Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are a recent immigrant, no? Read about American history concerning the 19h century.
None of it is smoke and mirrors, all you need do is apply yourself.
The South had disproportionate power in the antebellum years. That's not democratic. The only reason anyone tried to limit slavery in the pre-war years was because they were trying to curb the too-powerful influence of the Slave Power. It wasn't fair that northerners had the population, industry and wealth of the nation, but had less political power than the South. And the South dictated what went on in Congress for the most part, up until the mid- to late-1850s. When they saw that their power was being curbed to where it should have been all along due to their station, they tried to destroy the Union.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John2064
The real flag of slavery is the Stars & Stripes. Slaves were brought to America by northeastern(Mass., R.I., Conn.) states and sold south because slaves weren't able to do factory work. Not to mention profit even if they simply moved them south. Importation of slaves was outlawed in 1808.....the Confederate States of America came into being in 1861.
Do you even realize you're deflecting here? Deflecting isn't a good defense in any situation. No one is talking about who started slavery. Yes, northerners profited off of slavery. But to my knowledge, no one in this thread said Northerners were on some higher moral plane.
Your argument is too reminiscent of kids arguing about "who started it." What matters is who finished it. The North, while racist in their own right, decided that slavery was an institution that was corrupting and undermining democracy and got rid of it. It started as a military tool but was quickly adopted by the entire nation as a rallying cry.
Again, the Stars and Stripes represents progress. Compare where we are now to where we started. We continuously strive, as a people, to be more equal. That's what that flag represents to me. It represents each stage of our nation's development. And development seems to be an issue that Flaggers can't grasp. The nation didn't stop in 1861. You have to look at the whole picture. And the Confederacy's contribution to the national history is a bloody and persistent defense of the indefensible. The Confederacy was far from a democracy even, and fought for minority rule. The only reason northerners fought against slavery in the years preceding the war was because the South had disproportionate power. Didn't you ever wonder why Northerers derided the South as the "Slave Power?" It ran the country. And once the balance of power started evening out, the South took the ball and went home, so to speak, undermining the entire democratic process. That's not fair and not a real democracy. And the South implemented a gag rule that stopped them from even debating slavery issues for the longest time.
I like your post but have a problem with one aspect.
Are you of those who think man has only been on the planet for a short while? Slavery has existed, in one form or another, as long as mankind has existed. We only know of written history; what of that unwritten?
What of the times prior to the above countries having names? Your number of 4000 years is quaint when thinking of how old the Earth is and how long it has been inhabited by life of all forms, including man. How long has man been here? What have the thinking heads arrived upon? Are they the same group who insist upon GW/CC?
Well considering "We only know of written history; what of that unwritten?", it is pretty hard to quote a history that has not been documented. Though I am not always successful, in a debate I generally try to stay away from fabrication, be factual, and keep opinion to a minimum. I know that is pretty outlandish, especially in these forums but it is kind of a personal thing to me.
Non-landed whites also viewed slaves as economic competition on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line. One of the reasons why agricultural families in the north were so large is that they were birthing their own workforce.
If that license plate ain't mine, then I'm not gonna pay for it anymore.
Tell me, why should the SCV not be allowed to put their logo on a license plate, when many other organizations already have their logos on license plates? What is it about the SCV that is deserving of government censorship?
I know, right?
I wanted to put hotsexxxygurls.com and some tasteful images on the license plates too and they won't allow that neither. Damn nazis!!
Alexander Hamilton Stephens was an American politician from Georgia and Vice President of the Confederate States of America during the American Civil War
That doesn't make sense. Assuming she was 100 and born in say 1900, she would have married a 70 year old when she was 20?
Actually, I heard a similar story years ago. Really, does that shock you? People will marry anybody for the right amount of notoriety. Take Charles Manson or hundreds of lesser knowns that were/are ancient, but still managed to marry a woman substantially younger than themselves. Well after the Civil War was fought, a few of the older survivors did marry younger women. Google it.
Last edited by Hollywood55; 06-20-2015 at 01:49 PM..
Reason: puncuation
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Old soldiers, young wives
