Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
Was it legal while they were in the Union? Yes? Then SHUT THE F*CK UP ABOUT AN EVIL WHICH THE UNION DID TOO!

So it would be just as accurate to identify you as a supporter of Southern state slavery as it is to call me a supporter of Northern state slavery.

You weren't going to give them freedom anyway, so why are you continuing to LIE about it?

Neither were you. So your bleating about seceding in the name of freedom and independence was for only a part of the Southern population.

59 posted on 06/30/2015 11:26:35 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: DoodleDawg
So it would be just as accurate to identify you as a supporter of Southern state slavery as it is to call me a supporter of Northern state slavery.

Accuracy is not at all your goal. The Objective of the North was to "Preserve the Union" not to abolish slavery.

If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.

Neither were you.

So both sides were in agreement on this issue? So why do you keep bringing it up as justification for an Invasion by the North? If one side was just as bad as the other, why mislead people about it?

So your bleating about seceding in the name of freedom and independence was for only a part of the Southern population.

The part that was no different from the slave holding People of Massachusetts in 1776.

If you can't recognize the right of slave holding Virginia to secede, you can't recognize the right of slave holding Massachusetts to secede either.

My point is the two secessions were exactly alike in terms of slavery. The Secession of 1776 was conducted by a slave holding people, and so was the Secession of 1860.

I contend the people of Massachusetts did not lose their right to secede from the English Union simply because they condoned slavery.

Yes, the Slaves had a right to be free too, but so did those slaves in Massachusetts. Denying one people their rights does not justify denying other people their rights.

60 posted on 06/30/2015 11:44:28 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson