KrisKrinkle: "Where did that happen? I just read the DOI, albeit quickly, and didn’t see the word 'slave' or 'slavery'."
Please see my post #263 above.
The word "slavery" or any variation of it is certainly not in the Declaration of Independence.
What is there are about 35 different complaints, of which one mentions "domestic insurrections" and that is the hanger on which our jeffersondem places his hat.
But "domestic insurrections" in 1777 could refer to almost anything, including Dunmore's proclamation of 1775, rumors of slave revolts or any other uprising against local authorities such as the burning of Norfolk in January 1776.
That had nothing to do with either slaves or Indians.
So jeffersondem's claim that the Declaration of Independence has something, anything, specific to do with protecting slavey is simply bogus.
Indeed, Thomas Jefferson's true feelings on the subject can be found in the one item his fellow slave-holders forced him to delete: it accuses the King of forcing slavery on the colonies and of refusing to let them abolish it.
In other words, according to you, the intent of the charges against the King found in Declaration of Independence are unknown and unknowable.
Jefferson writes, “To prove this (history of repeated injuries and usurpations) let Facts be submitted to a candid World.
Jefferson writes, “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good.”
And you say, what Laws? And what public Good? “That could refer to almost anything!”
Jefferson writes, “He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing Importance . . .”
And you say, what Governors? What Laws of Importance. “That could refer to almost anything!”
Jefferson writes, “He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harrass our People . . .”
And you say, What new offices? What Swarms of Officers? “That could refer to almost anything!”
You would have members of this board believe that Huntington, Sherman, Williams and Wolcott of Connecticut; McKean, Read and Rodney of Delaware; Gwinnett, Hall and Walton of Georgia; and so forth and so on throughout the roll call signed off on the DOI but they had no idea what “excited domestic insurrections” meant?
You have renounced reason but don't get me wrong; I'm not asking you to change. My biggest fear is someday I'll run up against an apologist for the north that knows what he is talking about and confronts me with facts forcing a change in world view.