Reply With Quote
As are big city democrats. Only idiots see it as good vs. evil.
If one were to see it through only racial tones and revisionist history (as "the winner" has created), I could see your point. But I see these statues as symbols of states rights. Big Brother wants nothing more than to see these statues taken down.
As are big city democrats. Only idiots see it as good vs. evil.
States' rights to have slavery.
You really think that wasn't rigged? Hillary averaging tens of people at her rallies really won? If anything, this alone should teach you the need to get rid of electronic voting. And I ain't a Bernie fan; but he got ed.
States rights as they're spelled out in the Cons ution.
To have slavery.
Every single state that seceded claimed loss of property --slaves-- as cause for leaving the union. Following Kansas voting to not be a slave state in 1861, the south knew they did not have the votes in congress to maintain their slave economy so they seceded.
Lee himself repeatedly spoke against emancipation stating that it would be cruel to release slaves and that it was good for them to learn under the dominion of their betters. The Army under his command was notorious for torturing and executing captured africans fighting for the union.
It is what it is.
Are you ing re ed? The Emancipation Proclamation came after the Civil War was under way. This pretty much portrays how liberal dunderheads can't see history for what it is.
The government of the United States, by certain joint resolutions, bearing date the 1st day of March, in the year A. D. 1845, proposed to the Republic of Texas, then a free, sovereign and independent nation, the annexation of the latter to the former, as one of the co-equal States thereof,
The people of Texas, by deputies in convention assembled, on the fourth day of July of the same year, assented to and accepted said proposals and formed a cons ution for the proposed State, upon which on the 29th day of December in the same year, said State was formally admitted into the Confederated Union.
Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquillity and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own cons ution under the guarantee of the federal cons ution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the ins ution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her ins utions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?
http://www.lsjunction.com/docs/secesson.htm
The same article of the Cons ution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the ins ution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Cons ution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Cons ution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her cons utional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the cons uted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
The ends for which the Cons ution was framed are declared by itself to be "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own ins utions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.
We affirm that these ends for which this Government was ins uted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic ins utions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Cons ution; they have denounced as sinful the ins ution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.
For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Cons ution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Cons ution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp
In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the ins ution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which cons utes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the ins ution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
That we do not overstate the dangers to our ins ution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.
The hostility to this ins ution commenced before the adoption of the Cons ution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.
The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.
The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.
It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.
It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.
It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.
It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact, which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.
It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.
http://www.civil-war.net/pages/missi...eclaration.asp
This is some furious copy/paste action. Well done
For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slaveholding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express cons utional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every cir stance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates, after a full and calm hearing of all the facts, after a fair warning of our purpose not to submit to the rule of the authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large majority committed the Government of the United States into their hands. The people of Georgia, after an equally full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have declared with equal firmness that they shall not rule over them. A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state. The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Cons ution. While the subordination and the political and social inequality of the African race was fully conceded by all, it was plainly apparent that slavery would soon disappear from what are now the non-slave-holding States of the original thirteen. The opposition to slavery was then, as now, general in those States and the Cons ution was made with direct reference to that fact. But a distinct abolition party was not formed in the United States for more than half a century after the Government went into operation. The main reason was that the North, even if united, could not control both branches of the Legislature during any portion of that time.
http://www.civil-war.net/pages/georgia_declaration.asp
Sorry I don't have a YouTube for you. Any black people scare you since this afternoon?
Wow, that's a lot of blather. Doesn't change that your statement was historically inaccurate and utterly convoluted.
What part of the secession declarations do you not understand?
Complaints of loss of property.Doesn't change that your statement was historically inaccurate.
In black and white.
I actually bolded it for you in case you got lost in the multiple sentences.
same polls that said hillary would winInteresting
LOL someone claiming the civil war wasn't about slavery crying revisionist history.
A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the ins ution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying there were multiple issues. And for many, the issue was not about upholding slavery but rather Cons utional rights. If you don't follow your Cons ution, then tyranny abounds.
lol these s coming down with the quickness
Thanks Nazis!
I kinda like that one tbh. Shows Johnny Reb before and after he got his traitor ass kicked.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
