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

Skip to comments.

Video Implies Lincoln Would Have Supported Liberal Causes
CNSNEWS.com ^ | 2/04/03 | Marc Morano

Posted on 02/04/2003 3:42:54 AM PST by kattracks

Washington (CNSNews.com) - A video presented at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington appears to suggest that former President Abraham Lincoln would have supported modern-day, left-of-center political causes such as homosexual rights, abortion rights and the modern feminist agenda.

One tourist from Wisconsin, who viewed the video in the memorial's Lincoln Legacy Room, called it "awful" and said the "political correctness of it is beyond words." Other visitors to the memorial told CNSNews.com they believe the video clearly implies that Lincoln would have supported left-wing political causes.

A National Park Service spokesman told CNSNews.com he was "reluctant" to comment on the Lincoln video because the whole issue had the "potential to be quite controversial."

The video features an actor who sounds like Lincoln speaking about the Civil War and slavery. He then leads into clips of Martin Luther King's 1963 March on Washington.

About halfway through the approximately eight-minute video, footage of modern-day marchers is shown over "Lincoln's" booming voice as patriotic music and songs associated with the civil rights movement play.

At this point, the video shows snippets from modern-day marches. A sign reading, "The Lord is my Shepard and Knows I am Gay" kicks off a series of visuals featuring left-wing social causes, while "Lincoln's voice" and patriotic music blare.

The other visuals include signs reading "Gay & Lesbian Sexual Rights," "Council of Churches Lesbian Rights," "National Organization for Woman" (NOW), "Reagan's Wrongs Equal Woman's Rights," "ERA Yes," "Ratify the Era," "I had an illegal abortion in 1967 - Never Again," "Keep Abortion Legal," "I am pro-choice America," a Vietnam-era video clip of a woman asking: "President. Nixon where are our men?" and a sign reading, "Who will Decide NARAL (National Abortion Rights & Reproductive Action League).

The video features the theme song of the civil rights movement, "We Shall Overcome," and continues with visual display of liberal causes, including signs reading "In Opposition to King Richard [Nixon]," "U.S. out Now," "Equal Opportunity for All," "Peace," "Hell No We Won't Go," "No More Lies, Sign the Treaty Now Coalition," and marchers chanting U.S. Out Now" (crowd chanting).

The video also features an excerpt from a Martin Luther King speech and then progresses into a banner reading "Pass the Brady [Gun Control] Bill Now." Pro-life demonstrators appear in the video once, in a brief clip where they are shown clashing with abortion rights activists. No other political causes that could be considered right-of-center appear in the video.

'Beyond Words'


CNSNews.com asked several of the tourists visiting the memorial what they thought of the video and whether they believed it implied Lincoln would support modern-day causes such as homosexual rights and abortion rights.

"I liked it... I think [Lincoln] would have [supported homosexual and abortion rights] because that's how Lincoln was; he was very supportive of the people. He didn't care who you are and what you are, he loved everybody," said Elizabeth Baksi, a high school student from Houma, La., after viewing the video.

Darre Klain of Baltimore, Md., also agreed that Lincoln would have supported today's liberal political causes as implied in the video.

[Lincoln] seemed like a very progressive, forward-thinking man, ahead of his time," Klain said.

But Paul Meisius of Sheboygan, Wis., rejected the video's message as he interpreted it, and he chastised the National Park Service for showcasing it.

"That's awful," Meisius said as he finished watching the video. "The political correctness of it is beyond words. I don't think that's proper. They are giving themselves credit to be able to say whatever they want about Lincoln's political views," Meisius told CNSNews.com.

"Our national monuments are being stripped of their true heritage. They are being uprooted and taken and changed. It's an atrocity that they are rewriting history in the sense that these people have political agendas," Meisius said.

Meisius, who was visiting Washington, D.C., with his wife and five children, believes the video is an attack by revisionist historians.

"The wrongness and incorrectness of this -- this stripping of the true essential biblical aspects of our foundation - are being replaced by political correctness," he said.

