Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-30-2010, 04:52 PM
 
4,170 posts, read 4,187,747 times
Reputation: 2083

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound View Post
NYT: South celebrates Civil War, without slaves - U.S. news - The New York Times - msnbc.com

The war has been re-branded as celebrations come up to drastically play down the role of slavery, and the fact it even happened. Instead many are making it all about "states rights" while the good ol' southern boys were defending their homes from the warring North.

Screw that one of the tantamount reasons to secession was to keep human beings as property I guess.
Slavery is not the reason for the Civil War. Lincoln himself admitted it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-30-2010, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Mid Atlantic USA
12,623 posts, read 13,954,563 times
Reputation: 5895
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
The Supreme Court ruled in 1869 that states could not succeed from the union, but thats because 8 states in 1861 succeeded which led to the Civil War..

That being said, if a state would succeed from the union, they would no longer be covered under the US Constitution, and any Supreme Court ruling would no longer apply to them.. The Supreme Court only covers US jurisdiction, and since nothing in the Constitution limits a secession, it might stand if ever re-visited by the Supreme Court. Remember, the Constitution is a list of things the federal government CANT do, not what it can, and there is nothing in the Constitution authorizing the federal government to force a state to stay..

The original court ruling against secession was because Texas wanted to secede, but then asked that the US Govt guarantee bonds, which could only happen if they didn't secede.. They argued against themself which most likely wouldnt happen again since the us govt doesnt guarantee state bonds.
Legal secession, no. Rebellion/revolution yes. Of course the South had a natural right to rebel if it held the moral justification. Slavery was not a moral justification and therefore the south had no legal or moral right to leave. Now, we can today pass an amendment to the Constitution allowing them to leave. I'm all for that. I'm sure many Americans will agree. Especially once all the god-awful celebrations of the Confederacy start.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 04:59 PM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
28,353 posts, read 16,414,616 times
Reputation: 10467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rggr View Post
...Slavery became a direct focus for the union in the war only as a means to dismantle the economy of the South.

Bingo!

Look, I'm glad the North won and slavery was abolished (I was born and raised in MI, if that matters). However, the fact that slavery was abolished after the Civil War does NOT make ending slavery the driving force *for* the war.

The damn President responsible for the Emancipation Proclamation said so in his very own words! I'm not sure what more proof folks need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:04 PM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
28,353 posts, read 16,414,616 times
Reputation: 10467
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom77falcons View Post
Yup, I want you to leave. You and SC, MS, TX and all the rest of you southern traitors. Start a movement and go for it. I'll join one in the north to help in your cause so you can get out of the USA. You're a bunch of dis-loyal traitor worshippers.

Wow, this might very well be THE dumbest thing I've ever seen posted on C-D. And that is saying something!

Unbelievable...


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:04 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,196,228 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
Bingo!

Look, I'm glad the North won and slavery was abolished (I was born and raised in MI, if that matters). However, the fact that slavery was abolished after the Civil War does NOT make ending slavery the driving force *for* the war.

The damn President responsible for the Emancipation Proclamation said so in his very own words! I'm not sure what more proof folks need.
Correct, and slavey would have ended even without the Civil War just like its ended all over the world without a Civil War.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:05 PM
 
8,640 posts, read 9,155,911 times
Reputation: 5993
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom77falcons View Post
What about "or the people". You forgot that part of the 10th Amendment. So, can a person legally secede themselves from Georgia? Or a county secede from Georgia? Or a part of Atlanta from Geogia? It's called anarchy and that's why it's not legal.
Wrong again. The United States, not The United counties, cities and States. The Confederate Constitution was very very similar to the US constitution except for a couple of areas that should have been in place from the beginning, one being that "We the People" changed to "We the People of Sovereign States". Keep in mind all governors of today will tell you States are sovereign.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:06 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
37,170 posts, read 19,265,197 times
Reputation: 14922
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert kid View Post
Slavery wasn't the only reason you know, stop oversimplifying it. And in a way, they were defending themselves from the North.

FYI: MSNBC is probably even MORE Liberally biased than FOX is Conservativly biased.
Correct.

It was only 98% of the reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:13 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,097,482 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
Don't be so gullible to think our founding fathers wished to place the States into a forced union.
I must have missed the "We the States" in the Preamble:
We the People of the United States, in Order 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, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
As Senator Daniel Webster so eloquently opined:
"If the Government of the United States be the agent of the State Governments, then they may control it, provided, they can agree in the manner of controlling it; if it be the agent of the people, then the people alone can control it, restrain it, modify or reform it. It is observable enough that the doctrine for which the honorable gentleman (HAYNE) contends, leads him to the necessity of maintaining, not only that this Government is the creature of the States, but that it is the creature of each of the States severally, so that each may assert the power for itself, of determining whether it acts within the limits of its authority. It is the servant of four and twenty masters of different wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. This absurdity (for it seems no less) arises from a misconception as to the origin of this Government and its true character. It is, Sir, the people's Constitution, the people's Government, made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people. The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the supreme law. We must either admit the proposition or dispute their authority. The States are unquestionably sovereign so far as their sovereignty is not affected by this supreme law. But the State Legislatures, as political bodies, however sovereign, are yet not sovereign over the people."
New York Times, November 3, 1860
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:14 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,196,228 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald View Post
Correct.

It was only 98% of the reason.
not even close. Many states already abolished slavery before the Civil War
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:16 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,097,482 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
Keep in mind all governors of today will tell you States are sovereign.
Governors say all sorts of silly things.

Like, "segregation today . . . segregation tomorrow . . . segregation forever."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:57 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top