In relation to debating the facts of the South's pro-slavery crowd you resort to typical Standism.
The more facts - the more Standisms.
Posted on 09/10/2005 4:46:12 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
My 546 ended, 'Abraham Lincoln was pro-slavery, as he supported a constitutional Amendment making slavery PERMANENT.'
The text of the Corwin Amendment did not indicate that it was permanent, Lincoln stated that in his inaugural speech:
understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.
The little 6 1/2 oz. bottles, almost ice-cold with crystals forming? On that we agree.
go read the 10th amendment & see if you find that the RIGHT to SECESSION was EVER given up by the states. the 10th talks about those POWERS CEDED to the central government. one of those ceded powers is NOT secession.
fwiw, i see you as BRAINIER than most of the other DY coven members.
free dixie,sw
If you are willingly ignoring numerous posts on the subject there it indicated a refusal to except basis historical facts of pro-Union Southerners fighting against the criminal enterprise referred to as the Confederacy.
"Yes, I would have worked to end slavery. I'm not pro-slavery, I'm pro-Constitution."
It's reversed logic to be promoting the pro-slavery 'Confederates' of 1861, and then stating you would have worked to end slavery(?)
The pro-slavery quotes I listed proves Davis, Stephens and the other top politicians and pro-Confederate newspapers triggered the Civil War to 'protect' their economic interests in Southern slavery.
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
They should have never stopped producing those for the general public. Overseas the little Coke bottles are still en vogue.
MR. SPIN, don't you get tired of everybody laughing AT you???
free dixie,sw
In relation to debating the facts of the South's pro-slavery crowd you resort to typical Standism.
The more facts - the more Standisms.
there is NO PRO-slavery crowd in FR & never has been. (are you too DUMB to know at least that much?)
could it be that Leeza is CORRECT & that you are "mentally challenged" (what USED to be called in less-PC times, RETARDED.)???
free dixie,sw
In other words he has no objection to an amendment which says explicitly what he already thinks ithe constitution says implicitly--that slavery is a state matter and not one for the Federal government.
No it doesn't.
face it, N-S, everyone here is on to your game. all you do is post PROPAGANDA that ATTEMPTS to cover-up the ABUSES & WAR CRIMES of the lincoln administration & blame EVERYTHING that ever went wrong since the beginning of time on the CSA.
And 75 percent of what you post are lies, and the rest just isn't true.
I think of the Confederacy as hundreds of thousands of Stand Waties led by a few thousand 4CJs.
Agreed. Just looking at an earlier portion of Patrick Henry's "Liberty or Death" speech would seem to reinforce that assertion.
"And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on." -Patrick Henry, March 23 1775.
That's a good question. Reading Article XIII of the AoC, I'd say they, and the other 12 states were still a part of the perpetual union of the AoC until all the states ratified the Constitution. But regardless of what was the rightful constitution between ratification # 9 and #13, the union was perpetual.
Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.
To be precise Stand, while I am a member of the coven I'm a scalawag and not a yankee.:)
I suspect Virginia would have rather not have had to share the name and as Washington deserves a state named after him, so does Lincoln.
The statement in question was "[p]lease you post any proof that Confederate administration advocated the wholesale slaughter of Americans in disagreement with them."
If Lincoln wanted to END slavery, he and the radical Republicans never would have allowed West Virginia to enter the union as a slave state.
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.