Replies

I would be careful with this argument.

A lot of people would be happy if the United States didn't exist.

At the time of the Founding, there was only one place where slavery was outlawed, and that was western Europe. With our revolution, half the states abolished slavery or adopted gradual emancipation. Was this a glass half-empty or a glass half-full? Well, if you think everything in the world was perfect until white people showed up, it’s a glass half-empty. If, on the other hand, you see history as an on-going struggle against poverty, ignorance, disease, war, violence and oppression, you see it as a step in the right direction.

The commie filth of the !eft are not about compromise, they love arbitrary government and limitless power in all circumstances whatsoever because they fundamentally believe people cannot lead their lives without being managed for their own good. They fundamentally believe that without that management bad things happen and yet they are utterly blind to the simple fact that far worse things happen when limitless political power is concentrated into the hands of people who are inevitably going to be unaccountable to those they manage.

In fact the ONLY thing they don’t want to regulate every nuance of is sex and whatever helps there to be more sex. Those calling everyone not them fascists are the direct heirs of people calling others who dared suggest they have good morals fascists ... all people who never faced actual fascists or who ever considered communists to be as bad as they really are.

In short the Left is, like even the early so-called progressives of the 19th century, completely and inherently opposed to the wisdom this country was founded upon, wanting something foreign, something French — to be blunt — rather than something American.

That was as true of someone like Wilson as it is of Pelosi ... she is worse in degree but not really worse in being opposed to this nation’s founding principal and the wisdom brought to bear.

Wait a minute. At the time, every state allowed slavery. Moreover, New Jersey still had slaves in 1865. They just called them “apprentices for life”.

Those who pushed for a 20 year grandfather clause for the ban on the slave trade were “frontier” states likeSouthCarolina and Georgia.....as well as New England states which were the epicenter of the slave trade industry.....Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and NewYork.

Over time, America's education system, along with parents, churches and communities have failed to teach all children of the real history of our nation?

To understand something of the degree to which today's generations have been failed, one needs only to reference the following information and the Library of Congress web site referenced in the post.

Ohio State Senator and A.M.E. Bishop Benjamin W. Arnett, outstanding scholar, Legislator, and Minister, who lived through the period of the Civil War and delivered a most outstanding Centennial Sermon, at St. Paul Church in Norwalk, Ohio, by invitation, honoring the 100th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, in which he traced the history of nations and that of America, from it's inception and up to the Year of the Centennial of its Declaration.

In that Sermon, Dr. Arnett issued a grave warning of what might happen to America if a group, including academics who then self-described as "Liberals," had its way. Excerpts follow:

"The Danger to our Country.
"Now that our national glory and grandeur is principally derived from the position the fathers took on the great questions of right and wrong, and the career of this nation has been unparalleled in the history of the past, now there are those who are demanding the tearing down the strength of our national fabric. They may not intend to tear it down, but just as sure as they have their way, just that sure will they undermine our superstructure and cause the greatest calamity of the age. What are the demands of this party of men? Just look at it and examine it for yourselves, and see if you are willing that they shall have their way; or will you still assist in keeping the ship of state in the hands of the same crew and run her by the old gospel chart! But ye men who think there is no danger listen to the demands of the Liberals as they choose to call themselves:
"'Organize! Liberals of America! The hour for action has arrived. The cause of freedom calls upon us to combine our strength, our zeal, our efforts. These are The Demands of Liberalism:
"'1. We demand that churches and other ecclesiastical property shall no longer be exempt from just taxation.
"'2. We demand that the employment of chaplains in Congress, in State Legislatures, in the navy and militia, and in prisons, asylums, and all other institutions supported by public money, shall be discontinued.
"'3. We demand that all public appropriations for sectarian educational and charitable institutions shall cease.
"'4. We demand that all religious services now sustained by the government shall be abolished; and especially that the use of the Bible in the public schools, whether ostensibly as a text-book or avowedly as a book of religious worship, shall be prohibited.
"'5. We demand that the appointment, by the President of the United States or by the Governors of the various States, of all religious festivals and fasts shall wholly cease.
"'6. We demand that the judicial oath in the courts and in all other departments of the government shall be abolished, and that simple affirmation under the pains and penalties of perjury shall be established in its stead.
"'7. We demand that all laws directly or indirectly enforcing the observance of Sunday as the Sabbath shall be repealed.
"'8. We demand that all laws looking to the enforcement of “Christian” morality shall be abrogated, and that all laws shall be conformed to the requirements of natural morality, equal rights, and impartial liberty.
"'9. We demand that not only in the Constitution of the United States and of the several States, but also in the practical administration of the same, no privilege or advantage shall be conceded to Christianity or any other special religion; that our entire political system shall be founded and administered on a purely secular basis; and that whatever changes shall prove necessary to this end shall be consistently, unflinchingly, and promptly made.'
"'Let us boldly and with high purpose meet the duty of the hour.'
In another section of the lengthy discourse, Bishop Arnett addressed the topic of "The Greatness of America," as follows:

