Posted on 04/02/2015 4:24:38 PM PDT by BigReb555
“The flags of the Confederate States of America were very important and a matter of great pride to those citizens living in the Confederacy. They are also a matter of great pride for their descendants as part of their heritage and history.”
(Excerpt) Read more at huntingtonnews.net ...
You’re gonna get flamed by the Jefferson Davis brigade, you Yankee cur you. ;p
Fixed it for ya. Keep it real.
Like, why not?
Yet that's exactly what the Founders, as the representatives of ALL the States, agreed to when they signed the Constitution.
If their descendants in the northern states decided they no longer wanted to honor their promise to perform, they should have changed the Constitution in the manner which it was intended...NOT at the end of a gun.
It was about the rights of states to allow their citizens to own slaves; it was about the rights of states to define and establish the property rights of their citizens to include certain human beings as just another class of property to own.
Lincoln siad the war wasn’t about slavery. But what did he know?
The ones pointing guns were from the slavocracy.
It wasn’t - for the north. but it certainly was for the south.
The funny thing is when “Yankees” move in they take over. nobody ever assimilates into white southern culture, which should tell you folks something.
People tend to do that when they're invaded.
You have it backwards. The slavocracy mounted an armed insurrection, stealing everything it could get its hands on. The Federal forces occupying many of those resources fought back.
It's pointless to try to rationally discuss a subject with someone when they're proven themselves incapeable of using real words.
Have a nice day.
slavocracy is a term that predates the Civil War. It’s more real than any of your arguments to date.
Y’all have yourself a nice day too.
It was about the rights of states to allow their citizens to own slaves
WRONG.. What the States did internally was none of the federal givernments business.. i.e. 10th amendment..
The federal givernment business was inter State OR international business....
Slavery was wrong but legal.. the WAR of Northern Aggression forced the issue.. a cabal of States trying to force democracy on other States..
YOU KNOW..... MOB RULE BY MOBSTERS.. democracy..
AND this Republic has been a democracy ever since..
Most americans are not to smart.. this goes right over their heads..
The federal givernment was meant to be a servant of the States NOT their Master..
AND WHY?.. the US Constitution was written down to LIMIT the federal givernment NOT the States..
The War of Northern Aggression REVERSED THAT.. limiting THE STATES..
AND STILL DOES....
We crossed that bridge with the Fugitive Slave Act which compelled Free States to actively intervene on behalf of slavers.
Slavery was wrong but legal.. the WAR of Northern Aggression forced the issue.. a cabal of States trying to force democracy on other States..
You mean the War of Southern Aggression which attempted to bend the rest of the country to its will and then tried to blow up the country when it failed.
NO...
I would suggest that you read Article I, Sec. 9, of the Constitution, and stop trying to pick fights with people from the one region of America, which has the highest level of support for traditional American freedom.
Or maybe you would consider the views of Massachusetts' Senator Daniel Webster, the leading anti-slavery voice in the North, for many years, on the Constitutional argument: Daniel Webster.
There is no slavery issue in America in 2015, except that which goes to the contemporary attack on our liberty being waged by the Obama Administration. Conservatives need to come together on that issue, while continuing to recognize that the Constitution deliberately left issues of health, safety & morals to the States.
I'm familiar with it....what's your point?
and stop trying to pick fights with people from...
Irrelevant.
Or maybe you would consider the views of Massachusetts' Senator Daniel Webster...
Seen it. Sad to see that he was an apologist for the Peculiar Institution. I guess it goes to show that even great minds can be wrong. Conservatives need to come together on that issue, while continuing to recognize that the Constitution deliberately left issues of health, safety & morals to the States.
Lost Causers can't have it both ways. You can't claim that slavery was purely an individual state issue at the same time as the southern states DEMANDED that the federal government involve itself in forcing Free States to participate in the unseemly act of hunting and repatriating runnaway slaves.
Your derogatory language, aimed at other Americans who take pride in their ancestry--certainly proper in a Federation dedicated in large part to the "posterity," of its founders--can scarcely be defended.
I admit that I have no clue as to your motives.
From his Second Inaugural address: "One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.