Angela Brewer, a program instructor for the Close Up Foundation, a citizenship education organization, denied the Lincoln video implied the former president would have supported modern-day, left-wing social causes.

"[The Lincoln Memorial] has frequently has been used as a backdrop for groups that seem to me to be liberal. I don't know that there is a particular purpose behind [the video]," Brewer said.

Gary Perkins, who coordinates exhibits at the Sweetwater Historical Museum in Green River, Wyo., has written about the difficulty our national museums face when presenting historical materials. Perkins believes that the National Park Service may be guilty of historical overreach with the video in question.

"We do not know what Abraham Lincoln thought of gay rights. We have no clue, he never talked about it," Perkins said after hearing CNSNews.com's description of the Lincoln Memorial video.

"We can't really infer he supported gay rights," Perkins added.

'Quite Controversial'


Bill Line, a spokesman for the National Park Service's National Capital Region, told CNSNews.com that the Discovery Channel produced the video for the Lincoln Memorial.

Asked if the video intentionally makes it appear as though Lincoln would have supported homosexual rights, abortion rights and feminist causes, Line was unequivocal in his initial answer.

"I have seen the video, and I don't know how you can contrive that out of it," Line said.

However, after specific examples of "liberal causes" were pointed out to him, Line backed away from his previous comment.

"I am reluctant, quite frankly, to say much to you because I don't know the whole other premise that you are coming from or the background or the fuller context that the story is being written in, and it has potential to be quite controversial," Line explained.

Finally, Line announced he needed to see the video again before he would have any official comment.

"It's been a while since I reviewed the videotape. Before I can adequately comment and give to you something you can use in your story, I need to go and review that videotape myself," Line said.

As of press time, Line had not contacted CNSNews.com with further comment on the video.

'Left-wing gestapo'


Cultural critic David Horowitz was not surprised by the description of the video that CNSNews.com provided. Horowitz believes that left-wing political perspectives are the dominant philosophy of the curators of the U.S.'s national monuments. Horowitz, a former 1960s radical, is co-founder of the Los Angeles-based Center for the Study of the Popular Culture.

"The whole museum field has been taken over by the left wing Gestapo," Horowitz said.

"People have to wake up. This is the America hating left. It is in charge of our national monuments. It's a disgrace and testament to how the academic history profession is totally dominated by the political left," Horowitz said.

E-mail a news tip to Marc Morano.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

 



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dixielist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-314 next last
Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

To: AntiGuv
bingo
42 posted on 02/04/2003 7:06:31 AM PST by Maelstrom (Government Limited to Enumerated Powers is your freedom to do what isn't in the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
I did see it, too late. My apologies.
43 posted on 02/04/2003 7:08:17 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
Give yourself some credit.

He supported centralizing government and placing power in the hands of a very few...himself and corporate backers.

He opposed the individual in most venues and opposed power in the states that might keep the government from over-stepping it's bounds.

He jailed opponents, exiled others...the guy *was* left of center. The social and economic views that he supported did not limit government power over the economy nor over society.

If anything, I would admit that he was constrained by the mores and education of his time. I think he'd be just like Ted Kennedy today.
44 posted on 02/04/2003 7:12:00 AM PST by Maelstrom (Government Limited to Enumerated Powers is your freedom to do what isn't in the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
You just described Jefferson Davis to a tee.
45 posted on 02/04/2003 7:25:56 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: afz400
I wonder if they will ever mention that Lincoln wanted the blacks returned to Africa, not to stay here and become citizens.

Lincoln is on the record in the 1850's and up until 1862 supporting colonization. After blacks were enlisted to fight for the Union, he began clearing the way for black suffrage and citizenship. He says nothing about colonization at all. In 1864 Lincoln began to support voting rights for black soldiers privately and on April 11, 1865 he made a public speech where he took this position.

This film at the Lincoln Memorial is pretty grotesque, no doubt about it.

Walt

46 posted on 02/04/2003 7:27:19 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: afz400
I wonder if they will tell the truth about his hatred for American Indians. Probably not.

