Posted on 12/20/2010 3:43:37 PM PST by Jet Jaguar
Exactly 150 years after South Carolina became the first state to leave the United States, a group whose purpose is to preserve Confederate history is holding a dance in Charleston.
The NAACP plans to protest Monday night's "Secession Ball." Leaders of the civil rights group have said it makes no sense to honor men who committed treason in order to maintain a system that kept black men and woman in bondage as slaves.
But organizers of the ball say their intention is to honor men who were willing to die to protect their vision of states' rights and what this nation was supposed to be.
The Secession Ball is happening just blocks from where 169 men voted unanimously 150 years ago to leave the United States.
A protest rally is scheduled for 4:30pm at Emanuel AME Church on Calhoun Street and the group will march past the Gaillard Auditorium to Morris Brown AME Church on Morris Street.
Meanwhile, a new historical marker will identify the site where South Carolina delegates signed the Ordinance of Secession. The marker was unveiled Monday in downtown Charleston, where Institute Hall once stood.
The marker identifies what was Charleston's largest pre-Civil War public space, with seats for 3,000 people. It hosted the 1860 Democratic national convention, which split when Southern delegates wanted to adopt a party platform protecting slavery.
(Excerpt) Read more at wistv.com ...
If they had freed their slaves then what would they have had to secede over?
In a nutshell an encroaching usurping Federal Government. You cannot judge the republic of then by today's standard. Back in the day, the States were supreme. Hell, the smallest thing FedGov™ tried to do was considered encroachment on States Rights then and rightly so. We are so lost now, nobody can even understand what it was like, the glory days of the republic.
Ditto that. It wasn't till air conditioning and enough Yankees moved south that anyone but a big government New Deal Democrat the likes of Gore Sr., Fullbright, Irvin, Falbus or Wallace had a chance of winning down there. Even with that, they still gave use the curses of Clinton, Carter and Gore Jr. ;~))
But you will note that the Slave Power of the Confederacy never even considered putting secession before Congress. There is a reason for that. They relied strictly upon raw emotion to make their case to the people in their states.
A reasoned debate in Congress would have diffused the raw emotions that the Slave Power had incited among the bare majority in most Southern states and the non slave owning Yeomen citizens of the South would have had time and perspective enough to tell the fire eaters to go to hell.
It was pure demagoguery that the Fire Eaters used to drive the South into a suicide pact. They had no reason or rational that would have stood up in a congressional debate and they damn well knew it.
There were numerous locations within the South that rejected the "Confederacy", mostly in hill country amongst the farmers who didn't want to fight for slavery. Nickajack, Republic of Winston, and the Free State of Jones are a few names that come to mind. However I could find no reference anywhere to a place called "Mayland".
Maybe Rustbucket has a newspaper source on that.
The only usurping that the Southern states were concerned with was the fear that Lincoln would prohibit slavery in the territories. Doing away with slavery would have eliminated that problem so it's back to the original question - had the Southern states done away with slavery then what was there to secede over?
Again you are judging by today's standards, Morrill Tariff was enough of a catalyst back then. Back then people took their states rights seriously.
To show how far we have strayed, how bass ackward everything is take the following test.
Most people couldn't answer the most basic questions about their state legislatures without looking it up on google. Can you answer these simple questions regarding your state legislature(without the aid of a search engine)?
I'm perfectly willing and capable of doing same today if my 'fellow American' be it some Bill Ayres revolutionary type or a native born Mohammad Jihad were attempting insurrection. Trust me, if they take up arms against the Constitution and I'd blow big holes in them with no remorse whatsoever!
From your past comments, it is obvious that you think the United States is not worth protecting and preserving since you consider it to be an illegitimate government for the past 150 years.
From that position, I can only assume than that you would not have defended that document during WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam or in our current wars against terrorists and despots who threaten it now. That the only veterans deserving of honor are those from the CSA and all the others since then were simply agents of an illegitimate government.
Since in your opinion, the Constitution has been meaningless since the time of Lincoln, I only have to ask why you hang around at FreeRepublic.com which is dedicated to upholding that Constitution which you consider to meaningless?
Seems you would have more friends at Anarchy.com
No, you seek only to distract with this question. The real question is, why in the world would anyone think it is fine and dandy to strip the states of their basic sovereignty?
