Posted on 02/20/2020 9:13:10 PM PST by Pelham
Five more states and all the manpower that went with it? It’s not exactly speculation.
Where was the South going to get the several more hundred thousand rifles for these men. They couldn’t make them, and they couldn’t get them through the blockade.
The South came close to winning anyways.
Maybe in your wildest dreams. But in reality the South never came close. They might had an outside chance if the could convince the Brits and French to interfere. Without them they would have failed anyway.
Prop 8 makes no difference. Did the Citizens of Massachusetts try to amend their constitution to make slavery legal.
If you study the issues, you discover a lot of the problems wrong with this country have their roots in the Civil War. I think it's very important for people to understand how we got into this mess so they can grasp what needs to be done to get out of this mess.
Abortion? 14th amendment.
"Gay Marriage"? 14th Amendment.
Banning prayer in schools and government hostility to Christianity? 14th Amendment.
Illegal aliens becoming citizens? 14th amendment.
14th amendment? Fake 3/4ths ratification due to military occupation of states caused by the Civil War.
Really the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were short circuits of the constitutional process and they never should have been accepted as ratified under the conditions during which they were ratified.
The 14th amendment has become the Liberal Judges "genie in a bottle" to give them whatever law they wish to decree from the bench.
Show me where a German court ruled against Hitler, or a Russian court ruled against Stalin, and I will show you where a US court ruled against Lincoln.
It isn't about law, it's about raw power.
They didn't seem to have any problems getting sufficient rifles with which to fight a war. I believe you mentioned that Lee took an extra 2,000 rifles with him in the hopes of arming the locals in Maryland to help him. Blockade runners were bringing them in, and I think they were making some rifles themselves.
Maybe in your wildest dreams. But in reality the South never came close. They might had an outside chance if the could convince the Brits and French to interfere. Without them they would have failed anyway.
With the alignment of the states as they were, the South would have unquestionably been ground to dust if the will remained in the North to do it. With more equal odds, this possibility changes greatly.
Show me where a German court ruled against Hitler,
So what you are saying, only in your opinion Lincoln acts were illegal. No court in the United States found against those actions.
Massachusetts is an early example of liberal judges imposing law, and then making the burden on the people to attempt to change the judge's decision. Gay Marriage in Massachusetts happened in exactly this manner.
You know something you moron, you obviously must think yourself a conservative and you come to a conservative website venerating a bunch of treasonous Southern democrats AND you’re spewing the same anti-Lincoln bullshit that the ultimate Leftist rag The New York Times is spewing in it’s horrendous “1619 Project’’. Are you aware of that? Don’t talk to me about ‘’brainwashing’’ and ‘’revisionist history’’ you idiot. The South launched a violent war of secession and lost. There is no rationalizing that away so don’t waste my time trying.
What you are really trying to say, that there was not enough interest in slave ownership or slave owner political power to get an amendment to the Massachusetts off the ground.
I absolutely and categorically reject the notion that Judges make something true which is not already true, just by issuing a ruling.
Abortion is not constitutionally legal simply because a Judge says so. A different judge will say differently.
You control the judges, you control the results, so rulings by judges are meaningless when it comes to understanding truth.
A monarchy isn’t elected by anyone stupid. A government of the people, by the people, for the people is an entirely different entity. Stop wasting my time.
Has no bearing on the situation in Massachusetts in 1790 or so.
Do you believe in the right to bear arms? What if you lived in a state where this was an unpopular view of the majority of people, such as Massachusetts?
Whether or not a democratic majority approves of your right is irrelevant to whether or not it is a right.
A Judge ruling you don't have a right to own a gun doesn't make it true, and a majority of the population agreeing with this liberal judge also doesn't make it true.
It is either true or not on it's own merits, and no ruling by a judge, or public opinion result will change that. Truth is not subject to democratic or judicial whim. It either is or isn't, regardless of the opinions of Judges or citizens.
I think slavery is evil, but according to the laws of that era, it was legal, and i'm not going to pretend it wasn't just because that makes me feel better. I'm going to tell the truth on this point, and i'm going to call out people who are telling lies on the same point. (Meaning the Judges of Massachusetts in 1780.)
That is irrelevant to the point that this was their rightful government, and they were required by law to obey it.
A government of the people, by the people, for the people is an entirely different entity.
It isn't "for the people" when the people want out of it because they see it as oppressive.
I wasn't conflating the two topics. Why are you? Liberal judges outlawing slavery in Massachusetts by deliberately misreading the 1780 Massachusetts constitution is one topic.
Liberal Judges in the 1860s after the fact rubber stamping Lincoln's actions is another.
It did no such thing.
It prevented all the slave "property" in all the southern states to be seized without "due process", but they did it anyway.
It did no such thing.
They simply ignored the Constitution when it suited their interests, and demanded strict adherence to it when that suited their interests.
The truly sad thing is that you obviously believe that. And not amount of rational discussion is ever going to dissuade yourself from your biased opinions.
You something, I’ve had enough of you. You’re an idiot and an insufferable boor.I am no longer posting any more to you. Do the same.
Ooh, me too! Please flounce off in a huff never to speak to me again.
Not interested in your desire to pretend otherwise. It's in plain English, and there is no risk of misunderstanding unless you just want to misunderstand.
I think this means "I won." :)
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.