Posted on 05/22/2015 6:12:39 PM PDT by robowombat
SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS TO REPLACE FLAGS AT UNION SPRINGS
Gary Carlyle, Commander of the Alabama Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, announced today that at 10 a.m. on Saturday morning, May 23rd, the SCV will replace the memorial flags which were recently removed from a Confederate cemetery in Union Springs, Alabama by an individual in that town.
In a statement, Carlyle said that he wished to thank Mayor Saint T. Thomas, Jr. and the City Council of Union Springs for working together with the Sons of Confederate Veterans on the restoration project.
"The Mayor and the Council have been very understanding and co-operative with us," said Carlyle. "He has been very helpful in making this happen."
Ben Jones, Chief of Heritage Operations for the 30,000 member Sons of Confederate Veterans, an international organization of men who are directly descended from those who fought for the Confederacy, praised the Mayor for "taking a clear stance for healing and reconciliation."
"The removal of these flags from the graves of our ancestors was a terribly wrong-headed, provocative and divisive action," said Jones. "No amount of political sanctimony can excuse it. Our membership asks that this ceremony on Saturday will be given the respect and reverence it deserves by all. We are grateful for the leadership of Mayor Thomas during this time, and we are hopeful that the event will take place in an atmosphere of reflection and genuine understanding. "
The reason I think the South cared about the Union is because a Southerner, George Washington, was the Father of the Country. And because a Southerner, Thomas Jefferson, is credited with writing the Declaration of Independence. And because a Southerner, James Madison, was the Father of the Constitution. And because a Southerner, James Mason, was the Father of the Bill of Rights. Southerners loved the Constitution, the country, and the Union which they “helped” found. They were willing to fight for their Constitutional rights. They did not love the synthetic Constitution evolving in the north which they feared would be used to destroy the South politically, economically, and militarily. (We now know the fear was justified).
You are bold to assert the North was fighting to preserve the Union and not for some high moral cause. You wouldn't believe how many people believe Julia Ward Howe's emotional song (”As he died to make men holy, let us die to make men free”) represented the purpose of Lincoln's optional war.
What complete and utter claptrap.
Slavery was indeed practiced in Massachusetts in 1790. If you read the old original records you will see that the owners of those individuals who had been slaves in the earlier census were later called servants. Everything was the same except slave was now called servant AND now when the ‘servants’ got too old to serve they could be released and the owner wouldn’t have to pay a bond.
Massachusetts did not want its citizens to free their slaves. They were afraid they would have to take care of them. That’s why they fined the owners who released them.
What’s your point? Even if you could substantiate your claim the number of slaves residing in the state (or any northern state) was so small as to be statistically irrelevant.
Every northern state had either outlawed slavery or had a plan for graduated emancipation by around 1830.
Oh, and the bond? It was to ensure that manumitted blacks did not become a burden on the state. It held former owners responsible for them even after emancipation. Not such a bad idea that, don’t you agree?
“What complete and utter claptrap.”
If you do not like my reference to the synthetic Constitution evolving in the north, you will not like it when I say there is no constitutional basis for the federal government requiring states to allow abortions in the ninth month; no constitutional basis for federal minimum wage and price controls; no constitutional basis to interfere with state laws that define marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman. Big government has failed. Give us more big government.
I don’t object to the “synthetic constitution” because I think that in some ways that’s true. But holding the northern states exclusively responsible is wrong. The simple truth is that until about the last 30 years or so the south has solidly supported the dhimmicrat party.
Big government has failed and the south helped deliver big government.
“But holding the northern states exclusively responsible is wrong.”
I have challenged some Yankee myths on this site but I don’t think I have ever stated northern states are exclusively responsible for all human ills.
I just haven’t got started criticising fellow Southerners yet. I wouldn’t be surprised if Adam and Eve were Southerners. They messed up the first or second week.
Does that mean you’re retracting your misstatement of the reference to the “synthetic Constitution evolving in the north”?
I don't think I want to fall on that much sword. It does seem to me the north has led the way in attacking and denigrating the 10th amendment.
That’s fine. I will continue to point out you distortions, deceptions and departures from the truth.
Funny how even the first census in 1790 lists zero slaves in Massachusetts. Go here to page 6 of this PDF document if you don't you don't believe me.
You are partially correct that they didn't have a specific state law on their books outlawing slavery, but state court decisions beginning in 1780 based on interpretations of their 1778 state Constitution ended slavery in Mass.
So to the larger point, you are wrong. Slavery was not legal in Mass. The state courts ruled that it violated their Constitution.
Your Lost Cause BS propaganda has lied to you again. Why do enjoy being lied to?
Please allow me to quote the words of another son of the South given 80 years after those Southern Patriots you mentioned worked together to help form this union.
The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions—African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact.
But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away... Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."
--- CSA Vice President Alexander Stevens, March 21, 1861.
You can not claim the heritage of both the Founding Fathers of the 1770s and the Fathers of Disunion of the 1860s who rejected those Founding Fathers. They are mutually exclusive. Pick one or the other.
“They are mutually exclusive. Pick one or the other.”
Stevens thought the founders were “in error” about the future of the Peculiar Institution and he said so. He did not reject the founders or their larger accomplishments. With a couple of changes, the Confederate Constitution tracked the Constitution written by James Madison.
I’ve gone over the original records in Massachusetts many times. My ancestors were here in the mid-1620’s, and yes, some of them owned slaves.
Reading the old records you will find ample evidence for slaves in the households - even in Lexington the Cradle of Liberty. When it became necessary they became called indentured servants. The slaves stayed with the families because they couldn’t earn a living and the towns didn’t want them. BTW - it was illegal for colonists to buy anything from an Indian, a black or a mulatto. Too much ‘went missing’ in the households.
“Stephens rejected the central tenet of the Declaration of Independence.”
Your statement is interesting. May I see your data on that?
See post 101 on this thread where I quoted Stevens’ words from his Cornerstone Speech. He rejected the Founders vision.
Should be post 113, not 101.
My ancestors fought in the Union Army of the Potomac. They had great respect for their Confederate foe and rightfully so. This Monday morning quarterback p.c. nonsense must stop. The rank and file Confederate soldier certainly didn’t sacrifice life and limb so some rich guys could keep slavery. To suggest otherwise is absurd.
And you can bet the average Ubion grunt wasn’t risking same to abolish slavery.
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.