But not the catalyst for Southern secession. When Francis Pickens was inaugurated governor of South Carolina, his inauguration speech spoke of ending the ties with the U.S. and gave no other reason than Lincoln's opposition to slavery. South Carolina started the whole secession ball rolling. And without slavery they wouldn't have taken that first step.
Pssst....I'll let ya in on something....Ayres and company already did.
Comparing the Confederacy to terrorists is not going to work. You are no Non-Sequitur so stop it.
From your past comments, it is obvious that you think the United States is not worth protecting and preserving since you consider it to be an illegitimate government for the past 150 years.
Since the South was drug back into the union against her will, I see no problem with defending the USA since Hilter, Moussilini and Tojo declared war on all the States. Even if the CSA and the USA were separate Countries in 1941, we would have fought together just like the Canadians and all of the other allies. We are both talking hypothetical here.
Since in your opinion, the Constitution has been meaningless since the time of Lincoln, I only have to ask why you hang around at FreeRepublic.com which is dedicated to upholding that Constitution which you consider to meaningless?
Like I said many times the Constitution, while well meaning, is actually hurting the cause of the republic now. IMO It has not been followed as originally intended for the last 150 years, it has been debased to where now it is just a fig leaf of modesty for the statist agenda. They can point to it and say "see everything we do is legit".
I want to get back to the original republic, were states were the equal to the Federal. If that is not possible then freedom lovers should not be afraid to think of other means to restore the republic.
As far as constitutions go: No piece of paper can secure the liberties of people that don't deserve it.
I guess you couldn’t pass my little test. Didn’t think so. :)
Yep, slavery was legal in Virginia, North & South Carolina, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi and nine other states back in 1860 when they were part of the Union. There were a total of 15 states where slavery was legal. Eleven of those states formed the Confederacy. Four of them chose to stay loyal to the Constitution.
But there were 18 other states then where slavery was illegal whom all stayed loyal to the Constitution.
So what exactly is your point?
Fortunately, they were as incompetent as the Christmas day underwear bomber. :~))
That does not make any sense. If you think you are being forced to be something against your will, why would you have any loyality, especially when it comes to putting your life on the line?
Like I said many times the Constitution, while well meaning, is actually hurting the cause of the republic now.
What doesn't make any sense is that according to your statement:
I'm perfectly willing and capable of doing same today if my 'fellow American' be it some Bill Ayres revolutionary type or a native born Mohammad Jihad were attempting insurrection. Trust me, if they take up arms against the Constitution and I'd blow big holes in them with no remorse whatsoever! (Ditto)
Yet, Ayers and company are running the show right now and you aren't doing anything about it. The cabal of leftist revolutionaries are running everything, but I don't see you blowing big holes in them.
...and the last time I checked YOU were quoting black liberationist Lenore Bennett to support one of your half baked revisionist theories. Whats your point?
The claim is that the war was over slavery. The Constitution of the US provided for slavery, the constitution of Mayland prohibited it. The US warred against Mayland.
So it seems ridiculous to claim the purpose of the war was to abolish slavery.
Secession in 1860 had nothing to do with the Constitution, or possibly legitimate reasons, and everything to do with expanding slavery.
As I pointed out at the very beginning, tis a fruitless effort to argue this issue with a bunch of “Union-minded” (so-called) conservatives. That’s because, at the end of the day, they have one thing in mind. ONE thing dominates their thinking.
They do NOT ultimately CARE about:
States Rights,
Individual Liberty,
the Constitution,
History,
or Reason.
They only care about CONTROL. Power. That’s it. In 1865 — they WON. They thrashed their opponents, pillaged his burgs and looted his goods, and have ever since maintained to one degree or another DOMINANCE over both the States AND the People.
In the end, “Union-Minded, Big Government conservatives” are virtually indistinguishable from Liberals when it comes to the POWER and AUTHORITY of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT in the philosophical sense. Oh, sure, the Liberals want to spend $3 TRILLION to maintain control. The “Union minded Big Government conservatives” just want to spend $1.5 TRILLION or so. SAME Washington DC centered, Federal system — one is just a little leaner than the other.
Oh, one thing y’all did get right — it IS about slavery. It’s about the enslavement of every “citizen” in the nation TO the Federal Government in Washington DC — and YOU FREAKING MADE IT HAPPEN!
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.