“For your assertion to be true, we would have to assume that the Founders, while not perhaps hypocrites, were definitely either stupid or liars.”
Nonsense. We simply have to know that that was the truth of the times they lived in. You are obviously very ignorant about the beliefs of 17th and 18th century Europeans...and by extension, English colonials. You can look it up yourself, but here’s one example:
As the slave trade developed, Europeans created a racist ideology which could be used to justify the trade. Africans were thought to be sub-human, uncivilized, and inferior to Europeans in every way. And as they were ‘not one of us’, they could be bought and sold. The development of racism is linked to the slave trade. The slave trade could not have continued without this ideology to justify it. Racism cannot be ignored in any study of the slave trade.
Get it? Our founders lived in a culture that considered blacks to be subhuman. So, in their minds, saying that “all men are created equal” while sanctioning slavery in ALL 13 colonies/states, was not hypocritical. Nor were they stupid or liars. They simply did not believe blacks were “men” in the same way that white people were. If you cannot grasp this simple, well-documented truth there is no need for further discussion.
“The Founders were unrivaled in their ability to use language, yet you assume they couldn’t insert the simple adjective needed to make their actual point clear.”
I assume nothing of the sort. See above. You are simply unable to comprehend the fact that most people of that time did not consider blacks to be “men” in the same sense they considered themselves to be men. To them, adding “white” would have been both unnecessary and redundant.
“This whole issue of what the DOI meant was NOT settled in men’s minds in 1860. It was argued and fought over throughout the 1850s.”
More nonsense. There was no disputing what was in the DOI. The argument was over what was — or was not — in the Constitution.
“Lincoln in one of the Douglas debates expressed well my view on the issue. You and Stephens of course disagree.”
By this point you should understand that nothing you have said has been correct, including this statement.
Keep in mind that many of our Founding Fathers” (including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison) were slave owners. For me to accept your points we both would have to believe that they were either hypocrites, liars, or stupid (according to you), OR they were victims of the beliefs of their time, in this case, the belief that blacks were subhuman.
My explanation — is based on facts — makes perfect sense. Your arguments, based on nonsense, do not.
Sorry, Lee, but the simple, well-documented truth is that most if not all Founders, including Washington, Jefferson and Madison, well understood that slaves were not simply live-stock.
Indeed, at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, slave-holders wanted to count their slaves as "fully human" for purposes of census and representation, equivalent to fully-human women and children.
But northerners scoffed that if Southerners could count all their slave "property", then Northerners should count their cattle too!
Finally, Southerners reluctantly agreed to only count slaves as "three-fifths human" -- not because they wanted it, but because that was the most Northerners would agree to.
As Sherman Logan and others point out, most Southern Founders in 1787 understood that slavery was wrong, and could be restricted.
So they agreed to outlaw the international slave-trade, and later banned slavery in the new "Northwest Territories".
Washington freed his own slaves in his will, and Jefferson even proposed a plan for the Federal Government to purchase freedom for slaves.
Jefferson's plan went nowhere, because slave-owners wanted no part of it, but Jefferson at least understood the moral problem with slavery.
However, by 1860 most slave-holders believed slavery was not only necessary to their economic well-being, but also morally justifiable and ethically good.
Indeed, they considered slavery such a good thing, they would tolerate no discussions of subjects like abolition or even lesser restrictions on their "peculiar institution".
Hence secession on Lincoln's election.
Lee'sGhost to Sherman Logan: "My explanation — is based on facts — makes perfect sense.
Your arguments, based on nonsense, do not."
Sorry, Lee, but you have it exactly backwards.
;-)