“So that line (HE has excited domestic Insurrections) in the Declaration of Independence does not refer to slavery.”
It is interesting to watch you debate the DOI with Thomas Jefferson.
Elsewhere you have referenced, and vouched for the reliability of, Jefferson’s “deleted paragraph.”
The deleted paragraph reads, in one or more of the drafts:
“He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian King of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he has obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed again the Liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.”
Note well Jefferson’s words: “he is now exciting those VERY PEOPLE to rise in arms among us (emphasis added).”
And what “very people” is he talking about?
Indians? No.
Other British citizens? No.
Slaves? Yes. Read it again for the first time.
It is tricky business to cite language that the 13 slave states voted NOT to include in the DOI as definitive of what their thinking was. I would not have attempted it if you had not vouched for its relevance.
But there can be no doubt that Jefferson was writing about slaves and slave rebellions even if his colleagues voted to amend the final language to something less condemning and more euphemistic.
"...Note well Jefferson’s words: 'he is now exciting those VERY PEOPLE to rise in arms among us (emphasis added).' "
Note, for jeffersondem's claim to be valid, the two different phrases here ("domestic insurrections" vs. "rise in arms") must refer to the same things.
But in fact, they do not.
You can't win an argument with people who refuse to acknowledge facts. They want to believe what they want to believe, and all contrary facts only annoy them.