Posted on 06/28/2022 6:10:13 AM PDT by artichokegrower
Last week, the Supreme Court eviscerated a woman’s right to abortion, undermined Miranda rights, expanded gun rights and allowed border patrol agents to operate with even further impunity. Today, it ruled that a former Washington state high school football coach can pray on the field immediately after games—regardless of the religious backgrounds of the students.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
That is an interesting piece of history I have not run across. Do you have sources for that? Yes only 9 were needed to ratify the Constitution, but what was their influence on the other states?
Terrorists who want to eliminate our Constitution.
They are as harmful as the Japanese who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.
As harmful as the 9-11 attackers.
Actually the constitution was written by Madison and his coterie. Not Jefferson. Jefferson wrote the declaration of independence.
Comparing the Constitution as it is now to how it was in the past is the way to evaluate progress. And one needs to have patience because there will be more progress in the future
Here's one about the Declaration: https://www.ushistory.org/declaration/lessonplan/slavery.html
Here's one about the Constitution: https://www.ushistory.org/us/15d.asp
I don't have time to look up more. But some good names to learn in the First Great Awakening are Henry Hosier (sometimes called Black Henry), Francis Asbury, John Wesley (who was influenced by the Moravians). Because they were part of the Holiness Movement (Protestants believing that being saved by grace doesn't free us from being called to change our lives and live it like we mean it) was abolition. How can we say we love our fellow man like Jesus said to when we treat some of our fellow men as slaves? To me Black Henry was amazing. The black slaves obviously liked hearing a fellow black man preach against slavery. But they got uncomfortable sometimes when Black Henry would tell them they too should live holy lives or a sinful life might persuade them to ditch Jesus and lose their salvation (obviously making the Calvinists mad too).
For the Second Great Awakening know Theodore Weld ("the most mugged man in America"), the Grimke sisters giving up a wealthy life of slave owners to be abolitionists (one of whom Weld married), and Harriet Beecher Stowe. Weld's book Bible Against Slavery got preachers across America against slavery and was instrumental in getting abolitionist messages from the north into the south around censoring post masters (because nobody dared interfere with ministers communicating with other ministers). If there's a single writing that you want to peg as the most important in building the abolitionist cause, it's that one. This was like a nerd-to-nerd argument against slavery. It details how chattel slavery in his day was worse even than slavery in the Old Testament because the Moses law gave slaves at least some rights. But don't forget his American Slavery As It Is (with help from the Grimke sisters) that was like a personal testimony type book (feel the plight of the slaves with real stories in newspapers of the day from the south, opening the eyes of northerners to how bad the slave experience was in the south). This fueled Stowe's desire to write Uncle Tom's Cabin (fictional, but still impactful).
Weld was physically attacked whenever he gave a speech "down south" -- to him that was in Pennsylvania and Ohio, he didn't dare go further south like Black Henry had done during the First Great Awakening. He formed the Abolitionist Society and they set up a building in Philadelphia across from Independence Hall. Haven't seen the building when you visited Philly? That's because the pro-slavery Dims destroyed the building in Antifa-like fashion right after Weld and his honey got married in it. But he lived to see the Civil War and the 13th Amendment ratified.
I've read in a couple of places that Catholic historians admit that the abolitionist movement was largely a Protestant thing because the Protestants were good at encouraging a personal relationship with God, making the abolitionist movement that went with it a more grassroots type movement than a formal leader movement.
The real goal is undermining support and respect for the Constitution to the point it can be discarded and replaced with a new form of government. One which is better structured to suit vision of an all omnipotent government perpetually under their control.
I respectfully disagree. It's way more than just the numerical states needed for ratification. Look up these glaring facts the founding fathers were facing:
1. Charleston, SC was the wealthiest city at the time. They had more clout than NYC does today.
2. During the Little Ice Age crop yields were hard to come by, especially up north. Basically, the north could barely feed itself, and needed the south as a more dependable backup plan for agriculture. And that's not even getting into cotton being a cash cow to fund a new nation.
