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

To: DoodleDawg
No, they were not property. They were free people with rights and interests that needed protection.

But not until two years after a group of states threw off the rule of Washington D.C. *THAT* is when it suddenly became necessary to look after their rights and interests.

Prior to that, they didn't need their rights and interests looked after.

132 posted on 07/07/2015 9:29:11 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp
But not until two years after a group of states threw off the rule of Washington D.C. *THAT* is when it suddenly became necessary to look after their rights and interests

I have no idea of what you point is here. Not quite two years into the rebellion, Lincoln issues his Emancipation Proclamation as a war-time measure to free Southern slaves that might have been used to further the rebel war effort. Nowhere in that document is there anything about "rights" for the freed slaves. In fact the 3/5ths rule remained in effect until the 14the Amendment. But as free men and women then the newly emancipated slaves did count as a whole person because they were no longer property.

140 posted on 07/07/2015 9:45:25 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

To: kalee

For later


143 posted on 07/07/2015 9:50:38 AM PDT by kalee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | 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