Posted on 08/23/2025 4:28:03 PM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
That makes Corwin an important piece of anti-slavery legislation!
You are unbelievable. An absolute stab in the back to the slaves by the Republicans controlling Congress in 1861, and you are trying to convince people "it was part of a grand scheme to free them! "
And the 13th amendment is a fake amendment passed by tyranny. If the actual will of the people was enacted, there were never enough ratifying states to pass that "amendment."
We all like to pretend it is legitimate, but it was enacted through force, not democracy. It is a humiliation of our Constitutional law.
And on what basis do you say that? What particular thing did he do that makes you think he was a lunatic?
Well I couldn't find any. All I found was that most of the freed men were in Boston.
Some could & did vote. They could also use the courts to, for example, sue for freedom, and at least in theory, could sit on juries.
Do you have any supporting evidence for this contention?
That is hard to believe, because you often seem so unprepared for information I have revealed to you.
I am reminded of what President Reagan said about Liberals.
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant...
"... It's that they know so much which isn't so."
I’m over any race, to be honest.
What I’m not over, is the Founding Fathers. If they did some act that can be considered “good”, then I’m going to talk about it.
None of this makes any sense at all. I don’t know who is trying to review. Please explain.
Former. If the rule is good enough for a former slave trader, it's good for Americans too.
They are abolitionists. It is clear that you are not coping well with history that won't bend to what you wish it to be.
Again, you are just flat out wrong. In those days, only freeholders (I.e. citizens who owned real estate and therefore paid taxes) could vote. Not all whites were freeholders, i.e. taxpayers. Some blacks were freeholders, and could vote. It had nothing to do with their rights as individuals.
You just make stuff up as you go.
Slave owning abolitionists. Their position seems to be "Yeah, we know it is wrong, but we just can't help ourselves. "
It is clear that you are not coping well with history that won't bend to what you wish it to be.
I am reminded of BroJoeK's interpretation of the Corwin Amendment as a good thing for all the black people it tried to keep in slavery.
He just wants to believe what he wants to believe, as do you.
You want to preach, but you don't want to listen, or give any of my points a fair consideration.
You can believe what you like, but neither the Declaration of Independence, nor the Massachusetts constitution of 1780 were written with black people or slaves in mind when they were written. The *INTENT* of their respective governments was to articulate the rights of white people, with no thought given to slaves.
The fact that the reality of their society as slave holding states absolutely contradict what they later claimed those words mean, should be all the proof any rational man needs to understand what they actually meant in 1776 and 1780 respectively.
And Article IV, section 2 is referring to "slaves", not indentured servants. You are trying to put a fig leaf on it, but it isn't fooling anyone.
You really had to search for that obscure opinion. Do you know that most people who followed the court then considered Justice Baldwin to be insane? Literally insane.
Where you been you old fart.
“Slave owning abolitionists. Their position seems to be “Yeah, we know it is wrong, but we just can’t help ourselves.””
This applies equally to slave trading abolitionists like John Newton, whose position seems to be “Yeah, we know it is wrong, but we just can’t help ourselves.” you’re trying too hard to go out of your way to be inconsistent this can’t be accidental.
I am absolutely oblivious to any inconsistency that you seem to be noticing. I'm not trying to be anything. I'm noticing stuff that doesn't fit with what you wish to believe about the founding era.
I'm contrary like that.
You are like the painter who is painting the King, and removing all the warts and blemishes because he wants to present the king in the best possible light.
I'm just coming along and repainting the warts and blemishes so that it is more accurate.
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.