That's not true either.

In 1862 Lincoln received from General Pope a simple list of 303 indians that Pope planned to hang in the Minnesota indian uprising.

Lincoln's response to a congressional commission: "...I received a long telegraphic dispatch from Major General Pope, at St. Paul, Minnesota, simply announcing the names of the persons sentenced to be hanged. I immediately telegraphed to have transcripts of the records in all the cases forwarded to me, which transcripts, however did not reach me until two or three days before the present meeting of Congress. Meantime I received, through telgraphic dispatches and otherwise, appeals in behalf of the condemned, appeals for their execution, and expressions of opinion as to proper policy in regard to them, and to the Indians generally in that vicinity, none of which, as I understand, falls within the scope of your inquiry. After the arrival of the transcripts of records, but before I had sufficient opportunity to examine them, I received a joint letter from one of the senators and two of the representatives from Minnesota, which contains some statements of fact not found in the records of the trials...

Anxious to not act with so much clemency as to encourage another outbreak on the one hand, nor with so much severity as to be real cruelty on the other, I caused a careful examination of the records of trials to be made, in view of first ordering the execution of such as had been proved guilty of violating females. Contrary to my expectations, only two of this class were found. I then directed a further examination of all who were proven to have particpated in massacres, as distinquished from participation in battles. This class numbered forty, and included the two convicted of female violation. One of the number is strongly recomended by the commission which tried them, for comutation to ten years' imprisonment. I have ordered the other thirty-nine to be executed on Friday, the 19th. instant."

A. Lincoln

If you read the Kunhardt's picture biography of Lincoln you'll see a photo of a note in Lincoln's own hand where he wrote out the names of Indians codemned to death in the Minnesota uprisings--not out of cruelty, but to prevent the wrong men from being hanged.

Walt

47 posted on 02/04/2003 7:33:59 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
Fake Lincoln Quotes by Thomas J. DiLorenzo.

Here are some real Lincoln quotes:

"I confess that I hate to see the poor creatures hunted down down, and caught, and carried back to their stripes and unwarranted toils; but I bite my lip and keep quiet. In 1841 you and I had together a tedious low-water trip, on a Steam Boat from Louisville to St. Louis. You may remember, as I well do, that from Louisville to the mouth of the Ohio there were, on board, ten or a dozen slaves, shackled together with irons. That sight was a continual torment to me; and I see something like it every time I touch the Ohio, or any other slave-border. It is hardly fair for you to assume, that I have no such interest in a thing which has, and continually exercises, the power of making me miserable. You ought rather to appreciate how much the great body of the Northern people do crucify their feelings, in order to maintain their loyalty to the Constitution and the Union."

8/24/54

"If A can prove, however conclusively, that he may, of right, enslave B. -- why not B. snatch the same argument, and prove equally, that he may enslave A.?

-- You say A. is a white, and B. is black. It is --color--, then; the lighter, having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule, you are to be the slave to the first man you meet, with a fairer skin than your own.

You do not mean color exactly? -- You mean the whites are --intellectually-- the superiors of the blacks, and therefore, have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to your own.

But, say you, it is a question of --interest--; and, if you can make it your --interest--, you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his interest, he has the right to enslave you."

1854

"I will say here, while upon this subject, that I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. [Loud cheers.] I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects---certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man."

August, 1858

"I do not expect the Union to be dissolved--I do not expect the house to fall--But I do expect it will cease to be divided. Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is the course of ultimate extinctioon; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new--North as well as South. Have we no tendency towards the latter condition?"

1858

"The principles of Jefferson are the definitions and axioms of free society. And yet they are denied, and evaded, with no small show of success. One dashingly calls them "glittering generalities"; another bluntly calls them "self evident lies"; and still others insidiously argue that they only apply to "superior races."

These expressions, differing in form, are identical in object and effect. -- the supplanting the principles of free government, and restoring those of classification, caste, and legitimacy. They would delight a convocation of crowned heads, plotting against the people. They are the van-guard -- the miners and sappers -- of returning despotism. We must repulse them, or they will subjugate us. This is a world of compensations; and he that would -be- no slave, must consent to --have-- no slave. Those that deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves, and under a just God cannot long retain it."

