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.
Illegal immigrants from Mexico are treated much like slaves here now.
That's really insulting to people who had ancestors that were slaves. Or to people who are currently victims of human trafficking. Illegal immigrants have things MUCH better than any group of actual slaves did.
The status of the Negro, where as the Union, was freeing them without making it to where they could provide for themselves through property ownership, education, or anything else. They set them free, so as they could incorporate them into the war.
If you will read the documents as a whole, you will get that, I'm sure. But as long as a person is focused intent on one thing and one thing only, then they will totally miss it.
Have you read the Constitution of the Confederate States of America?
The following link contains a line-by-line comparison of the CSA & USA Constitutions:
Cherry picking documents, does not tell the situation as a whole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
The Civil War United the States into a Country. The bastardization of the Confederate Cause continues to divide us, 150 years later.
If a civil war broke out today and the issue was state sovereignty and independence from the (Union) Federal Government. People would not see State Rights as the cause, they would twist it to the core and say race was the cause of the war.
States can not secede from the Union, because the Confederacy lost the war.
The good, the bad and the ugly; the bad and the ugly, brushed with a broad stroke, removes any good that from an event. If people threw out the bad and the ugly, they might get along together and truly become as One. Our representatives do not want to see that happen, ever, and have found manipulation of the people, too easy, as people make it so.
Why not read the original documents? Why the link to an opinion piece?
If folks were discussing secession today, I'd read the documents & the proposed Constitution.
I'd want to thoroughly understand which States' Rights were the reason for secession.
Learn some history. The Tariff of 1928 was replaced in 1832 - don't peddle the absurd notion that secession in 1860 was about a tariff that had not been in effect for 28 years. Oh, and the tariff of 1832? That only lasted a year before being replaced.
It was the Tariff of Abominations in 1828 and the Tariff of 1832 that caused South Carolina to threaten secession in the early 1830s - almost 30 years prior to the war.
The Tariff of 1832 was indeed replaced by the Compromise Tariff of 1833, but that tariff was then replaced by the Black Tariff of 1842 which was much more protectionist (favored by the North), raised rates to around 40%, and caused a sharp decline in international trade.
The Black Tariff of 1842 was replaced by the Walker Tariff in 1845, then the lower Tariff of 1857, then the higher Morrill Tariff of 1861 that was addressed during the secession conventions of SC and GA.
In "Address of South Carolina to Slaveholding States," Robert Barnwell Rhett wrote the following:
Quote:
And so with the Southern States, towards the Northern States, in the vital matter of taxation. They are in a minority in Congress. Their representation in Congress, is useless to protect them against unjust taxation; and they are taxed by the people of the North for their benefit, exactly as the people of Great Britain taxed our ancestors in the British parliament for their benefit. For the last forty years, the taxes laid by the Congress of the United States have been laid with a view of subserving the interests of the North. The people of the South have been taxed by duties on imports, not for revenue, but for an object inconsistent with revenue— to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the productions of their mines and manufactures."
You should take umbrage when any branch of government decides that censorship in any form is appropriate.
It's is not censorship to declare a flag of treason and controversy shouldn't fly on state property, if that state is part of the United States. What if they decided to fly a Russian flag? Or a Harley Flag? Would that be okay, on tax payer funded property?
1. The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery: Tariff of 1828
2. As long as progressive leftist moonbats fling epithets at southerners, their region's adopted banner is still a symbol of honor and dignity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX
It was the Tariff of Abominations in 1828 and the Tariff of 1832 that caused South Carolina to threaten secession in the early 1830s - almost 30 years prior to the war.
The Tariff of 1832 was indeed replaced by the Compromise Tariff of 1833, but that tariff was then replaced by the Black Tariff of 1842 which was much more protectionist (favored by the North), raised rates to around 40%, and caused a sharp decline in international trade.
The Black Tariff of 1842 was replaced by the Walker Tariff in 1845, then the lower Tariff of 1857, then the higher Morrill Tariff of 1861 that was addressed during the secession conventions of SC and GA.
I think most rational people realize the Civil War had something to do with slavery. The people back then identified as Slaveholding States.
I think most rational people would recognize slavery to be the sine qua non of the American Civil War.
It's questionable when people claim the War had nothing to do with slavery back then & claim it's all about pride, honor & heritage in the present day.
I think the people in South Carolina should decide the status of the confederate flag. Let the people decide. States' right or the Peoples' right? Let the people decide.
There were a lot of Confederates who migrated to Brazil after the war, much like the Nazi's in Argentina. Perhaps those who support it should consider relocation.
I think most rational people realize the Civil War had something to do with slavery. The people back then identified as Slaveholding States.
I think most rational people would recognize slavery to be the sine qua non of the American Civil War.
It's questionable when people claim the War had nothing to do with slavery back then & claim it's all about pride, honor & heritage in the present day.
I think the people in South Carolina should decide the status of the confederate flag. Let the people decide. States' right or the Peoples' right? Let the people decide.
Take out slavery and you wouldn't have had the Civil War.
Sad to see the revisionist "historians" chipping away at reality. Their wiggling and squirming and denials are not doing the South any service.
Or anyone else for that matter. Very weak.
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.
