Posted on 05/22/2015 6:12:39 PM PDT by robowombat
SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS TO REPLACE FLAGS AT UNION SPRINGS
Gary Carlyle, Commander of the Alabama Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, announced today that at 10 a.m. on Saturday morning, May 23rd, the SCV will replace the memorial flags which were recently removed from a Confederate cemetery in Union Springs, Alabama by an individual in that town.
In a statement, Carlyle said that he wished to thank Mayor Saint T. Thomas, Jr. and the City Council of Union Springs for working together with the Sons of Confederate Veterans on the restoration project.
"The Mayor and the Council have been very understanding and co-operative with us," said Carlyle. "He has been very helpful in making this happen."
Ben Jones, Chief of Heritage Operations for the 30,000 member Sons of Confederate Veterans, an international organization of men who are directly descended from those who fought for the Confederacy, praised the Mayor for "taking a clear stance for healing and reconciliation."
"The removal of these flags from the graves of our ancestors was a terribly wrong-headed, provocative and divisive action," said Jones. "No amount of political sanctimony can excuse it. Our membership asks that this ceremony on Saturday will be given the respect and reverence it deserves by all. We are grateful for the leadership of Mayor Thomas during this time, and we are hopeful that the event will take place in an atmosphere of reflection and genuine understanding. "
More pictures here:
http://historyofmassachusetts.org/where-did-the-shot-heard-round-the-world-happen/
http://www.a-sense-of-place.com/2012/02/concord-ma-in-photos.html/concord-ma-in-photos6
Heritage.org suggests that you have it backwards...
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/65/export-taxation-clause
Good. I hope they are armed, locked and loaded.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3me6ifiaNY
Turn it up !
My great grandpa fought at Shiloh and was later surrendered at Vicksburg . I spend not a minute , nor a breathe ,regretting my Southron heritage . My biggest regret is that this valorous spirit has thus far not yet risen again .
It’s time
Deo Vindice SCV
Thanks.
I am not teaching a class anymore, so just go back and look at the amendments of the commerce clause prior to 1830 and you will have your answer.
If you would read some history you would learn that there were thousands of blacks who owned slaves in this country. There were tens of thousands of whites who owned no slaves.
The north invaded the south because of power. They didn’t do it over slavery. They owned slaves in the north.
Also Lincoln was a gay man who had numerous affairs of varying lengths with among others his law partner.
You think I jest. This stuff is all over the net and the queer brigade are pushing it hard.
American history is about to get another bit of Orwellian remake to further destroy any common basis of narrative and heroes.
I hope that you jest. Anyone who buys that garbage has to look up to the the bottom side of moron.
Thanks for the link, really.
I’ve spent my entire life living just south of the Mason-Dixon line. Just south enough in the Washington DC suburbs that I never considered myself a “southerner”.
I am a suburbanite that drove daily on the Lee-Jackson hwy, Lee hwy, Jefferson Davis hwy, Braddock rd to name a few. I wanted to be a “northerner” but was forced to consider why/who are these roads named after?
What was and how is it that they have such a legacy ?
I had to know.
At the end of the day?
It all comes down to, “Leave me the F88k alone”.
There was an article in the NYT (where else) about some evil old fag who has a book published on this. It was picked up by the Times-Picayune and run as the featured book of the week review. I will try and find it and post a stub here. This crap is starting to stir. Believe me it is.
If you believe that the CW was fought over slavery, that just proves that you were indoctrinated in the government controlled public school system and it worked.
That might be an interesting exploration but sort of irrelevant since the Commerce Clause is Section 8, not Section 9.
Oh, I completely agree that there are imbeciles who believe such idiotic crap - there have been several FReepers who have posted it over the years. I’m just glad that you’re not one of them ;’)
The material prosperity of the North was greatly dependent on the Federal Government; that of the South not at all. In the first years of the Republic, the navigating, commercial and manufacturing interests of the North, began to seek profit and aggrandizement at the expense of the agricultural interests. Even the owners of fishing smacks, sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business, which yet continue — and half a million of dollars are now paid them annually out of the Treasury.
The navigating interests begged for protection against foreign ship builders, and against competition in the coasting trade; Congress granted both requests, and by prohibitory acts, gave an absolute monopoly of this business to each of their interests, which they enjoy without diminution to this day. Not content with these great and unjust advantages, they have sought to throw the legitimate burthens of their business as much as possible upon the public; they have succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the maintenance of their seamen, upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above two millions annually for the support of these objects.
These interests in connection with the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to mail steamers, and the reduction of postage, in relieving their business from the payment of about seven millions of dollars annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury, under the name of postal deficiency.
The manufacturing interest entered into the same struggle early, and has clamored steadily for Government bounties and special favors. This interest was confined mainly to the Eastern and Middle non-slaveholding States. Wielding these great States, it held great power and influence, and its demands were in full proportion to its power. The manufacturers and miners wisely based their demands upon special facts and reasons, rather than upon general principles, and thereby mollified much of the opposition of the opposing interest. They pleaded in their favor, the infancy of their business in this country,the scarcity of labor and capital, the hostile legislation of other countries towards them, the great necessity of their fabrics in the time of war, and the necessity of high duties to pay the debt incurred in our war for independence; these reasons prevailed, and they received for many years enormous bounties by the general acquiescence of the whole country.
But when these reasons ceased, they were no less clamorous for government protection; but their clamors were less heeded, — the country had put the principle of protection upon trial, and condemned it. After having enjoyed protection to the extent of from fifteen to two hundred per cent, upon their entire business, for above thirty years, the Act of 1846 was passed. It avoided sudden change, but the principle was settled, and free-trade, low duties, and economy in public expenditures was the verdict of the American people.
The South, and the Northwestern States sustained this policy. There was but small hope of its reversal, — upon the direct issue, none at all. All these classes saw this, and felt it, and cast about for new allies. The anti-slavery sentiment of the North offered the best chance for success. An anti-slavery party must necessarily look to the North alone for support; but a united North was now strong enough to control the government in all of its departments, and a sectional party was therefore determined upon.
Time, and issues upon slavery were necessary to its completion and final triumph. The feeling of anti-slavery, which it was well known was very general among the people of the North, had been long dormant or passive, — it needed only a question to arouse it into aggressive activity. This question was before us: we had acquired a large territory by successful war with Mexico; Congress had to govern it, how — in relation to slavery — was the question, then demanding solution. This state of facts gave form and shape to the anti-slavery sentiment throughout the North, and the conflict began.
Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation, and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and firmness by the South. We had shed our blood and paid our money for its acquisition; we demanded a division of it, on the line of the Missouri restriction, or an equal participation in the whole of it. These propositions were refused, the agitation became general, and the public danger great. The case of the South was impregnable. The price of the acquisition was the blood and treasure of both sections — of all; and therefore it belonged to all, upon the principles of equity and justice.
Interesting propaganda - where did you find it (and why did you post it to me?)?
I do know my history.
The Civil War was not fought over “just”, slavery.
But it was a major major factor.
The confederacy could have won the war, but they weren’t willing to give up their white and black slaves.
I’m not embarrassed either. You should be for supporting shortsighted lunatics that would rather be able to keep slaves, instead of giving America the freedom it deserved.
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.