3/1/59

"But to be plain, you are dissatisfied with me about the negro. Quite likely there is a difference of opinion between you and myself upon that subject. I certainly wish that all men could be free, while I suppose that you do not. ....peace does not appear as distant as it did. I hope it will come soon, and come to stay; and so come as to worth the keeping in all future time. It will have then been proved that, among free men, there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet; and that they who take such appeal are sure to lose their case, and pay the cost. And then, there will be some black men, who can remember that, with silent tongue, and clenched teeth, and steady eye, and well-poised bayonet they have helped mankind on to this great consumation; while, I fear, there will be some white ones, unable to forget that, with malignant heart, and deceitful speech, have strove to hinder it. Still let us not be over-sanguine of a speedy final triumph. Let us be quite sober. Let us dilligently apply the means, never doubting that a just God, in his own good time, will give us the rightful result."

8/23/63

"I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I can not remember when I did not so think, and feel...

In telling this tale I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me. Now, at the end of three years struggle the Nation's condition is not what either party, or any man devised, or expected. God alone can claim it. Whither it is tending seems plain. If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God."

4/4/64

"it is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers."

4/11/65

sources: "Abraham Lincoln, Mystic Chords of Memory" published by the Book of the Month Club, 1984 and:

"Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1859-65, Library of the Americas, Don E. Fehrenbacher, ed. 1989

Lincoln clearly was preparing the way for black suffrage.

Consider these letters:

Private

General Hunter

Executive Mansion

Washington D.C. April 1, 1863

My dear Sir:

I am glad to see the accounts of your colored force at Jacksonville, Florida. I see the enemy are driving at them fiercely, as is to be expected. It is mportant to the enemy that such a force shall not take shape, and grow, and thrive, in the south; and in precisely the same proportion, it is important to us that it shall. Hence the utmost caution and viglilance is necessary on our part. The enemy will make extra efforts to destroy them; and we should do the same to perserve and increase them.

Yours truly

A. Lincoln

_________________________________________________________

Hon. Andrew Johnson

Executive Mansion,

My dear Sir:

Washington, March 26. 1863.

I am told you have at least thought of raising a negro military force. In my opinion the country now needs no specific thing so much as some man of your ability, and position, to go to this work. When I speak of your position, I mean that of an eminent citizen of a slave-state, and himself a slave- holder. The colored population is the great available and yet unavailed of, force for restoring the Union. The bare sight of fifty thousand armed, and drilled black soldiers on the banks of the Mississippi, would end the rebellion at once. And who doubts that we can present that sight, if we but take hold in earnest? If you have been thinking of it please do not dismiss the thought.

Yours truly

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon Soc of War

Executive Mansion

Washington

July 21, 1863

My Dear Sir:

I desire that a renewed and vigorous effort be made to raise colored forces along the shores of the Missippi [sic]. Please consult the General-in-chief; and if it is perceived that any acceleration of the matter can be effected, let it be done. I think the evidence is nearly conclusive that Gen. Thomas is one of the best, if not the very best, instruments for this service.

Yours truly

--------------------------------------

Lincoln also proposed --privately-- to the new governor of Louisiana that the new state constitution include voting rights for blacks. A year later, in April, 1865 he came out --publicly-- for the suffrage for black soldiers, because his great --political-- skill told him that the time was right.

It was a direct result of this speech, and this position, that Booth shot him.

President Lincoln, besides ordering the army (note that this is only a few months after the EP) to use black soldiers more vigorously, made many public speeches to prepare the people for the idea of black suffrage.

