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

To: FLT-bird
Nah. You post PC Revisionist lies and BS.

Speech of Jefferson Davis before the Mississippi Legislature, Nov. 16, 1858

The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States

Repeat snipped.

This was 2 years before.

That's right. He spelled it out in advance.

Repeat snipped.

Umm Virginia's is the secession ordnance and does not list causes. Its obvious you have never read it.

As I said, I'll let the readers decide. If anyone else needs me to spell it out I will, but I'm not going to waste any more effort trying to get you to see what is in front of you.

In English please.

If anyone else failed to understand that, they can say so and I'll explain it.

The Corwin Amendment demonstrated quite clearly that the North was perfectly happy to protect slavery where it existed - as Lincoln and many other Republicans said they would.

The states had the opportunity to ratify it and they didn't. It was nothing.

It also showed that the original 7 seceding states were not concerned over the protection of slavery - which was not threatened in the US anyway.

Both JD and the declarations of secession said it was.

Repeat snipped.

THEY didn't. The African slave traders were not their proxies - they were their business partners.

They committed the acts of war that captured those humans. The Confederacy paid them to do it. You can cover it with nice terms like "business partners", but they paid the traders to commit acts of war against those tribes.

And before you run back to "but the North had slaves too and there were crooked politicians who looked the other way while it happened", I know that. Lincoln had to deal with them too.

The North only "refused" to ratify the Corwin Amendment because the original 7 seceding states turned it down.

They refused to ratify it for the same reason they chose to ratify abolition.

And of course the slave holding states turned it down. They knew it wasn't going to be ratified. Even if you were right about the causes, why would they accept nothing.

You keep trying to make the Hitler/Nazi analogy.

Only to make a point, which is that Hitler lied about Germany's intentions and made his actions legal. You don't have an answer for that so you keep falling back to the "but the Confederacy wasn't as bad as Hitler" strawman.

The rest was repeat so I snipped it.

703 posted on 12/24/2021 2:41:20 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Will whoever keeps asking if this country can get any more insane please stop?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 700 | View Replies ]


To: TwelveOfTwenty
blah blah blah the same crap I've posted 100 times which does not show what I claim it shows.

Nothing more needs be said.

That's right. He spelled it out in advance.

No he didn't. It had not even happened.

As I said, I'll let the readers decide. If anyone else needs me to spell it out I will, but I'm not going to waste any more effort trying to get you to see what is in front of you.

what's in front of me is a secession ordnance for Virginia that does not list causes. Its obvious you've never read it.

If anyone else failed to understand that, they can say so and I'll explain it.

I'll take that as proof you cannot express yourself in plain English.

The states had the opportunity to ratify it and they didn't. It was nothing.

They didn't ratify it because the original 7 seceding states turned it down. It was irrefutable proof that neither side was fighting over slavery.

Both JD and the declarations of secession said it was.

The Republicans, Lincoln and the US Congress said it wasn't. To prove that it wasn't they offered express protection of slavery effectively forever by constitutional amendment.

They committed the acts of war that captured those humans. The Confederacy paid them to do it. You can cover it with nice terms like "business partners", but they paid the traders to commit acts of war against those tribes.

You don't have the first clue what you're talking about. They did not commit acts of war. Those tribes were not sovereign and SOLD THEM the slaves in the first place. Secondly, the Confederacy didn't pay slave traders. Importing slaves was made illegal in the Confederate Constitution. You're just spewing gibberish as usual.

And before you run back to "but the North had slaves too and there were crooked politicians who looked the other way while it happened", I know that. Lincoln had to deal with them too.

It went on for 50 years after the sunset clause for importing slaves in the US Constitution expired. This was overwhelmingly before Lincoln came to office. Learn some actual history for a change.

They refused to ratify it for the same reason they chose to ratify abolition.

No they didn't. They refused to ratify it because it FAILED to draw the original 7 seceding states back in.

And of course the slave holding states turned it down. They knew it wasn't going to be ratified. Even if you were right about the causes, why would they accept nothing.

They "knew" no such thing. Had that really addressed their concern, they could have simply said they would be happy to come back in and ratify it when enough Northern states had ratified it to ensure its passage. Instead they turned it down flat. What they were really interested in was self determination for reasons of taxation and trade - not protection of slavery which was not threatened anyway.

Only to make a point, which is that Hitler lied about Germany's intentions and made his actions legal. You don't have an answer for that so you keep falling back to the "but the Confederacy wasn't as bad as Hitler" strawman.

The analogy is lazy, stupid and a failure. Neither the CSA nor the USA were ever remotely comparable to Hitler or Nazi Germany.

704 posted on 12/25/2021 4:13:59 AM PST by FLT-bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 703 | 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