Posted on 03/10/2019 7:34:32 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
“In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil in any country.” — Robert E. Lee 1856
Could Gen. Robert E.l Lee’s sentiments deter the “tear down those monuments” crowd?
Probably not.
Given their current success in removing monuments to Confederate generals, ignorant politicians and those whose hobby is going through life seeking to be offended, soon will run out of things to be offended by. Why not broaden the list of "offensive" symbols to include slave owners George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and a host of other founders?
Here in Texas you could add slave owning Texas heroes such as Sam Houston, Jim Bowie and William Travis.
Should we banish from public view all monuments to past historical figures who supported white supremacy, advocated secession or made racist comments?
Consider Abraham Lincoln. In addition to the Lincoln monument in the nation’s capital, there’s probably not a major city in the country without a school, street or park named after Lincoln (Abilene once had Lincoln Middle School).
What do Lincoln's own words tell us about “Honest Abe”, "the Great Emancipator?"
During one of the famous 1858 debates with Sen. Stephen Douglas, Lincoln explained to the crowd: “I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races . . . I am not now nor have ever been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people . . . there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
Lincoln's prejudices weren’t limited to blacks.
During another debate with Douglas, Lincoln opined: “I understand that the people of Mexico are most decidedly a race of mongrels . . . there’s not one person there out of eight who is pure white”.
In Lincoln's 1861 inaugural address, he endorsed a constitutional amendment, known as the Corwin Amendment, which would forever protect slavery where it existed, telling the audience: “I have no objection to its (Corwin Amendment) being made express and irrevocable”. Lincoln's goal was to save the Union, writing to abolitionist Horace Greeley: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it”.
Virtually all white men of that time were white supremacists. Lincoln was no exception, and his comments belie his reputation.
Was Lincoln opposed to secession?
Consider his remarks he made in Congress on January 12, 1848: “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one which suits them better. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much territory as they inhabit.” This is exactly what the seceding states did in 1861.
Another discomforting fact for today’s advocates of political correctness: In 2011 I sponsored a commemorative license plate for Buffalo soldiers, iconic black U.S. cavalrymen who served on the frontier. Couldn’t today's Native Americans claim buffalo soldiers participated in a genocidal war against an entire race of people - the American Plains Indians – enslaving them on reservations?
If we’re going to measure Confederates of 150 years ago by today’s standards, shouldn’t we do the same with Lincoln?
Today, it's Confederates. Who’s next? Buffalo soldiers? Our nation’s founders? Our Texas heroes? The possibilities are limitless.
Jerry Patterson is a former Texas land commissioner, state senator and retired Marine Vietnam veteran.
Quit evading the question. What point were you trying to make with pointing out how many Revolutionary war founding fathers were slave owners?
The key point which distinguishes our Founders in 1776 from slaveholders in, say, 1860 is that in 1776 virtually all recognized slavery as an evil imposed by the Brits which should be gradually abolished.
By 1787 slavery was being abolished, including by Southern leaders like Thomas Jefferson (i.e., Northwest Territories).
But by 1860 Democrats denied that slavery was anything but virtuous and claimed it should never be infringed, even in US territories.
Delaware was a Southern state, though one of the two non-slaveholding Southern delegates in 1787 was a Quaker living in Delaware.
jeffersondem: "And Pennsylvania?
Was it counted as a northern state in your totals?"
Pennsylvania was a Northern state and one of the first to begin abolition, in 1780.
You’re the one stupidly hurling playground insults because you have no facts to back up your dogma.
We’ve gone down this road hundreds if not thousands of times before. I am not going to waste my time with your responding to respond posts in which you endlessly spew your ignorant and false PC Revisionist drivel.
4th attempt.
It was 1 year after the EP. So, not that long, no matter how you try to spin it.
Many others said that they were fighting for slavery.
and many others said they were not.Just out of curiosity where, under the Confederate Constitution, did Davis get the power to end slavery in the Confederacy?
The treaty making power. Obviously he and the Confederate Congress must have thought they had that power.
Bullsh*t seldom does.
Au Contraire. Bullshit is all PC Revisionists traffic in.
We’ve gone down this road hundreds if not thousands of times before. I am not going to waste my time with your responding to respond posts in which you endlessly spew your ignorant and false PC Revisionist drivel.
5th attempt.
Its hilarious how obsessed you are.
Treaty making power???? That gives him the right to ignore his own constitution?
Obviously he and the Confederate Congress must have thought they had that power.
OK, let's try this again. Under the Confederate Constitution where did the president have the power to end slavery and overturn all the clauses that specifically protected it? It's right there is Article I, Section 9: "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Article IV guarantees the right to, "...transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired." What gave Davis the power to overrule those clauses? Can't you answer that simple question?
Au Contraire. Bullshit is all PC Revisionists traffic in.
Yes, well answer my very simple questions and we'll see.
It took you two days to spit that out? Go back to sleep you dolt.
You're wrestling with an imbecile so you'll need to type slower.
You have not asked a question; you have asked multiple questions including, “You sure your at the right website?” [sic]
I thought these were schoolyard taunts. If you say they are not rhetorical, I will answer.
No, MLK statues, even the unfinished one on the Mall, are next
“Pennsylvania was a Northern state and one of the first to begin abolition, in 1780.”
I am glad we can both agree that Pennsylvania was - and still is - a northern state.
Some seasons back someone on this site attempted to convince everyone that Pennsylvania was not a northern state. “Pennsylvania is a Keystone State! A Keystone State! It is not a northern or southern state. It is a Keystone State!” he posted over, and over, and over again.
Nice person though.
They took down McKinley and he was a Yankee general
No spin, the Confederacy was loosing the war. Davis knew that, his offer of negotiate emancipation for European diplomatic recognition was simply a last ditch desperate effort to try and save a cause that was already lost. Never mind that it would have taken an amendment to the Confederate Constitution to accomplish that emancipation.
no spin, to be accurate 1 year and 11 months.
Unlike you, I have a life.
You say last ditch and desperate blah blah blah. They were still very much in the war. Obviously neither Davis nor the Confederate Congress believed it would have taken a constitutional amendment to the Confederate Constitution to agree to a treaty that would have abolished slavery. Treaties have the force of constitutional law.
Treaty making power???? That gives him the right to ignore his own constitution?
Its not ignoring his own constitution. Treaties have the force of constitutional law.
OK, let's try this again. Under the Confederate Constitution where did the president have the power to end slavery and overturn all the clauses that specifically protected it? It's right there is Article I, Section 9: "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Article IV guarantees the right to, "...transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired." What gave Davis the power to overrule those clauses? Can't you answer that simple question?
The treaty making power. Let me ask you: if this were just some scheme of Davis' that nobody else thought he had any authority to do or that would have required a constitutional amendment to do.....why did the Confederate Congress authorize it? Surely they would have pointed out this argument too if it were valid wouldn't they have?
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.