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

To: MamaTexan
When I see opinions posted that so adamantly defend Lincoln and his administration's effort to change a slave's social position from property to person, I can't help but wonder if those same posters also defend the current administration's efforts to change a denizens social position from illegal to citizen. Then again, some folks will never even see the parallel between the two.

The difference is that the slaves in Lincoln's time were brought to this country against their will, AS property, and were bartered and/or sold as if they were nothing more than merchandise. That is the sad historical fact that is fortunately no longer a part of our culture.

In the case of illegal immigrants, they have entered the country ILLEGALLY, of their own volition, and nobody put chains on them and forced them to sail across an ocean to become the property of someone in America.

As I see it, the two situations have absolutely nothing in common with each other.
1,068 posted on 05/29/2007 5:34:10 AM PDT by mkjessup (Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1067 | View Replies ]


To: mkjessup
As I see it, the two situations have absolutely nothing in common with each other.

Of course you don't....unless you're aware of the fact that originally, it was a State who decided whether a denizen deserved citizenship, not the federal government.

The war stripped that power from the States under the auspices of freeing the slaves, yet everyone today screams 'no amnesty' and gets upset because the federal government exercises a power that the Union helped them obtain.

Guess you have to file it under "Unintended consequences".

1,072 posted on 05/29/2007 5:47:30 AM PDT by MamaTexan (Government cannot make a law contrary to the law that made the government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1068 | View Replies ]

To: mkjessup
As I see it, the two situations have absolutely nothing in common with each other.

They have much in common. In both cases, you have large, economic concerns which have based their business model on cheap, easily exploited and acquired labor. In both cases, those concerns are willing to go to huge lengths to maintain that model in the face of evolving moral and legal standards, to the detriment of the local economy. Another iteration of the same thing was the wage slave/company town model of the coal mines.

1,099 posted on 05/29/2007 7:13:57 AM PDT by LexBaird (PR releases are the Chinese dog food of political square meals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1068 | View Replies ]

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