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

Skip to comments.

Abraham Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address, November 19, 1863
Many | November 19, 1863 | Abraham Lincoln

Posted on 11/19/2018 8:39:26 AM PST by EveningStar

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Abraham Lincoln
November 19, 1863

Gettysburg Address as recited by Jeff Daniels.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: abrahamlincoln; anniversary; civilwar; despot; gettysburg; gettysburgaddress; greatestpresident; history; keywordskinheads; lincoln; pennysylvania; thecivilwar; tyrant; warcriminal; worstpresident
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 241-252 next last
To: Bull Snipe
“are so naïve as to believe that the U.S. Government would use a nuclear weapon on an American citizen who would not turn in his gun. If you really believe that, I have some sea side property in Arizona to sell you.”

I'd rather you sell me all your guns at ten cents on the dollar.

You might as well. You are all set to be flimflammed out of your firearms by the Democrats anyway.

81 posted on 11/20/2018 5:24:42 AM PST by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: jeffersondem

When is Trump going to sign the legislation outlawing private ownership of guns.
You would take ten cents on the dollar for guns if you believe that the Federal Government would waste a nuclear weapon on a citizen because they didn’t surrender a fire arm.


82 posted on 11/20/2018 6:34:07 AM PST by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Bull Snipe

Actually that was a telling comment from demojeff - eager to profit from the misery of US citizens.


83 posted on 11/20/2018 7:23:04 AM PST by rockrr ( Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

misery how?


84 posted on 11/20/2018 7:34:12 AM PST by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

“That’s right. That’s why Lincoln had no option but to stop the insurrectionists who attempted to destroy our union.”

Yes sir! To save the country you have to destroy it!


85 posted on 11/20/2018 9:15:30 AM PST by Captain Jack Aubrey (There's not a moment to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
"Four score and seven years ago..."

Bringing up 1776 is not a good idea for someone trying to *STOP* an independence movement. It makes the other side look like heroes.

86 posted on 11/20/2018 9:22:49 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bull Snipe
Probably should not have fired on Fort Sumter then.

Fort Sumter isn't in the North. It's in the South. It's in their territory. Also, they wouldn't have fired on it if Lincoln hadn't sent the war fleet to attack them, or if Anderson would have agreed not to fire on them.

87 posted on 11/20/2018 9:25:06 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Either Lincoln knew he was being false in this, or he truly was crazy.

Implying that the Declaration of Independence was about freedom for slaves is more of a deliberate lie than it is about being crazy. Lincoln knew better.

88 posted on 11/20/2018 9:26:23 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: IrishBrigade
the future Confederacy was all for government fiat when it came to enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act in...

If you mean applying constitutional law as written, then yes, they were.

The fugitive slave act requires exactly the same thing as Article IV, section 2 of the US Constitution.

They only created the fugitive slave act because states were deliberately ignoring the requirements of Article IV, section 2 of the US Constitution.

89 posted on 11/20/2018 9:28:45 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: IrishBrigade
watch it...lots of people on this forum think Lincoln goaded them into it...

Goaded my @$$, he made it absolutely necessary. He sent a fleet of warships with orders to use their cannons to attack the confederates around Fort Sumter.

What did you think they were going to do? Sit there and absorb cannonballs?

90 posted on 11/20/2018 9:30:40 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

States are not required to enforce Federal Law.


91 posted on 11/20/2018 9:33:54 AM PST by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

“With the exception of the original 13 states, the rest of the states didn’t join anything and ratified nothing. They were allowed to join and only after a majority of the other states, as expressed by a vote in both houses of Congress, agreed to let them in. Shouldn’t leaving require the same thing?”

OK, but you have to look to the Constitution, right? Isn’t that what’s it for?

The Constitution describes how to document is ratified and how it goes into effect. The Constitution describes how subsequent states are to be admitted to the Union by Congress. The Constitution does not describe how congress allows states to leave the Union. (Obviously, that means it doesn’t have the power.) The Constitution also describes limitations of the powers of the states (Art I, sec. 9). Nothing in the Constitution prohibits states from withdrawing or confers a power upon congress to prevent it. The 9th and 10th Amendments reserve to the states and the people all powers not delegated to the US by the Constitution.

Why is this so hard?


92 posted on 11/20/2018 9:34:55 AM PST by Captain Jack Aubrey (There's not a moment to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: IrishBrigade
perhaps...but those same people had no inalienable right to seize and occupy Federal property by force, after having seceded, and then expect no retribution for it...

It ceased being Federal property when the state reassumed it's powers previously relinquished to the Federal Government.

Lincoln himself said that the land belongs to the people who live on it.

Lincoln created the necessity of attacking the fort by sending a fleet of warships to attack the confederates around it. Had Lincoln not sent those warships with their orders to use force, the confederates would not have attacked the fort.

General Beauregard even sent notice to Major Anderson that if he would refrain from using the guns of the fort to attack them when those warships arrived, he would make no move against the fort.

Anderson replied that if he fired at those ships, the fort would attack his forces. This answer made it impossible to leave the fort alone, or else Beauregard would have had to face cannon fire from two fronts simultaneously.

93 posted on 11/20/2018 9:37:09 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Right to leave.


94 posted on 11/20/2018 9:38:36 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Show me the order by Lincoln where he directed the ships use their cannon to attack the confederates around Fort Sumter.


95 posted on 11/20/2018 9:39:13 AM PST by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
The courts would do what Lincoln said, especially after he issued an arrest warrant for Chief Justice Tanney.

And no, I don't want to hear your denials of it. I've found adequate proof that this claim is true, and i've posted it for you in the past. You just refuse to accept that this really happened, because it is not justifiable under the claim one is defending the constitution.

96 posted on 11/20/2018 9:40:38 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

One would have thought that the Southern States would have applauded this as a principal of “States Rights”


97 posted on 11/20/2018 9:40:49 AM PST by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
Not when the states reassumed their powers previously granted to the Federal government. Besides, they paid for it, and the rest of the Union didn't.
98 posted on 11/20/2018 9:42:07 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bull Snipe
All of it. The sovereign state of South Carolina ceded the land Fort Sumter was built on to the United States Government in perpetuity.

Imminent Domain. Once the state reassumed it's former powers, it could once again reclaim it's property for it's own public interest.

99 posted on 11/20/2018 9:44:45 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Bull Snipe
So the Southern States withdrew from the Union for absolutely no concrete reason

They didn't need a reason. When one has a right to do something, one does not have to explain why one wishes to do it. A right allows one to do it without explaining why.

100 posted on 11/20/2018 9:46:11 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 241-252 next last

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.

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