Sons of Confederate Veterans fight to get book in library

The State ^ | November 21, 2001 | (AP)

[aomagrat]

SUMMERVILLE (AP) (--) The Dorchester County Library Board is on the front lines of a fight to put a book refuting current history written about the Civil War on its shelves.

"The South Was Right!," written by Sons of Confederate Veterans members and brothers James Ronald Kennedy and Walter Donald Kennedy of Louisiana, states the Confederacy had the right to be a free nation and most of what is taught in this country is false and misleading.

A crowd of about 50 people, mostly members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in St. George and Moncks Corner, pleaded for the board to approve the book Tuesday night.

Library director Mickey Prim is reviewing the book and is expected to make a recommendation to the board in about two or three weeks.

St. George resident Laren Clark said she tried six months ago to donate the book the county library but was told the title was too inflammatory.

"There is no reason for this book to not be in the library," said St. George resident Charles Moorer.

But board chairman Jim Neil asked the group if upon approval, there would be any objection to it being placed at the Summerville branch instead of the main library in St. George because of a space shortage.

Several audience members offered to supply shelves.

[Cleburne]

Oh, come now you fellows. Just give people Harry Potter and tell them to go buy a car. Go watch Harry Potter. Go on a trip to some place, using an airplane. Move along...

[Non-Sequitur]

Shall we start back up on the Black Codes, Jim Crow laws and the penalties for teaching slaves to read, billbears? We've gone down that path before.

As far as I'm concerned let them put the book in the library. They can even put it in the non-fiction section for all I care. South Carolina schools are ranked, what, 46th in the nation? Either the people won't be able to read it or else by reading it they still won't be able to drive down the school rankings much

[Triple]

I especially loved the part where he had members of the Maryland legislature arrested, so they could not vote on secession.

NOT

[Aurelius]

BUMP

[Aurelius]

BUMP

[billbears]

You mean the 31 legislators? What paper would you like the direct quote out of? Or would you like their take of the federal troops that voted in the Maryland elections?

[Aurelius]

BUMP

[sheltonmac]

"...Slaveocracy..."

Your insistence on calling the South a "slaveocracy" is puzzling. You are obviously one of those Yankees who believe that the ownership of slaves is best left to those in government. You seem to have a problem with the private ownership of slaves, something clearly supported in the U.S. Constitution at the time, but have no problem with the government making slaves of its citizens. This new "slaveocracy" came about in 1865 with the Union victory.

You might also be interested in seeing what the Confederate Constitution had to say about slavery...

Article I, Section IX
1. The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.
2. Congress shall also have power to prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territory not belonging to, this Confederacy.

The U.S. Constitution was never that explicit on the issue of slavery until the ratification of the 13th Amendment.

[sheltonmac]

"The more enlightened members of the nation in the North refused to go along and pretend slavery was o.k."

Are you including among those "enlightened" states those that maintained slavery throughout the duration of the war? The slaveholding states that remained in the Union were Missouri, Deleware, Kentucky, and Maryland. Were they part of the "Slaveocracy"?

[Non-Sequitur]

Confederate Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 4: "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed. "

Confederate Constitution, Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1: "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired."

Confederate Constitution, Article IV, Section 3, Clause 3: "The Confederate States may acquire new territory...In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government..."

You're right. The U.S. Constitution was never that explicit on the issue of slavery. At least as far as protecting it went.

[stands2reason]

I betcha "Heather Has Two Mommies" is on their shelves. Librarians are typically first amendment freaks; I've never heard of any public library banning a book. Until now, that is.

[Citizen Kang]

Certainly I'd be interested in seeing what the Confederate Constitution had to say about slavery. Too bad you didn't see fit to post everything it had to say about slavery. How about the section from Article I you conveniently left out?

Article I, Section IX

4. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Seems to settle the whole slave issue once and for all. But just in case:

Article IV, Section II

1. The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

3. No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs; or to whom such service or labor may be due.

And just to resolve that whole issue of slaves in the territories (not that THAT had ANYTHING to do with secession):

Article IV, Section III

3. The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and...to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.

[warchild9]

I've generally found that people who rattle on about how Lincoln loved justice either suffer from television-induced ignorance or are Yankees who are envious of people who possess a culture to defend at all...or are traitors who cleave to the lies of the North. But, like Clinton, the man could talk. ...the Kid

[Non-Sequitur]

...are Yankees who are envious of people who possess a culture to defend at all...

And I've generally found that that those who proclaim that the south is the only area with culture and hospitality really have neither.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The U.S. constitution was explicit in stating that Congress could do nothing to stop "...Importation of such Persons..." i.e. slaves until 1808 because the Slaveocrats would have rather seen Independence fail rather than give up their victims.

It is hilarious to watch the Defenders of Slaveocracy flounder around trying to make the North look as bad as the heart of the Slaveocracy.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Having been born and raised in S. Arkansas it is clear to me that there is no southern culture worth the name. Poverty, racism and ignorance is not a culture. The only culture of any worth escaped from the South when the Bluesmen began to flee the cotton fields and the new slavery imposed after the War.

Grow up Kid and you might get a chance to discuss other people's ignorance. You might want to get an education as well. BTW there are other sources for Civil War history than "Birth of a Nation."

[justshutupandtakeit]

Slaveocratic power prevented the right thinking people of those states from seeing the light. But it either wasn't dumb enough or strong enough (probably the latter) to force them to join the attempt to destroy the greatest nation in the history of the world.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Well you have reached a new peak in stupidity. Do you have your chains on? Are there strips across your back from the overseers lash? Has your child been sold down the River to new masters? Has your wife been sold down the River? Did you have to work overtime coming up with that ridiculous comparison?

It is good to see the Defenders of Slaveocracy reduced to such idiotic comments since they point out the total vacuity of their arguments. Keep it up.

[justshutupandtakeit]

As bad as life for a black may have been in those states and as unfairly as they were treated, life and treatment were far worse in the Slaveocracy. Thus, they were desperate to escape so the Yankees could mistreat them.

Keep trying to make the North look as bad as the Slaveocracy it is really funny to watch the floundering around you do trying to find an argument which has a chance to stand up against a man who knows history and historical lies.

[justshutupandtakeit]

That was an excellent move and prevented the dumbassed Slaveocrats from committing treason. Treason was and is still illegal. Though it is only opinion that Maryland would have seceded.

Unfortunately he could not stop the other idiots from provoking a war which cost the lives of hundreds of thousands. War in defense of the ability of the Slaveocrats to live on the blood of their fellow humans like vampires.