Posted on 02/27/2006 6:14:47 AM PST by SuzyQ2
I love history. I’m proud of my Southern heritage. But for me to be angry to the point of protesting a moment in Southern history that happened nearly a century-and-a-half ago would be just, well, nonsensical. And would in some ways tarnish that heritage.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Lincoln thought that there was no legal means to end slavery in the southern states, not that he didn't wish to, but that he didn't see the way forward to. After Dred Scott, there was no way for Northern states to not have slavery. That was the problem: People were free to have slavery, but not free to not have it.
Slavery was, in fact, a merciful institution when substituted for the previous practice of killing all enemy soldiers out of hand. That wasn't the Southern practice.
It would have been interesting if Nat Turner had been more successful. If we had a state of freed slaves, freed by their own efforts, using the same methods used previously to put and keep them into bondage. Now that would have been an interesting situation.
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.