"

"When you give the Negro these rights," he [Lincoln] said, "when you put a gun in his hands, it prophesies something more: it foretells that he is to have the full enjoyment of his liberty and his manhood...By the close of the war, Lincoln was reccomending commissioning black officers in the regiments, and one actually rose to become a major before it was over. At the end of 1863, more than a hundred thousand had enlisted in the United States Colored Troops, and in his message to Congress the president reported, "So far as tested, it is difficult to say they are not as good soldiers as any." When some suggested in August 1864 that the Union ought to offer to help return runaway slaves to their masters as a condition for the South's laying down its arms, Lincoln refused even to consider the question.

"Why should they give their lives for us, with full notice of our purpose to betray them?" he retorted. "Drive back to the support of the rebellion the physical force which the colored people now give, and promise us, and neither the present, or any incoming administration can save the Union." To others he said it even more emphatically. "This is not a question of sentiment or taste, but one of physical force which may be measured and estimated. Keep it and you can save the Union. Throw it away, and the Union goes with it."

--"Lincoln's Men" pp 163-64 by William C. Davis

Lincoln's sense of fairness made him seek to extend the blessings of citizenship to everyone who served under the flag.

His great political skill made him realize that blacks --were--not-- leaving -- he played that card and no one was biting, black or white. That being the case, he knew he had to prepare for the future, and that future involved full rights for blacks.

Walt

48 posted on 02/04/2003 7:36:38 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: shuckmaster
lincoln-worshipers truly show his colors!

tyrant, GREAT bloodspiller & WAR CRIMINAL!

FRee dixie,sw

49 posted on 02/04/2003 7:38:32 AM PST by stand watie (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. : Thomas Jefferson 1774)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
When the National Park Service can actually ask Mr. Lincoln for his views on a particular contemporary issue, then I encourage them to do so.

Until then, they can either present him as he actually was known to be, or they can sit down and STFU.

50 posted on 02/04/2003 7:40:19 AM PST by Riley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
Linciln was primary in bringing about the belief that the state governments wer subservient to the federal government and that the federal government could literally do anything they damned well pleased.

This idea was well understood before Lincoln's time.

"In order, therefore, to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, to insure domestic tranquility, to provide for common defense and to secure the blessings of liberty, those people, among whom were the people of Georgia, ordained and established the present constitution. By that constitution, legislative power is vested, executive power is vested, judicial power is vested...We may then infer, that the people of the United States intended to bind the several states, by the legislative power of the national government...

Whoever considers, in a combined and comprehensive view, the general texture of the constitution, will be satisfied that the people of the United States intended to form themselves into a nation for national purposes. They instituted, for such purposes, a national government complete in all its parts, with powers legislative, executive and judiciary, ad in all those powers extending over the whole nation. "

John Jay, first Chief Justice, 1793:

"It is remarkable that in establishing it, the people exercised their own rights and their own proper sovereignty, and conscious of the plenitude of it, they declared with becoming dignity, "We the people of the United States," 'do ordain and establish this Constitution." Here we see the people acting as the sovereigns of the whole country; and in the language of sovereignty, establishing a Constitution by which it was their will, that the state governments should be bound, and to which the State Constitutions should be made to conform. Every State Constitution is a compact made by and between the citizens of a state to govern themselves in a certain manner; and the Constitution of the United States is likewise a compact made by the people of the United States to govern themselves as to general objects, in a certain manner. By this great compact however, many prerogatives were transferred to the national Government, such as those of making war and peace, contracting alliances, coining money, etc."

--Chisholm v. Georgia, 1793

Chief Justice John Marshall:

"We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the government are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended. But we think the sound construction of the constitution must allow to the national legislature that discretion, with respect to the means by which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution, which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it, in the manner most beneficial to the people. Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the constitution, are constitutional. . . .

Those powers are not given by the people of a single state. They arc given by the people of the United States, to a government whose laws, made in pursuance of the constitution, are declared to be supreme. Consequently, the people of a single state cannot confer a sovereignty which will extend over them.

