You have made dozens of posts claiming confederates fought for liberty. It is my position that anyone who claims to be fighting for liberty while simultaneously denying it to others, is a hypocrite and does not deserve his freedom. Please note my tagline.
To a lesser extent I also believe that anyone who chooses to be an apologist for those who claim to fight for freedom while denying it to others is a hypocrite. Feel free to include yourself in this group, if you like.
The position to which I object can be defined as being in favor of freedom for all men while still enslaving some. This is, of course, logically defensible. However, to defend it absolutely requires a redefinition of those enslaved as “not men,” and therefore not deserving of freedom. Or, as the great Chief Justice put it, persons of African descent do not have and can never acquire any “rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.”
All men can be free and still have slaves. We just have to redefine “men” to exclude anyone we wish to enslave. If you cannot see in this ideology a foreshadowing of the master race theory that led to such horrific crimes in the last century, I suspect it’s because you don’t want to see it.
Feel free to turn me in. I’m perfectly willing to explain my position to the admin people. If you don’t like being implied to be a racist, I suggest you reconsider your ardent defense of those who chose war to entrench a master race ideology.
Based on your righteous position, this country is illegitimate because the Founders fought for liberty while denying liberty to others and then protecting the institution of 'servitude' in the Constitution.
In other words, the Founders were hypocrites that did not deserve freedom.
The position to which I object can be defined as being in favor of freedom for all men while still enslaving some.
That includes the Founders. Right?
Feel free to turn me in. I’m perfectly willing to explain my position to the admin people. If you don’t like being implied to be a racist, I suggest you reconsider your ardent defense of those who chose war to entrench a master race ideology.
Your problem is that you have taken a major, and false, leap.
I've always defended secession, never slavery. You obviously don't have the intellectual agility to reconcile the difference and be able to debate the merits of secession in it's own right.
Or, you're simply trying to spin the debate so that you can have your 'racist' and flame him too. It's a trick your mentor, non-sequitur, is equally unable to master even though you have both had plenty of practice.