"Let us see what it is that makes us so great; wherein lies our strength. What has made us one of the greatest powers of the earth, politically and intellectually? Have we come to the conclusion that it is Righteousness that exalteth a nation? We have met to-day at the request of the President of the United States, Ulysses S. Grant, and also the Governor of our beloved State, Rutherford B. Hayes. For what? Why call us from our homes? Why come to the house of God? Why not go to the hall of mirth and to the places of amusement to-day? No that is not what they want us to do. We are commanded to go to our 'several places of worship, and there offer up thanks to Kind Providence which has brought our nation through the scenes of another year, and blessed the land with peace, plenty and prosperity.' Then as Americans we have reason to rejoice and congratulate ourselves on the greatness of our beloved country; at this the close of the first hundred years of experimental government of the people, by the people, and for the people. To be a citizen of this vast country is something, and to share in its privileges and duties is more than something." - Dr. Benjamin W. Arnett, 1876 "Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon" -

CENTENNIAL Thanksgiving Sermon, DELIVERED BY REV. B. W. ARNETT, B. D., AT ST. PAUL A. M. E. CHURCH, URBANA, OHIO 1876 - available in the "Library of Congress - Historical Collections" - "African-American Pamphlets from the Daniel A. P. Murray Collection," 1820-1920; American Memory, Washington, DC.
This historical treasure is one which should be prominent in our national discussions, especially now, when our philosophical foundations are being challenged, and when the views of a learned man like Dr. Arnett might shed light on centuries-old ideas about America's history. His theme: Righteousness Exalteth a Nation, but Sin is a Reproach to any People."
"Withdraw from Christendom the Bible, the Church with its sacraments and ministry, and Christian morality and hopes, and aspirations for time and eternity; repeal all the laws that are founded in the Christian Scriptures; remove the Christian humanities in the form of hospitals and asylums, and reformatories and institutions of mercy utterly unknown to unchristian countries; destroy the literature, the culture, the institutions of learning, the art, the refinement, the place of woman in her home and in society, which owe their origin and power to Christianity; blot out all faith in Divine Providence, love, and righteousness; turn back every believer in Christ to his former state; remove all thought or hope of the forgiveness of sins by a just but gracious God; erase the name of Christ from every register it sanctifies—in a word annihilate all the legitimate and logical effects of Christianity in Christendom—just accomplish in fact what multitudes of gifted and learned minds are wishing and trying to accomplish by their science, philosophy, and criticism, and what multitudes of the common people desire and seek, and not only would all progress toward and unto perfection cease, but not one of the shining lights of infidelity would shine much longer. Yes, the bitterest enemies of this holy and blessed religion, owe their ability to be enemies to its sacred revelations - to the inspiration and sublimity of that faith which reflects its glories on their hostile natures. They live in the strength of that which they would destroy. They are raised to their seats of opportunity and power by the grace of Him they would crucify afresh; and is it to be thought that they are stronger than that which gives them strength? Can it be supposed that a religion which civilizes and subdues, and elevates and blesses will succumb to the enmities it may arouse and quicken in its onward march? Are we to tremble for the ark of God when God is its upholder, and protector, and preserver?” - Dr. Benjaming W. Arnett, St. Paul A.M.E. Church, Urbana, Ohio, Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon, November 1876
Dr. Arnett, an A.M.E. Minister and Ohio State Legislator, was invited to publish this remarkable sermon commemorating the Centennial of the Declaration of Independence by the following method:
To:
Rev. B. W. ARNETT, B. D.
Dear Pastor:
Will you please prepare your “Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon” for publication: together with whatever matter pertaining to the colored people of this city, you deem worth preserving.
We make this request of you, believing that the publication of such matter, will be of benefit to the present and succeeding generations.
Yours Respectfully,
J GAITER
J. DEMPCY
C. L, GANT
Trustees W. A. STILGASS, W. O. BOWLES
Urbana, O.
December 7th, 1876
J GAITER, J. DEMPCY, C. L, GANT
Trustees W. A. STILGASS, W. O. BOWLES

thanx kaslin

LJ you might like this?

....Which would be fully acceptable to the communists.

THEN the French Revolution could’ve been the preeminent example of Revolution in the world!

there are four lights.

The liberal and black arguments have nothing to do with slavery. It is all about gibdmedats.

The country was founded by the Federalist, which wanted a king ( lifetime and via hereditary means), a house of Lords (Senate) and house of Commons (Representatives), plus a system of U.S. courts that could overturn or even make unnecessary state courts. Sound familiar? They wanted a facsimile of the British government, just with the local money men running it (those that held western landgrants and those speculators in confederation money they had picked up at a heavily discounted rate and wanted the new government to pay in full).
It was the anti-federalists that fought for a small government, not Washington (who by the way was not much of a general from a strategic pov), not Madison, etc. Henry and Monroe are towards the top of that list.
In other words, money folks wanted big government that they controlled and got richer on.
Like it says in Ecclesiastes, ain’t nothing new under the sun.

Why is it that nobody ever gets the Three Fifths Compromise right? This was a compromise during the Constitutional Convention made necessary by the desire of BOTH the Northern and Southern states to fully include slaves in the census counts, but for different purposes.

The Constitution lays out two purposes for the decennial census, only one of which still is applicable. In addition to the apportionment of members of the House that is still done today, the census was also used to determine the taxes levied upon each state. Taxes were required to be levied on states in proportion to state population.

The Southern states, as stated in the article, indeed wanted slaves counted in the census, but only for representation and not for taxation. The Northern states also wanted slaves counted, but for the opposite purpose — only for taxation, not for representation. The Three Fifths Compromise was implemented to allow slaves to be counted for both purposes, but only at three fifths of the actual number of slaves.