The convention which framed the constitution was, indeed, elected by the State legislatures. But the instrument, when it came from their hands, was a mere proposal, without obligation, or pretensions to it. It was reported to the then existing Congress of the United States, with a request that it might "be submitted to a convention of Delegates, chosen in each State, by the people thereof, under the recommendation of its legislature, for their assent and ratification." This mode of proceeding was adopted; and by the Convention, by Congress, and by the State Legislatures, the instrument was submitted to the people. They acted upon it, in the only manner in which they can act safely, effectively, and wisely, on such a subject, by assembling in Convention. It is true, they assembled in their several States; and where else should they have assembled? No political dreamer was ever wild enough to think of breaking down the lines which separate the States, and of compounding the American people into one common mass. Of consequence, when they act, they act in their States. But the measures they adopt do not, on that account cease to be the measures of the people themselves, or become the measures of the state governments.

-- McCullough v. Maryland, 1819

"That the United States form, for many, and for most important purposes, a single nation, has not yet been denied. In war, we are one people. In making peace, we are one people. In all commercial regulations, we are one and the same people. In many other respects, the American people are one; and the government which is alone capable of controlling and managing their interests in all these respects, is the government of the Union. It is their government and in that character, they have no other.

America has chosen to be, in many respects, and in many purposes, a nation; and for all these purposes, her government is complete; to all these objects it is competent. The people have declared that in the exercise of all powers given for these objects, it is supreme. It can, then, in effecting these objects, legitimately control all individuals or governments within the American territory.

The constitution and laws of a state, so far as they are repugnant to the constitution and laws of of the United States are absolutely void. These states are constituent parts of the United States; they are members of one great empiure--for some purposes sovereign, for some purposes subordinate."

--Chief Justice John Marshall, writing the majority opinion, Cohens v. Virginia 1821

Walt

51 posted on 02/04/2003 7:46:29 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Lincoln might still have been a Republican today, but he would have been a country club Republican, and probably would have accepted all sorts of PC.

I just read an anecdote about Lincoln I hadn't seen before.

Secretary of the Treasury Chase found Lincoln in his office shining his own boots.

"Gentlemen don't black their own boots," Chase said.

"Whose boots do they black?" was Lincoln's answer.

Walt

52 posted on 02/04/2003 7:51:16 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: The Other Harry
Lincoln's attitude re the slaves and blacks in general was IMHO somewhat advanced for his time...

The problem with this comment is that we don't actually have any idea what Lincoln's attitude was. His public statements conflict wildly.

No they don't.

" It is useful when thinking about Abraham Lincoln's attitudes toward slavery and Blacks to remember that Lincoln was a Southerner born in a slave state to parents born and raised in slave states. His family shared some of their culture's bias toward individual Blacks, but opposed the institution of slavery. This background and the early move of the family to a free state shaped Lincoln's attitudes early in his adult life. Now consider several facts about Lincoln's political career:

1. While Lincoln was building political strength in local Illinois politics, he opposed the war with Mexico as inexpedient for several reasons, including that it was waged to increase the power of slave states in the institutions of Federal government.

2. During Lincoln's first term as U.S. congressman from Illinois in the late 1840's, he continued to criticize the Mexican war and worked out a bill (never introduced) calling for a referendum in the District of Columbia designed to free the slaves in that Federal enclave and compensate their owners.

3. His reentry into national politics in 1854 was clearly for the purpose of opposing the expansion of slavery into the territories under the provisions of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. He had his heart and soul involved with the idea of gradual emancipation to bring the fullest meaning to the words of Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal.

4. From 1854 to his nomination for the presidency in 1860, as James McPherson noted in his DRAWN WITH THE SWORD, "the dominant, unifying theme of Lincoln's career was opposition to the expansion of slavery as a vital first step toward placing it in the course of ultimate extinction." In those years he gave approximately 175 political speeches. McPherson notes that the "central message of these speeches showed Lincoln to be a "one-issue" man - the issue being slavery."

Thus, Lincoln's nomination to the presidency was based on a principled opposition to slavery on moral grounds, and that position was clear to voters both in the South and the North.

5. In his early speeches and actions as president-elect and president, he was clear in his opinion that he had no legal authority to interfere with slavery in the slave states. However, he was persistent and consistent in his efforts to encourage and aid voluntary emancipation in the loyal Border States, territories and the District of Columbia. These efforts predated his publication of the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation.

