Confederate Legacy

Swell, nothing specific. What a surprise.

Then explaining why the documents I cited upthread clearly say the opposite, and why states did not have the right to prohibit slavery within their own borders under the Confederate Constitution, should not be problematic in the least.

 

Lots of the people on this very forum will call Lee a racist. That is what revisionist history will lead you to believe, however, he was not for slavery. He wanted blacks to stay here because they were safer here than in Africa.

 

You'd have to understand the reason slaves were needed. It was an issue for plantation owners and their fields, but it wasn't a major issue in the Civil War.

Slaves weren't put here to be abused by racist white men, and white men didn't secede and start a war just to abuse slaves.

Is there even a difference between an illegal Mexican housemaid getting $50.00 a week, living in your basement and slave from 1800 living in slave quarters? Besides that $50 bucks, there isn't. And who, that can afford it, wouldn't have an illegal immigrant doing all your house work for you if you don't have time?

 

People have been gay since the beginning of humanity. It's just that in post-christian western civlization, people were closeted until recent.

 

You keep on insisting that, but not actually demonstrating that it's the case. The clearly stated universal reason in the declarations of secession was slavery.

I'm not sure how that's relevant, as I've never claimed that 'white men seceded and started a war just to abuse slaves'.

Yes, there is a huge difference between them, and it's wildly, almost laughable irrational to claim there isn't.

 

Yeah? Yall gonna blow us up if we seceded today? We could secede then, we could secede now. Remember 2012?

- - - Updated - - -

I know, you just proved my point as to why the way of life had nothing to do with "straight" men back then.

 

Well I tried to explain to you the reason is was part of the issue, if you don't want to listen then that's on you.

No, there's no difference besides them being paid cheap for their labor.

 

I'm sorry, that's absurd on the face of it.

One is property and makes no wages.

The other is not and can come and go at will.

 

Psh, they can come and go as they please but they might as well be property if they're living there. Same as a butler to a rich man. I don't support it, but that's how it is man. I, myself, would feel bad for bossing someone around anyways. I'll discipline my kids, but nobody else.

 

No, sorry, I'm not buying that ridiculous rationalization.

One is property. The other is not. Therein lies a huge difference and illegals simply aren't the equivalent to being slaves.

If you can't see the honest difference between the two there is nothing to discuss.

 

I see the difference, I saw the difference when I made the comparison. My point remains that they're still treated as such on a milder level. We're all a slave to someone unless we're a business owner or retired.

 

I wasn't making a statement about "Back then". I was mocking the concept of "Southern Values" at all points in time.

 

This is the conversation I was going off of... My bad if I misread.

CJtheModerate wrote:

Then you replied with:

That looked as though you responded to "During the war. . ."

 

Actually the historical record is clear that you couldn't; but that's beside the point anyway, since your assertion was about the right to secede, not merely the ability to do so.

And which ends, precisely, was the DoI referring to? Hmmmmmm?

 

The South secured Fort Sumter without any bloodshed while the next following battles were offensives from the North. Fort Sumter was considered an evacuation when the talks began.

 

I've got a bad habit of assuming everyone's on the same page as I am without making an effort to inform them of exactly what page I'm on.

I was agreeing, then adding an addendum that popped into my head while I was reading it.

 

First the Civil War was about when President Buchanan sent troops into the South to retrieve federal property. When President Lincoln discovered that the federal government wouldn't be able to pay it's bills without the tax revenues from the Southern States, the war became about saving the Union.

The Civil War became about slavery when the people from the North got tired of the war, the draft and said let the South secede from the Union.

The radical left adopted revisionism (cultural-Marxism) starting in the early 1960's, one of the first things they did was to rewrite the history of the American Civil War. First they went after the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia and actually indoctrinated children in school that the battle flag was the flag of the Confederate States of America and claimed it represented slavery and racism. The uniformed still believe it.

Memorial Day honors both Union and Confederate soldiers who paid the unltimate scarifice. Even before the end of the war Southern women had decorated the graves of both Union and Confederate dead at Arlington. Memorial Day became official May 30th, 1868.

Last month some JACK ASS un- American leftist removed Condfederate flags from the graves of fallen Confederate soldiers. Why this ******** hasn't had his citizenship stripped and tared and feathered and sent into exile in Baltimore is beyond me. He's probably been indoctrinated in revisionism.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/18/myron-penn-alabama-democrat-removes-confederate-fl/

 

Any form of government... "it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government."

 

Yeah I got into it with some 'bags on here over that story... That CW collection I have has pictures from the CW itself. And I'm talking, battlefield pics of soldiers decapitated by cannons, bloated dead soldiers, limbless, and it has pictures of letters and slaves, and other soldiers along with tons of other things. It puts you right in the middle of the battlefield, and it's not politically correct at all. The set was handed down to me from my parents. I believe it's 12 books in all, around 200 pages each.

 

Where does the Constitution give them the right to secede? It was established by the Whiskey Rebellion and South Carolina's attempt to nullify laws during Jackson's admin, that there was no such right.

 

Spot-on and AMEN!!!

 

The DoI is not a governing document of this nation. It has no force of law. It was a polemic attempting to justify the rebellion against the legal authority of the Crown. Had the rebellion not been successful, the British would have had the leaders of the rebellion hung for treason, because that is exactly what it was. There is no right to rebel against the sovereign unless you can make it stick.

Under the Constitution the States gave up their sovereignty as nation states which they had not under the Articles of Confederation. Specifically they gave up their rights to control trade with each other and foreign nations, their ability to have independent diplomatic relations with foreign sovereigns and their claims to disputed land claims west of the Appalachian mountains. Yes they retained some sovereign rights within the Federal structure. But it is a Federal structure not a Confederal structure where the individual States (as the U.S. did under the Articles) or provinces (such as Canada) retain the the right to leave the Union at their choosing.

 

Because the people that were fighting to keep slaves were still a part of the country when we kicked their ass. Sons of those very same people are still here and still seeking power to still further the mission to make things better for the white man. It's less obvious now, the chains we put black people into cannot be seen because we don't turn news cameras on them when they're being shot to death, beaten to death, choked to death, and if they survive that, they end up in prison for petty crimes, sentenced twice as harshly on average than any other skin color and forced to work in labor camps (amazingly, a bit like slaves, working for about a dollar a day...even though really, on the outside, they aren't much better off with jobs only paying 7.25$).

So there's your answer. We showed mercy and the people who were on the right side of history, for equal rights, still have yet to be vindicated in my opinion. We wrote some laws in a book, so the (*)(*)(*)(*) what. That doesn't eliminate the hatred and bigotry in people's hearts nor does it eliminate those ideas of racism being passed on to future generations, further inhibiting the cultural, political and scientific progress we are so capable of.

But what do I know, I'm just some long haired Dude.

 

Obviously you didn't comprehend what you were responding to. Either that or you're angling for a spot on my i-list.

So you somehow managed to find the question incomprehensible. I suppose that has its advantages to someone in your position.

 

The revolutionary right of secession is based on the
Declaration of Independence and the philosophy of Thomas Jefferson and John Locke, that
whenever any form of government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, . . .

These words come directly from the Declaration of Independence.
http://www.bonniebluepublishing.com/The Right of Secession.htm



Lincoln supported session before he flipped flopped and opposed it.