I'm new here and someone at the beginning of this thread posted something to the effect of: Let's take off the gloves like we always do on this subject.
Guy was right. This one is a doozy. It's a doozy because it was brother vs brother, cousin vs cousin, American vs American.
I just happen to believe that the powers that made it happen did so from DC, not from a perspective of North vs South. Slavery is an utter abomination. This was just not the way to go about ending it. Lincoln was out of touch with the people.
Again, I want to reiterate. 6 million war dead in today's numbers.
Remember them this Thanksgiving.
You are most welcome, and appreciated here.. this subject always is a doozy..slavery is an abomination; and the 'Civil War' was never about ending it.
It remains so passionate an argument as to make people loose their minds. Many of the apparantly insane on this thread are, ordinarily, fairly rational sorts(including me...really, I mean it).
Have a safe, & rewarding Thanksgiving.
I just happen to believe that the powers that made it happen did so from DC, not from a perspective of North vs South. Slavery is an utter abomination. This was just not the way to go about ending it. Lincoln was out of touch with the people.That's rubbish. The secessions began before Lincoln was sworn in, and the Confederate VP's speech about the CSA constitution spells out that slavery was only vaguely protected under the US Constitution, and that had been rectified -- not to mention that the CSA attacked federal installations and started the War. The sovereignty issue had to do with holding other human beings -- those with black skins -- as property.
How does Lincoln become "out of touch with the people" by defending the Union when illegally attacked?
There is no moral equivalency here.