In that sense, so did Robert E. Lee. But simply opposing slavery as a practice does not equal politically supporting a government action to abolish it.
Your statement is not well supported in the record.
I will not at this time suggest that you are being disingenous. But to compare Lincoln's amd Lee's positions on slavery is a bit of a stretch. Lincoln repeatedly said that all men should be free-Lee said the best relationship between black and white was that of master and slave.
Too, you state that "simply opposing slavery as a practice does not equal politically supporting a government action to abolish it". Well, as my note put up just a few minutes ago shows, Lincoln wrote legislation in the late 1840's to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia.<>That is a governmental action. I do not think Robert E. Lee ever did as much. In fact, any opposition to slavery by Lee was just lip service. Lincoln took action --before the war.
It is simply incorrrect to say that Lincoln only adopted opposition to slavery as as war measure. The record simply will not support that.
Walt
"In that sense, so did Robert E. Lee. But simply opposing slavery as a practice does not equal politically supporting a government action to abolish it." - me
YOU:
Your statement is not well supported in the record.
Quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur.
I will not at this time suggest that you are being disingenous. But to compare Lincoln's amd Lee's positions on slavery is a bit of a stretch.
Who said I was comparing their position (as in their ENTIRE political position) on slavery? Certainly not me. I simply noted the historical fact that both men were personally _opposed_ to slavery after you stated that Lincoln personally _opposed_ slavery.
Lincoln repeatedly said that all men should be free
Lincoln also said to a group of blacks: "But, even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race...on this broad continent not a single man of your race is made equal of a single man of ours" - Lincoln, August 14, 1862
So again, what is your point?
Lee said the best relationship between black and white was that of master and slave.
Lee also said this: "There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. It is idle to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it is a greater evil to the white than to the colored race. While my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more deeply engaged for the former." (December, 1856)
So again I ask, what is your point?
Too, you state that "simply opposing slavery as a practice does not equal politically supporting a government action to abolish it". Well, as my note put up just a few minutes ago shows, Lincoln wrote legislation in the late 1840's to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia.
Sure he did, but he also used his inaugural address to endorse a constitutional amendment perpetuating it. Now tell me, in the scheme of things which do you think constitutes the bigger picture?
(a) a lowly 1 term representative writing a bill to abolish slavery in a single city of only a few square miles wide primarily for the purpose of casting off the image of slavery's presence in what was supposed to be the nation's capital to the world
or
(b) the president of the united states using his inaugural address to specifically and enthusiastically endorse a constitutional amendment that specifically perpetuates and protects the presence of slavery from any form of federal intervention in any state existing or future that wishes to employ the institution.
So again, you tell me. Which is it?
That is a governmental action. I do not think Robert E. Lee ever did as much.
I don't think Robert E. Lee ever used his inaugural address to call for an amendment to the constitution to protect and perpetuate slavery in any state that wanted it either. So again, what's your point?
In fact, any opposition to slavery by Lee was just lip service.
Was it? And, might I ask, do you have proof of this? If not, I again note quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur. Additionally, I note that Lee's most famous statement in opposition to slavery came in the form of a long personal letter from which I earlier quoted, not some public political speech. So who was he paying "lip service" to? Himself? Additionally, Lee was not a politician but a military officer and accordingly had much less of a need to pay "lip service" than does somebody trying to get votes.
Lincoln took action --before the war.
He sure did! He used his first public speech as president to endorse a constitutional amendment protecting slavery!
It is simply incorrrect to say that Lincoln only adopted opposition to slavery as as war measure.
Quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur.
The record simply will not support that.
Quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur.
He also said something else I found interesting...
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." - Lincoln, 8/17/1858. So much for BEFORE the war, but what about DURING the war?
"You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races." - Lincoln, 8/1862
Read it and weep, Walt, cause those are the written statements of Lincoln.
Lincoln's position towards blacks was nowhere near as moral, equality based, freedom oriented, or anti-slavery as you have repeatedly asserted it to be.
The record simply DOES support that, whether you like it or not.