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

Skip to comments.

If the Smithsonian Institution was more interested in promoting a patriotic version of U.S. history, would it put the Abolitionist Founding Fathers on display?
PGA Weblog ^ | 8/23/25

Posted on 08/23/2025 4:28:03 PM PDT by ProgressingAmerica

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-254 last
To: DiogenesLamp; Ditto; jeffersondem; ProgressingAmerica; x
quoting BJK regarding "all men are born free and equal": "You missed a key distinction, and it begins with understanding that the same "flowery language" appears in several important documents of the time,"

DiogenesLamp: "Unless they specifically say they were speaking of slaves held in bondage, the only rational interpretation was that they meant "White" men, and nobody else."

Says DiogenesLamp.

Massachusetts Supreme Court Chief Justice William Cushing disagreed with you in 1783, and so did many others at the time.

Cushing was highly regarded by not just John Adams, but also by Pres. Washington, who in 1790 appointed Cushing to SCOTUS and again in 1796 appointed Cushing to be SCOTUS Chief Justice.
The Senate confirmed him, but Cushing held the post only a few days before resigning, citing health reasons.
So Cushing continued to serve as associate justice under Presidents Adams, Jefferson and Madison, until his death in 1811.

It's clear that our Founding Fathers agreed with Cushing, and not with the b*ll sh*t posted by DiogenesLamp.

241 posted on 09/04/2025 4:37:31 AM PDT by BroJoeK (future DDG 134 -- we remember)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
quoting BJK: "Corwin changed nothing..."

DiogenesLamp: "I disagree.
It revealed that Republican politics was just a smoke screen for the masses.
What they really believed in was the continuation of that money from the South."

Then you disagree with Pres. Lincoln, who said Corwin changed nothing in his understanding of the US Constitution.

As for the rest, that's simply your Lost Causer Marxist fantasies, not real history.

242 posted on 09/04/2025 4:46:02 AM PDT by BroJoeK (future DDG 134 -- we remember)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: x; Ditto

Ahh, yes the NW Ordinance as well. TJ had many direct legal confrontations with slavery outside the home.

I am admittedly touchy about this; pretty much any time the Founders are disrespected.


243 posted on 09/04/2025 7:03:23 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica (We cannot vote our way out of these problems. The only way out is to activist our way out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK; DiogenesLamp; x; jeffersondem
"Cushing was highly regarded by not just John Adams, but also by Pres. Washington, who in 1790 appointed Cushing to SCOTUS and again in 1796 appointed Cushing to be SCOTUS Chief Justice."

That can't be. He was rewarded??? The 1783 Massachusetts slavery decision is said to be judicial activism, the decision was out of bounds, and of course none of the Founders were opposed to slavery - we are led to believe.

244 posted on 09/04/2025 7:06:42 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica (We cannot vote our way out of these problems. The only way out is to activist our way out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: jeffersondem; x; DiogenesLamp; ProgressingAmerica; Ditto
jeffersondem: "As late as 1854 Henry David Thoreau expressed a blistering low opinion of Massachusetts morality because the state, in his opinion, was playing nice with slavery.
Said he:

Thoreau's cabin on Walden Pond, near Concord, Massachusetts:

Thoreau was a purist, ideological, and a radical abolitionist, who died in May 1862 at age 44, after years of failing health due to Tuberculosis.

So, he lived long enough to see the Civil War's beginning, but not its duration, ending or Reconstruction.

Thoreau was not directly political and hated big government, so may well have supported post-war Radical Republicans in some respects, but Thoreau would not have liked their use of government to heavy-handedly enforce Reconstruction.

Not to be confused with Ted Kaczynski's cabin in Lincoln, Montana:

245 posted on 09/04/2025 8:54:22 AM PDT by BroJoeK (future DDG 134 -- we remember)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK; x; DiogenesLamp; ProgressingAmerica; Ditto
“Thoreau was not directly political and hated big government, so may well have supported post-war Radical Republicans in some respects, but Thoreau would not have liked their use of government to heavy-handedly enforce Reconstruction.”

I agree with Brother Joe.

That's bad.

246 posted on 09/04/2025 9:30:41 AM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: jeffersondem
but Thoreau would not have liked their use of government to heavy-handedly enforce Reconstruction.”

Ya… what kind of monster would support using the army to stop the KKK from slaughtering people. < / sarcasm >

247 posted on 09/04/2025 9:34:10 AM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: Ditto; BroJoeK; x; DiogenesLamp; ProgressingAmerica

“Ya… what kind of monster would support using the army to stop the KKK from slaughtering people. < / sarcasm >”

Let me put that in perspective.

During one turbulent year in one Southern state the Klan shot down a person every four hours and 17 minutes - and the governor said that represented a decreasing crime rate.

Let me correct myself: that is actually the rate at which people are being shot down in the streets of one city - Chicago - so far in 2025. And 75 percent of those shot down are black.

I’m wondering if the mayor of Chicago is under the direct control of the Klan.

https://heyjackass.com/


248 posted on 09/04/2025 10:00:11 AM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: jeffersondem
Nice attempt at changing the subject.

Now, do you think it was wrong for President Grant to use the military to stop the Klan from murdering people in the 1970s. If so, I can only assume you think it’s wrong for President Trump to use the military to stop gangsters from murdering people now.

249 posted on 09/04/2025 11:14:56 AM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK
I thought that might jerk your chain.

Trying to piss on my leg and tell me "it's raining" usually has that effect, but I wouldn't brag about it.

250 posted on 09/04/2025 12:14:57 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK
Massachusetts Supreme Court Chief Justice William Cushing disagreed with you in 1783, and so did many others at the time.

Well firstly, Massachusetts.

Secondly, don't post his conclusion, post his reasoning. Let us see if it passes the sanity test.

251 posted on 09/04/2025 12:17:19 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK
Then you disagree with Pres. Lincoln, who said Corwin changed nothing in his understanding of the US Constitution.

Okay, your logic is flawed here. Lincoln was absolutely right. The Constitution already said everything the Corwin amendment said *EXCEPT* that part about it henceforth being impossible to repeal or amend it. That was new.

So I don't disagree with Lincoln on this point, and I still believe that "It revealed that Republican politics was just a smoke screen for the masses. What they really believed in was the continuation of that money from the South."

252 posted on 09/04/2025 12:20:38 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
Ya… what kind of monster would support using the army to stop the KKK from slaughtering people.

You do know the Army is what created the KKK?

If the army had never been there, there never would have been a KKK.

And what do you think about illegal aliens voting?

253 posted on 09/04/2025 12:23:18 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

This is ridiculous.

Slavery was an institution back in the founding of the US.

Those both for and against slavery are part of that history.

It’s ALL part of US History. ALL. OF. IT.

Can people not tell the patriotic story of the US AND discuss the issue of slavery AND the those involved in keeping it OR banishing it?

I believe part of the problem is that many people just cannot think critically. It seems to be about two tribes and neither trusts the other.


254 posted on 09/04/2025 12:28:31 PM PDT by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-254 last

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.

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