Thanks for your insane reply, most people try to hide that from public view, nice to see you're not afraid to show the world how crazy you & Roger both are/were.
ml/nj: "Taney (pronounce Tawney, if you care) wasn't making decisions upon what he believed some of the Framers considered morally wrong.
He was, as he was supposed to do, making decisions upon what all the Framers agreed to and WROTE DOWN in the Constitution."
And so the Democrat insanity begins: redefining words to mean what they wish them to have meant.
In fact, those words meant exactly what Founders thought they meant, not what you or Crazy Roger suppose they might have meant.
And no Founder ever expressed the kinds of opinions Crazy Roger enshrined in Dred Scott.
The fact is the 1787 Northwest Ordnance was not a Constitutional issue, nobody claimed then the Constitution prevented Congress from abolishing slavery there.
That makes Crazy Roger's claims otherwise, by definition, pure insanity, meaning, anti-logical.
ml/nj: " Among the things WRITTEN DOWN was this in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3:"
Referring clearly to fugitive slaves, and nobody for the next 70 years fantasized it referred to legal permanent residents, or that Congress had no authority over territories, until Crazy Roger legislated those things from the Supreme Court's bench.
ml/nj: "It doesn't really matter what they [Founders] believed"
Spoken like a true Democrat.
Of course it matters, first & foremost, what Founders believed their words meant or implied.
In this particular case, there's no evidence -- none, zero, nada evidence -- suggesting Founders themselves intended anything other than fugitives from justice, including slaves.
And that did not include Dred Scott, the man.
ml/nj: "Congress didn't have to extrapolate.
It had to amend, or do nothing.
Taney understood.
You, apparently do not."
Neither Taney nor you had any authority to overthrow Founders' Original Intent in their Constitution.
Crazy Roger's excuse is simple insanity.
What's yours?
I’m amazed from time to time of the, uhm, unique scholarship that can be found at FreeRepublic.
This is the second person, out of the dozens of historians and thousands of posters I’ve studied, who believes that the United States Constitution contained a secret snare which forced slavery upon a horrified citizenry.
EVERY historian and virtually every poster participating on WBTS threads knows that certain compromises were written into the constitution in order to placate slave states. But no one ever doubted that states that desired to be free had every right to do so. And similarly, every state that wished to embrace slavery had that right. At least until Scott v. Sanford when taney upturned the history of our very nation and declared that the wording of the Constitution compelled every state to endure slavery. Like it or not.
Either we were tricked by a diabolical monster who inserted language into the document - which was later revealed by the super-prescient taney, or the constitution held meaning that the Founders (and every historian since) recognized, but taney ignored.
I guess you learn something new everyday...
(FTR, I've never lived south of Long Island, NY, but I've obviously read a lot more history than you have.)
ML/NJ
“. . . encouraged & enhanced each other’s craziness.”
“We should also notice here that in concurring with Crazy Roger . . .”
“. . . concurred in Crazy Roger's insanity.”
“So any notion that Chief Justice Taney (encouraged by President Buchanan) was anything other than stark raving insane . . .”
". . . show the world how crazy you & Roger both are/were.”
". . . not what you or Crazy Roger suppose they might have meant.”
". . . the kinds of opinions Crazy Roger enshrined in Dred Scott.”
"That makes Crazy Roger's claims otherwise, by definition, pure insanity . . .”
". . . until Crazy Roger legislated those things from the Supreme Court's bench.”
“Crazy Roger's excuse is simple insanity.”
“All seven justices voting for Crazy Roger's Dred Scott ruling were . . .”
“So when Crazy Roger Taney ruled that Congress had no authority . . .”
". . . an authority which Crazy Roger Taney singlehandedly abolished . . .”
“. . . Cracy Roger's ruling P.O.’d a lot of Northerners . . .”
". . . Crazy Roger's “logic” was complete nonsense . . .”
“. . .which sounds like the “logic” of Crazy Rober’s Dred Scott ruling.”
“. . . notion come from that Crazy Roger was anything other than stark raving mad??”
In the last eight hours a disturbing condition has manifested. Eight hours.