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.
In my posts I have been trying to seperate what Lincoln felt about the slaves and slavery (the institution) and no one gets it. I believe that Lincoln believed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. He loved this country and wanted it to stay whole. But, deep down in his heart and soul he didn't care about the slaves themselves as individuals.
You seem to be stuck on that subject
Please .... explain to us what "Lincoln feelings about slaves" have to do with Southern states seceding the union and/or the civil war.
In my posts I have been trying to seperate what Lincoln felt about the slaves and slavery (the institution) and no one gets it. I believe that Lincoln believed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. He loved this country and wanted it to stay whole. But, deep down in his heart and soul he didn't care about the slaves themselves as individuals. And that according to the rules and principles set down by our founding fathers (some of who had slaves themselves) he cared enough know that the institution of slavery was wrong and thankfully so. I was born and raised in the south and I have lived in three 'northern' states. I have seen and heard more racism in those three states than I ever heard in the southern state in which I was raised. This subject is getting old to me so I'm outta here.
If no one gets it, it is because you have presented a half-baked opinion. Your contention that Lincoln didn't care about slaves has been contradicted several times in this thread, including in the very link you posted initially (read the last paragraph of the Greeley letter). Your experiences living in northern and southern states is entirely irrelevant to Lincoln, and comes across as a desperate, though feeble, justification for your position. Even before the war, not everyone in the south was as sinister as Simon Legree, nor was everyone in the north as open-minded as Lucretia Mott, as the Grimke sisters and the burning of Pennsylvania Hall after a meeting which blacks and whites attended together show. Claiming otherwise would be equally half-baked, but again, this has nothing to do with Lincoln.
But don't feel bad about departing the discussion - lots of people leave the arena when their team is down by 30 with a few minutes left in the game.
Ok, go off the tangent
Obviously it should say 1850, but I mistyped.
Just the fact that 7 states seceded between the moment Lincoln was elected and before his inauguration would make anybody with 1/2 a brain would assume that Lincoln was not a friend slavery (Southern politics)
If no one gets it, it is because you have presented a half-baked opinion. Your contention that Lincoln didn't care about slaves has been contradicted several times in this thread, including in the very link you posted initially (read the last paragraph of the Greeley letter). Your experiences living in northern and southern states is entirely irrelevant to Lincoln, and comes across as a desperate, though feeble, justification for your position. Even before the war, not everyone in the south was as sinister as Simon Legree, nor was everyone in the north as open-minded as Lucretia Mott, as the Grimke sisters and the burning of Pennsylvania Hall after a meeting which blacks and whites attended together show. Claiming otherwise would be equally half-baked, but again, this has nothing to do with Lincoln.
But don't feel bad about departing the discussion - lots of people leave the arena when their team is down by 30 with a few minutes left in the game.
What it amounts to is that I see Lincoln differently than most people, I guess. I don't feel that I have lost, or won. I suppose I'm simply not articulate enough to get my point across. No biggey, in my mind and I don't feel bad, just tired.
Then don't participate. This site has a constant rolling population of new members, many of whom would like to participate in debates...specifically one of the most interesting Wars in this Nation on a History forum.....keep that in mind.
Then don't participate. This site has a constant rolling population of new members, many of whom would like to participate in debates...specifically one of the most interesting Wars in this Nation on a History forum.....keep that in mind.
Well, we all saw your notion of a contribution to "one of the most interesting Wars in this Nation on a History forum"
It was:
Quote:
Because the YANKEES were JEALOUS of our hot chicks and beautiful plantations!!!!!!
And if you continued past that first post of mine, you would have observed that I have participated, of course nothing so deep and meaningful as yours above. We know this from the multiple exclamation points which followed.
Because the YANKEES were JEALOUS of our hot chicks and beautiful plantations!!!!!!
Really?
Then show historical proof that this was the case.
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.
"1950"?
