Posted on 03/10/2010 6:35:02 PM PST by Idabilly
Over the course of American history, there has been no greater conflict of visions than that between Thomas Jefferson’s voluntary republic, founded on the natural right of peaceful secession, and Abraham Lincoln’s permanent empire, founded on the violent denial of that same right.
That these two men somehow shared a common commitment to liberty is a lie so monstrous and so absurd that its pervasiveness in popular culture utterly defies logic.
After all, Jefferson stated unequivocally in the Declaration of Independence that, at any point, it may become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them…
And, having done so, he said, it is the people’s right to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Contrast that clear articulation of natural law with Abraham Lincoln’s first inaugural address, where he flatly rejected the notion that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Instead, Lincoln claimed that, despite the clear wording of the Tenth Amendment, no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; [and] resolves and ordinances [such as the Declaration of Independence] to that effect are legally void…
King George III agreed.
(Excerpt) Read more at southernheritage411.com ...
If all y'all aren't embarrassed about posting all your Southron myth as fact, why should I be embarrassed about winning?
LOL indeed.
This never gets old.
Apparently not. You are easily amused. Let me guess, you're going to call me your bitch and claim you kicked my ass again?
According to the 1860 census the foreign born population of Texas was about 10% - 43,400 out of a free population of 422,000. Not very high compared to the North, but a lot higher than places like Mississippi or Georgia where the foreign born population was in the 3% or 4% range at best.
Your Prius runs,don't it? You and Bubba can pretend it's a Sherman tank,hoist that Illinois Rainbow banner,head Southbound to perform your reconstructing.
We could meet in Harrison Ar during Crawdad days.I'm in need of some reconstructing myself - Just leave noncombatants alone this time-K?
YOU won nothing. Your fat ass couldn't win a hot dog eating contest.
I like it fine where I'm at. You're the one flapping your gums about secession and the next civil war and rematch all the rest. So go ahead and start already. When your rebel horde reaches Kansas then I'll be waiting for you.
No you didn't
As for "light and transient causes", nobody was concerned about that with respect to ratification by the 13 original States.
I've made no argument based on ratification or any constitutional matter. Nor was "light and transient causes an issue during the Constitutional Convention because separation occurred 11 years prior.
have argued exhaustively but apparently to no effect on people prepared to resist elenchus, the idea of a threshold consent to irrevocable Union was not enshrined in the Constitution, and in fact it was explicitly rejected, as shown by our friend
I've made no Constitutional arguments either way. The original thread and my objection was about Jefferson, the DOI and it's meaning. Jefferson wasn't even at the Constitutional Convention.
Is that going to be how your next war of secession is fought? Hot dog eating contest? I'll bet you're one of those barbarians who pust ketchup on your hot dog. Fess up now.
The fact that the principles of the Declaration of Independence have not been uniformly or consistently been applied has no bearing on either their truth or meaning.
Awww.... did I hwurt his wittle feelwings?
Poor Bubbahoshit. I promise I won’t pick on you any more. Go tell mama you’re a big boy and maybe she’ll let you back in the basement to play with your wittle computer.
Bullschit.
Your #396 post strongly implies that the north was always against slavery and that if was only the evil planters in the South that was for it:
The North could not make money from slavery and was against it. The South could make huge amounts of money from slavery and were for it.
You statement would be more accurate if you had written: 'The north began to oppose slavery when they could no longer profit from the slave trade.'
Because your entire flawed argument was that in order to secede South Carolina had to 'declare' its intentions, which you stated that they did not.
I posted that link because the title had the specific word that you deny existed.
However the Yale link is just as good.
Well...instead of reverting to your Pee Wee Herman “I know you are, but what am I?” techniques, you might actually address my point. In other words, do what you wanted me to do...address the points on the web site I provided that I will not vouch for. Until you do what you ask others to do...consider your ass kicked....as usual.
Until then..buh bye pissant.
I did not say that.
ROTFLMFAO!!!!!!!!!
That is without a doubt the funniest line that has ever been posted on FR!!!!!
He'll be waiting alright; like the French when the Germans showed up: waiting to surrender!!!!!!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey Idabilly! Roadtrip? It'll be worth the drive just to see the brown stain in his panties!! Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!!
Did too!
There were about 20,000 Germans in Texas. The counties where they settled were the center of Unionism in Texas. Many of the Germans headed to Mexico to avoid being drafted into a war they didn’t support. In one case, confederate cavalry ran down one group of 60 heading to Mexico, massacring more than half of them, many after they’d surrendered. The oldest Civil War memorial in Texas is dedicated to those victims and is inscribed “Treue der Union.” It is one of six locations in the country where the US flag flies permanently at half staff.
Actually I did look at the website and it's full of the usual stuff. It's been posted or linked to time and again by lost cause adherents; surely you don't think you stumbled on some treasure trove of new material? Or did you even read it?
As for addressing the point's, let's take the first one of the noted examples: "The "Richmond Howitzers" were partially manned by black militiamen. They saw action at 1st Manassas (or 1st Battle of Bull Run) where they operated battery no. 2. In addition two black “regiments”, one free and one slave, participated in the battle on behalf of the South." Here's a Link to a site with the history of the Richmond Howitzers. According to your website, the 2nd battery was partly manned by black militia and served at First Bull Run. According to the history of the unit, only the first battery was present at Bull Run. The second and third batteries were not. Next, there's the claim that there were two black regiments at Bull Runs, one free and one slave. Here's a Link to the confederate order of battle for Bull Run. Can you identify which were the black regiments please?
Or I guess you won't be answering those, will you? You've already declared victory and gone off somewhere. Well buh bye back atcha.
What on earth are you talking about? You think that your admission that you suffer from an irrational and debilitating fear of homosexuals hurts my feelings?
Talk is very cheap. And talk is all you guys are good for. So wkae us all up when you start seceding again. I'd hate to sleep through it.
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.