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.
Agreed. In no way do I condone most of the north's behavior, but to leave the union is another story. I mean, the south was willing to die to fight for their rights to preserve slavery. I respect their "enthuisiasm" (for lack of better word) to fight for their rights, but dislike the reasoning.
No, not to preserve slavery. Most Southerners didn't even own slaves.
Jefferson Davis: "We fight not for slavery, but for independence".
They did not die to keep slaves. They died to defend their homeland.
The history of the south is not one of its strong points. In fact its the most shameful of any region.
I prefer the Northeast, the Washington DC area of the Mid Atlantic, the Chicago area of the Midwest, and the San Francisco Bay area of the West. The rest of the country (especially the rural areas) doesn't exist.
That's pretty elitist of you.
I don't think many people like some of the historical aspect of the South, Southerners included -- but that's no reason to just toss it out. Assuming you're referring to slavery, it's not as though the North was a mecca of racial harmony -- quite the contrary.
Sure, I'm a Yankee to the bone, but, politics and religion aside, I still enjoy visiting and appreciate some of the culture of the South, such as its rich tradition of music, its delicious (although pretty unhealthy) food, and its laid-back, hospitable, and generally much more mannered people.
You have a right to show a preference for a region, but try using some tact next time.
They died to defend their homeland because their homeland felt their rights regarding slave ownership were being infringed upon.
Let me ask you this: say there were no slaves in any states, ok? Would the war have occured? No. Thank you, good night.
A very few did. The majority didn't own slaves and were not fighting for slavery. They wanted their own government. States Rights, etc.
Slavery was one of the issues but to say the whole war was aboot slavery is a very 8th grade version of the "Civil" War.
A very few did. The majority didn't own slaves and were not fighting for slavery. They wanted their own government. States Rights, etc.
Slavery was one of the issues but to say the whole war was aboot slavery is a very 8th grade version of the "Civil" War.
actually having studied history in college, i can back steve o up on this one. Virtually every debate the south had in congress prior to secession, that had to do with state rights almost exclusivley revolved around slavery, and whether or not a state or the union had a right to decide whether or not it could have them. It all stems from you guessed it,economics and power. (what else does this world revolve around). Slavery was the souths lively hood economically speaking, and slaves also amounted to 3/5 a white person which provided the south with more congressman than they should have had(since this population could not elect them into office).
actually having studied history in college, i can back steve o up on this one. Virtually every debate the south had in congress prior to secession, that had to do with state rights almost exclusivley revolved around slavery, and whether or not a state or the union had a right to decide whether or not it could have them. It all stems from you guessed it,economics and power. (what else does this world revolve around). Slavery was the souths lively hood economically speaking, and slaves also amounted to 3/5 a white person which provided the south with more congressman than they should have had(since this population could not elect them into office).
Yes and who wrote that version of history? Northerners. They won the war, so they wrote it.
The Southern story was never properly told. The North was not going to free slaves.
A very few did. The majority didn't own slaves and were not fighting for slavery. They wanted their own government. States Rights, etc.
Slavery was one of the issues but to say the whole war was aboot slavery is a very 8th grade version of the "Civil" War.
True, but slavery was at the forefront for secession reasons. Right? Like I said, had there been no slavery to begin with, what "rights" would the south feel were being violated? Believe what you want...
Agreed. In no way do I condone most of the north's behavior, but to leave the union is another story. I mean, the south was willing to die to fight for their rights to preserve slavery. I respect their "enthuisiasm" (for lack of better word) to fight for their rights, but dislike the reasoning.
I agree that leaving the union is a bit more extreme in that regard steve.
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.