Posted on 12/13/2017 6:10:58 AM PST by Heartlander
The left would simply call this "trans-phobic hate speech" and would probably love to have the author arrested and executed.
It was about slavery, not race. Read the actual documents.
It was not at the behest of northern interests, it was a diminution of the power of the slave owners.
Slaves were black and forces opposing southern slaveholder political interests were northern, so pardon me for regarding your reply as a misleading quibble intended to yet again sugarcoat the situation.
Except the Catholic Church in the 16th Century..
Per Wiki:
Galileo’s championing of heliocentrism and Copernicanism was controversial during his lifetime, when most subscribed to either geocentrism or the Tychonic system.[4] He met with opposition from astronomers, who doubted heliocentrism because of the absence of an observed stellar parallax.[4] The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was “foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture.”[4][5][6] Galileo later defended his views in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which appeared to attack Pope Urban VIII and thus alienated him and the Jesuits, who had both supported Galileo up until this point.[4] He was tried by the Inquisition, found “vehemently suspect of heresy”, and forced to recant.
And free blacks were counted 100%.
forces opposing southern slaveholder political interests were northern
Ah, so abolitionists were representing Northern interests against the slaveholders who were upholding the humanity of their slaves.
Got it.
Heliocentrism is not flat earth theory.
In the future you might want to consult a dictionary before posting.
Please allow me to clarify.
Heliocentrism is a distinct issue from the flat earth controversy. By the time of Galileo, the spherical nature of Earth had been an accepted fact for two millennia.
Hey, anyone want to guess what Galileo was convicted of?
Anybody?
Bueller?
There you go, emoting over intent again. The end result, however, of declaring back slaves to be 3/5 human for purposes of apportionment was dehumanizing. Next thing you know, you’re going to be claiming that the Union entered the war to free the slaves when that is objectively untrue as well.
“I would not believe my own words were they not based upon first hand experience and then scientific understanding to ground it in reality.”
Again, zero Scripture to back your strange teachings up. Using the Pharisees to forestall disagreement ain’t gonna cut it.
LOL... Neuroscience and anatomy & physiology are rather scant in the Bible...
Maybe you don’t believe in current medicine as it is not in the bible, but it still saves lives!
That was never the debate or the phrase “3/5 of a human.” There was never, ever any phrase or thinking in ANY state that blacks were not human. That’s why the Constitution referred not to slaves but to “unfree PERSONS.” Even in slave states like MD and MO, slaves could SUE for their freedom on grounds of illegal imprisonment. Only a person can sue.
The “3/5s” was a numerical compromise over population of unfree PERSONS: how do you count unfree PERSONS for representation and taxation? The compromise was to count three out of five of the unfree PERSONS for each category.
Thank you, LS.
RegulatorCountry: I don’t suppose you are going to insist you have “read more about the subject”.
My goodness, what sort of PERSONS are not human? What is 3/5 of a PERSON? A cow? No, it was how an enslaved black human being was counted for purposes of apportionment. This idiotic hairsplitting of yours is far more befitting a Clinton than a FReeper, Jeff. Dragging a minor political blogger into it was a pretty lame appeal to authority, too.
“PERSON” means what to you? Cow? Pig? Come on, dig out a thesaurus, stop parsing.
3/5 means three out of five. They counted three out of every five. They didn’t say black people were three fifths of a person. That is a modern leftist race baiting interpretation.
Go back to DU with your fellow America-haters.
Oh, so two out of five weren’t even PERSONS? You really have a problem with history as it actually was rather than the sanitized storybook version. As far as supposedly hating America that’s ridiculous, you’re completely out of rejoinders and are now just pounding the table.
I’m done with this back and forth. Please do not reply further.
As you wish.
transgenderism is a bunch of malarkey and child abuse in my book...parents are ruining their children for life!!
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.