Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: GraceG

“One way to blow a Liberal’s mind is to tell them that...”

Even Lincoln wanted laws forbidding blacks to marry whites.
Even Lincoln wanted free blacks to remain out of Illinois.
Even Lincoln’s first inaugural address he claimed he had no intention of interfering with slavery.

There were all kinds of bad things on both sides, but for some reason the anti-South bigots refuse to condemn the North for their atrocities.


5 posted on 07/08/2013 2:37:06 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: CodeToad

Those aren’t atrocities.


7 posted on 07/08/2013 2:39:41 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: CodeToad
There were all kinds of bad things on both sides, but for some reason the anti-South bigots refuse to condemn the North for their atrocities.

And the anti-Yankee bigots refuse to apply the same standards to their rebel heroes that they try and hold Lincoln to. Go figure.

11 posted on 07/08/2013 2:49:06 PM PDT by 0.E.O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: CodeToad
Even Lincoln wanted laws forbidding blacks to marry whites.

AFAIK, he never opposed such laws, but I've never seen any evidence he promoted them.

Even Lincoln wanted free blacks to remain out of Illinois.

Again, I am unaware of his publicly opposing such laws, but also of any evidence he "wanted" them.

Even Lincoln’s first inaugural address he claimed he had no intention of interfering with slavery.

Flatly untrue. He stated he had no intention of interfering with slavery "within a state." He had every intention of interfering with it in the territories and in DC, where he had constitutional power to propose interference.

In fact, Lincoln, during his single term in Congress, proposed a bill "interfering" with slavery in DC. In 1849!

http://www.mrlincolnandfreedom.org/inside.asp?ID=37&subjectID=3

Something I've never seen mentioned is that Congress could have entirely constitutionally passed a law prohibiting interstate traffic in slaves, even between slave states. Which would have put a real crimp in the market and constituted big-time interference.

24 posted on 07/08/2013 3:08:26 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: CodeToad

So we have now established that not only were those not atrocities, they are also not true.

No, lies don’t make liberals heads blow up. If they did, then we would have fewer liberals.


33 posted on 07/08/2013 8:46:15 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson