The number one reason politically? Three fifths of a person..
Morally? Slavery was and still is a abomination on society.
Which explains this constant harping on the civil war. It was DEMOCRATS who foisted that war upon this nation and moreover, how can anyone claim to be a conservative and continue to argue over the southern causes for the civil war and its issues.
Nobody is arguing for slavery, just the reason for its abolition. I see the same manipulations of good people who argue for open borders and those of our elites who see open borders as nothing more than a means to keep people down while make billions of dollars for themselves. Those at the top typically do not care about human lives at all. For them it’s merely a means to stay on top of everybody else.
The southern states wanted their representation based on the entire population, free and slave. The north objected because that gave the south a huge over representation in Congress.
So they compromised and said the slaves would only be partially counted toward their representation in congress.
The Civil war had complex causes, and extremists of both sides of the slavery issue pushed the country to war. A compromise by gradual freedom and compensation to owners, which was Lincoln's solution, therefore failed.
Ironically, the plantation system would have been economically non viable in the near future due to other sources of cheap cotton, but the rich Southerners didn't want to admit this.
The small southern farmer fought to defend his land, the small northern farmer to prevent the disintegration of the union. So yes, the civil war was not bout slavery. But there were enough Christians who became aware of the evils of slavery that they were pressuring the government to eliminate this horrid system.
But what tipped the scales was not just northern industry, but immigrants and ex slaves fighting for the north. England's elite supported the south, but the industrial workers and anti slavery groups in England were strong enough to stop them, and after Gettysburg they decided the South would lose so decided not to help them.
And now the elites in the US is again letting extremists push the country to a civil war.
So please stop provoking each other on FR.
The sentence in the Constitution which includes the three-fifths clause begins "Representatives and direct Taxs shall be apportioned among the several States..."
Slavery is an abomination, but who among us can say that if we had been born into a slaveholding family we would have freed our slaves? It's easy to assert our moral authority over the antebellum slaveholders, but would we have done so if it meant exchanging a comfortable life for destitution? And how to ensure that the freedmen and freedwomen would have a practical way to make a living?
Are you saying Northerners objected to only three out of five slaves being counted for apportionment purposes?
I just love this simplistic rendition of American history. People today have a cartoon’s knowledge of the past, egged on by opportunists like D’Souza.
It's not three fifths of a person, bro. I can't let that one go because it iritates the hell out of me when someone says that. For purposes of the Representation and taxation they were including only three fifths of the slave population in calculating the total population of the state. It was done to minimize the political power of the Southern states because the number of Representatives in the House is determined by the population of the state. Read the damn language for yourself.
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.