhaustive. So it technically doesn’t exclude any of the other rights.
I am not claiming Republicans understand this stuff but they claim to be constitutional purists. And hence these are in the Bible.
I guess Trumo was trying to make some kind of point that his cases are tyranny of the government and infringement of his God given rights or something. IDK claim to understand his logic. I am just providing the context to try and understand why this would be effective propaganda for the right wing.
1 Like