3. Even with all 13 states breaking away from England they still faced the French Empire in the Louisiana Territory and the Spanish Empire in both Florida and to some extent west of the Louisiana Territory. (Modern day Mexico was controlled by Spain and their "northern frontier" was not just today's southwestern states of California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas, but even as far north as Colorado.) It was hard enough facing all of that as a new country as it was. How much worse if the most powerful country in the world, the English Empire, still had a foothold in Georgia and South Carolina?
4. The French Indian War had taught the founding fathers that the European empire nations will gladly stir up the indigenous tribes against the locals as a means of controlling the locals. It's worse than today's young white women rioting in the streets just because the Dim leaders tell them it would prove they're not racist. None were worse at this than the English -- again we don't want them in Georgia and South Carolina.
Hi.
I would attempt to school Candace McDuffie in regards to the U.S. Constitution, but that would be like casting pearls before swine. A no no.
5.56mm
See # 127 for the military/foreign policy implications of trying to form a new nation while Georgia and South Carolina stayed with the Brits.
“It’s way more than just the numerical states needed for ratification. Look up these glaring facts the founding fathers were facing . . .”
Still, the founders of the Constitution had decided they would form a nation with just nine states if necessary. That decision was made by the time Article VII was drafted.
The founders didn’t think in terms of needing 50 states to be successful; or even 10.
They said nine.
The Constitution was written and signed by SOME who were slave owners! The Northern states did not own slaves and the New England states were the larger portion of the signers. But not all slave owners were harsh with their slaves. Many were treated like family. One only has to look at the heart of a person, slave owner or not to know how they treat people. And one never hears about the black slave owners who were reportedly MUCh harsher with their slaves overall than many of the white slave owners. FACTS have no room in our society today. Who is pushing this? People who were never offspring of slaves! And they want those of us whose families never owned slaves to pay them reparations.
That's exactly what the founding fathers were facing. When they told the delegates from Georgia and South Carolina that only 9 states were needed to ratify the Declaration and later the Constitution, everybody in the room knew that Georgia and South Carolina had much more bargaining power than just 2/13ths of the votes.
“The Democrat Party was literally founded by slave owners”
The two founders were Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren.
Would you like to tell us how many slaves Van Buren owned?
Excellent letter!
Candace, let me enlighten you on a fewf things.
In 1787, these same slaveowners banned slavery forever in the Northwest Territory—Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
In the Constitution itself they allowed the banning of future slave imports after a period of twenty years. Congress approved the ban as soon as the 20 years were up.
And in the misunderstood 3/5 compromise, deliberately limited the representation of slaves states in the House.
So it looks to me, that the authors of the Constitution were well aware of the problems inherent with slavery and did their best to encourage its natural and non-violent death. It’s a shame it didn’t work out that way and it took a war largely fought by white people to free your ancestors.
because ironically the constitution guarantees the freedom of all, or do you think something is missing?
What a stupid and extremely ignorant statement.
What was normal then is not normal now. Judging people in the past by today’s standards is the ultimate in stupidity.
This trick is part of the demoncrat's stock in trade and one conservatives are almost guaranteed to fall for:
"Candidate XYZ" has moral flaws and is therefore unfit to govern."Meanwhile the demoncrats wear their moral turpitude like a badge of honor.
By increasing the circulation of this argument you're only helping them spread the slime. Don't be "that guy."
Candice baby, the Constitution had nothing whatever to do with slavery, and even today in almost half of the world’s countries, there is no criminal law penalizing either slavery or the slave trade. In fact, there are currently 94 countries where one cannot be prosecuted or punished in a criminal court for enslaving another human being. So just be appreciative of the fact you live in a country where there is no slavery!
Terrorists who want to eliminate our Constitution.
They are as harmful as the Japanese who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.
As harmful as the 9-11 attackers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
Well since they’ve already captured the Democrat Party and weaponized our Federal government I believe they are even MORE harmful than the Japanese or the 9-11 attackers.
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.