It is all the founder’s fault. They should have insisted that slaves be counted as full people instead of just 3/5 a person, you know for the case of proportioning out the house seats...
That would have ended slavery because the slaves would have been fully represented in the house..... You know with all those elections where the slaves wouldn’t vote at all in...
One way to blow a Liberal’s mind is to tell them that Most all Abolishionists in the North wanted slaves to NOT count as person at all when the constitution was being ratified....
You will need a rake a trash can to clean up the grey matter after they fully digest that fact...
Sorry a bit carried away about what is actually taught about the civil war in schools these days....
“One way to blow a Liberal’s mind is to tell them that...”
Even Lincoln wanted laws forbidding blacks to marry whites.
Even Lincoln wanted free blacks to remain out of Illinois.
Even Lincoln’s first inaugural address he claimed he had no intention of interfering with slavery.
There were all kinds of bad things on both sides, but for some reason the anti-South bigots refuse to condemn the North for their atrocities.
That would have ended slavery because the slaves would have been fully represented in the house..... You know with all those elections where the slaves wouldn’t vote at all in...
...
Most all Abolishionists in the North wanted slaves to NOT count as person at all when the constitution was being ratified....
First of all, they weren't abolitionists at the time. Secondly, if slave states only got representatives based on how many free people there were in the state (which the slave states didn't want) you could be sure it would have been a major incentive to get rid of slavery, in order to get more free people and more representatives. I hated math, but even I can figure that out.
How do you figure? The truth is that white Southerners would have been even more over-represented in the House. Slaves would continue to have no representation at all. Neither would free blacks.
One way to blow a Liberal’s mind is to tell them that Most all Abolishionists in the North wanted slaves to NOT count as person at all when the constitution was being ratified....
They were not considered a person down south, merely property. Should your house have a vote? Your wagon? Your plow? That property had no rights as individuals, and neither did slaves. So why include them when allocating Congressional seats?
You will need a rake a trash can to clean up the grey matter after they fully digest that fact...
Yes if there is one thing we've become over-exposed to when dealing with Lost Causers it's trash.
Slavery was a very different affair in the days of our founders and it had changed considerably from the 1650s or so when it rose out of indentured servitude. Even this wiki account of the life of Washington’s personal slave gives the impression that Billy Lee was far more than a slave. He had a better life than poor white farmers of the day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lee_%28valet%29
George Whitefield is an interesting character in that even when he supported slavery early in life he saw it as a means of gaining freedom from the barbarism of Africa. He later became an abolitionist but always believed that an education for all slaves was essential to their future independence. A slave named Phyllis Wheatly was a well known poet (not a well known black poet) of the day and eulogized Whitefield in glowing terms.