Actually, the OP is evil, not slavery. Nice try. I know how you like to keep your mind free of contrary views.
Admonishment rejected.
Most Evil Person in American History
Discussion in 'History Forum' started by saturneptune, Dec 12, 2013.
Page 8 of 25
-
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
-
-
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
Since my post deals with the evil of child labor, it is quite on-topic.
-
This thread took a turn when it was pointed out the Southern leaders who led us into the civil war were among the most evil people in American history.
1) They denied the South seceded due to slavery, and ignored the statements of the seceding states, claiming the north had misrepresented history.
2) They defended those same southerners by using the argument that the northern leaders were just as bad.
3) Slavery caused the civil war, with the North trying to end it, and the South trying to prolong it.
4) The effort to hide the truth included, insults, personal attacks, and misrepresentation of the facts.
a) It is fact the South seceded before Lincoln took office.
b) It is a fact their statements of secession said slavery or the fear of of the North ending slavery in the south was the reason for the succession.
c) It is a fact I posted 4 statements from seceding states to that effect. -
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
It is a fact Lincoln didn't give a rip about slavery.
-
-
Lincoln opposed the extension of Slavery, as did the Republican Party. -
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
You cannot make up your own facts, Van. Lincoln did not care about slavery. We have shown his own words. You have shown YOUR own words. You lose.
-
Now the Southerns deny Lincoln opposed the extension of slavery and act like that is not a fact in evidence. Discussion with them seems a waste of time.
And has any statement been entered that says "Lincoln did not care about Slavery?" Nope
1) Fact, the Civil War ended Slavery.
2) Fact, Lincoln said a man has the right to keep what he earned by the sweat of his brow.
3) QUOTE ""I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I can not remember when I did not so think, and feel."
4) QUOTE ""I think slavery is wrong, morally, and politically. I desire that it should be no further spread in these United States, and I should not object if it should gradually terminate in the whole Union."
5) QUOTE "I do not wish to be misunderstood upon this subject of slavery in this country. I suppose it may long exist, and perhaps the best way for it to come to an end peaceably is for it to exist for a length of time. But I say that the spread and strengthening and perpetuation of it is an entirely different proposition. There we should in every way resist it as a wrong, treating it as a wrong, with the fixed idea that it must and will come to an end."
Folks, pay no attention to the complete fiction offered by these folks trying to hide the culpability of the South in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. -
JohnDeereFan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
In the case of the Civil War, if you wanted to argue that the South's growing anger over federal intrusion that occurred as a response to slavery, then you might have a point.
But to say "slavery caused the Civil War" is just good old fashioned intellectual laziness.
I would also add that the issue wasn't that more slave states wouldn't be allowed to enter the Union, but that the federal government was governing with bias in favor of some states, at the expense of other states and "directly or indirectly violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article of the federal constitution, and laws passed in pursuance thereof". -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Squire Robertsson AdministratorAdministrator
Opposition to the expansion of slavery is not the same as supporting abolition. With the Dred Scott Decision and the Fugitive Slave Act, slave holders could move their property into otherwise free States and Territories witout fearing loss.
While massive property losses was the proximite cause, the basic cause was the Southern elites seeing the demographic handwriting on the wall. The population of non-slave based economies was growing at a faster pace. The soon to be Confederate States saw they would be losing their Congressional power. -
What drove secession was the demand of the federal oversight what the states considered their right to regulate.
From the Civil war, the Federal has been a continual access point to "reconstruct" the US into some socialistic agenda.
FDR is remarkably the single most influencing factor in this move that Lincoln started.
Not a single current issue that presses tension between conservatives and liberals would truly be as great a problem if the states had retained their rights as the constitution laid out.
ALL matters NOT in the constitution are supposed to be up to the states to make decisions.
But very few rules and regulations that the Federal government imposes upon the every day living of folks and the states are "enumerated" in the constitution.
That was the true reason for the Civil War.
State's rights.
Look at the list from Wikipedia of "enumerated" powers and see what the constitution allows and how state's rights have been pilfered by the federal system. -
Parcing to remove truth
2) Yes, the war with its hundreds of thousands of American deaths was caused by the South's effort to preserve slavery.
3) No need to hide behind name calling, insult, and other logical fallacies. My earliest known relative with my last name, i.e. the paternal line, engaged is seafaring in 1774 along the south Atlantic and Gulf coasts. I do not know if they profited from transporting slaves or slave labor products, but it is likely. That same paternal line fought "Indians" (native peoples) helping to take the USA land from the native peoples by deception and force of Arms. Truth is truth, no need to rewrite history, and then insult those presenting truth.
4) The South seceded after Lincoln was elected. They fired on Fort Sumter. They were unwilling to see their antebellum way of life end (built on the monstrosity of slavery), now it is gone with the wind. -
Pay no attention to logical fallacies from those who would rewrite history, rather that admit the monstrosity of slavery caused the civil war. -
The Georgia declaration's authors point out, accurately, that the Constitution was written with compromise over slavery as one of its centerpieces, and the declaration, while not outrightly admitting it, indicates that slavery was dying its own natural death. Therefore, why was a war over slavery necessary? It wasn't. But the North couldn't go to war over internally charged tariffs that were nothing more than illegal taxes. The North couldn't go to war over a growing Southern shipping industry that threatened to cripple Northern interests in that venue. The North couldn't go to war over Missouri -- and therefore, potentially, other states' -- industries processing the state's own foodstuffs and textiles, thus hurting Northern interests. So it went to war over slavery. That was a war it could "sell."
And 150 years later, there remain those such as yourself "convinced" by their lie.
-
JohnDeereFan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
JohnDeereFan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
(now this might seem to be off OP - but bear with me.....)
Question for VAN ---
(and let Van answer before anyone else does)
In the Declaration of Independence - what was the main reason America wanted Independence from England? -
Folks, the denial that the monstrosity of slavery caused the civil war goes not unabated.
They say I have my head in the sand and that saying so is not an insult.
Judge for yourself, if someone said your head was in the sand, would you think you had been insulted?
They say either I did not present evidence or the evidence I presented did not say what I said it says. Read post 113 for yourselves, clearly the secession statements say the fear that the north would end slavery in the future was the cause.
3) They say I did not present evidence, or the evidence did not say what I said it says that the South seceded before Lincoln took office over fear his administration would continue to allow non-slave states to be added to the union. Starting with South Carolina on December 20, 1860, five more deep south states seceded by February 1, 1861, well before Lincoln took office March 4, 1865. These states (Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and Louisiana) were followed by Texas (on Feb 1, 1861). More states did secede when the south fired on Fort Sumter (Virgina, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas.)
Next, if was falsely claimed that Lincoln did not care about slavery, but I provided numerous quotes, see post #149.
At the end of day, Slavery caused the civil war, and the south, unwilling to see it come to an end, first seceded, the fired on Fort Sumter, making those southern leaders among the most evil leaders in American history.
Page 8 of 25