In summary, I think one can safely say that Lincoln was clearly a gradual abolitionist from the beginning of his political career."

-- From the AOL ACW forum

Walt

53 posted on 02/04/2003 7:55:53 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
The social reform movement of the 19th Century was, as you point out, a precursor of today's PC movement. Many antebellum abolitionists also favored prohibition of alcohol, equal rights for women, universal and compulsory public education, and even vegetarianism. All these strains of social uplift are still visible in 2003, although the anti-alcohol zeal seems to be focused on tobacco, to a large extent. Anhueser-Busch and McDonald's executives probably have sleepless nights in fear that the full force of PC wrath may someday turn from tobacco onto beer and high cholesterol foods.

However, to call it a Protestant movement is inaccurate. The "social uplift" movement largely arose out of the Unitarian churches, which are neither Protestant nor Christian, and was also supported by other freethinkers, people whom we would now call secular humanists. Though from a Baptist background, Lincoln was not a Christian believer during most of his adult life. (There is some evidence that he converted to the Christian faith while in the White House.) This reform movement did have support in what might be labelled the "broad church," essentially proto-liberals who paid lip service to the Reformation creeds but who accepted the social engineering schemes of the reformers as a means of establishing a kingdom of God on earth. However, these people rejected, by their vain schemes to create heaven on earth, the core Christian doctrines oultined in the early ecumenical creeds as well as the Reformation distinctives.

54 posted on 02/04/2003 7:57:37 AM PST by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
He supported centralizing government and placing power in the hands of a very few...himself and corporate backers.

That's absolute nonsense. The big money in 1860-61 was for appeasemet of the south at almost any price.

And one of Lincoln's best known quotes:

"As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy."

What's wrong with that?

Walt

55 posted on 02/04/2003 8:00:32 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
He opposed the individual in most venues and opposed power in the states that might keep the government from over-stepping it's bounds.

And how did Lincoln manifest all this?

Walt

56 posted on 02/04/2003 8:02:50 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
He jailed opponents, exiled others...

The police chief of Baltimore was arrested for a time. He was released and was later a serving officer in the rebel army.

Consider this:

"It was to Lincoln's credit that early in 1862, when General McClellan was about to advance upon Richmond and hopes of an early victory ran high, he ordered that all political prisoners in military custody be released upon parole and granted an amnesty for past offenses. Extraordinary arrests by the military authorities would continue: all spies, secret agents, and conspirators whom the secretary of war regarded as dangerous to the public safety would be taken up and kept in custody. But the old slate was wiped clean.

And it was to Stanton's credit that he adopted a sensible course for sifting the great body of prisoners held on various charges, and releasing most of them. He appointed John A. Dix and Edwards Pierrepont as commissioners to examine those held in the New York area and render a quick verdict. Visiting Fort Lafayette and other prisons, by April 1862 they had practically finished their work. The judge advocate of the army for the Washington area was empow­ered to dispose of prisoners arrested in the Federal District and adjacent Virginia. Governor David Tod of Ohio was authorized to use a special agent to investigate cases, with a promise that any prisoner would be released on his recommendation."

-- from a website.

Walt

57 posted on 02/04/2003 8:08:11 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
...the guy *was* left of center. The social and economic views that he supported did not limit government power over the economy nor over society.

I dunno about that. Some of the neo-rebs try to belittle Lincoln because he apparently said in February 1865 regarding free blacks -- "Let 'em root hog, or die."

That may sound harsh to a modern ear, but it is exactly what he was left to do himself. Few people have had a tougher early life as Abraham Lincoln and then rose so high.

Walt

58 posted on 02/04/2003 8:16:45 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
He was a firm believer that the desires and needs of the government outweight the rights of the people.

Quote Lincoln.

Walt

59 posted on 02/04/2003 8:19:23 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
Four score and seven years ago,------
60 posted on 02/04/2003 8:20:15 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-314 next last

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.

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