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 10-06-2014, 06:15 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathy4017 View Post
You mean using Three-Fifths Compromise so that they would be seen as less than human?

No doubt.
For sure that however it seemed to be even more than that, an oxymoron at best ... at worst? Barbaric & unreasonable - proposing a person could be considered as both property & non-property whenever it suited their 'owners.' Ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:26 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C View Post
True but then considering people inferior for reasons other than race was prevalent then as now.
The difference being the CSA Constitution (as opposed to the current amended USA Constitution & the original unamended US Constitution) specified African origin as being legitimate subjects of the institution of slavery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:30 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason3000 View Post
This is semantics. The war was about establishing that states could not secede if they wished. The "United States" was formed voluntarily. No state would have entered into it had they known they couldn't get out of it when it stopped working for them. At the time of the civil war, there was debate as to whether or not states could simply secede if they wished? Some believed they could, some believed they couldn't. Slavery was the issue that made push come to shove. That said, most Southerners weren't slave owners & weren't fighting for slavery, so much as they were fighting for their Southern pride & their state's rights to independence from the Federal Government.

The revisionist history is by the Uncle Toms who never bothered to think more profoundly than what they were taught in their High School history book. They revere a man that thought they should never be allowed to be in that High School history class because they were sub-humans.
The Union of the States was voluntary - take it or leave it. Once the decision was made, secession was not an option according to either the US or CS Constitution. There are still no amendments allowing secession.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:30 PM
 
Location: Miami, FL
8,087 posts, read 9,836,106 times
Reputation: 6650
Naturally since for the CSA that was the crux of the issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:37 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
That's debatable and depends on the state/country you have the slave in. If a prisoner dies it is no big deal, but if a slave dies the owner is held responsible. Again, the jurisdiction matters as some states/countries had rules on treatment and others did not.



No it isn't. Housing alone is going to be $700/month. Food is going to run $2-$300/month. Then you need to add in guards to restrict the slaves.
Importation of slaves to the Americas was a very lucrative business even while many of the persons imported died before even arriving because of the barbaric conditions aboard the ships transporting. What's your point again?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:40 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C View Post
Naturally since for the CSA that was the crux of the issue.
I've read this thread & that does not seem to be the consensus here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:44 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
You're the one who claimed industrialization was pushing slavery out, I was just responding to that assertion with a rebuttal.

It might have impacted slavery eventually, but not in 1860 or anywhere near it. Slavery was too entrenched in the economic models that employed it to abandon it totally. I do believe industrialization would have lessened it, but never eradicated it completely.
So how is it that some folks here claim the practice of owning people as property was eradicated voluntarily?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:45 PM
 
Location: The analog world
17,077 posts, read 13,364,015 times
Reputation: 22904
I've said it before, and I'll repeat it. Pam, the actual subject of this thread, is being a nitwit, IMHO, and I would like to see her ousted, but it won't happen, because she represents the super conservative 4th Congressional District. By all appearances, her primary focus is school choice, a subject that is extremely contentious in Douglas County.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:47 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason3000 View Post
But you acknowledge Lincoln said all those racist things he was quoted as saying? You just choose to ignore them?
Personally I think most folks back then were more racist than folks are today.

I also think most people are more reasonable & less illogical today than most folks were back then.

Call me a crazy optimist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 07:13 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent View Post
I've said it before, and I'll repeat it. Pam, the actual subject of this thread, is being a nitwit, IMHO, and I would like to see her ousted, but it won't happen, because she represents the super conservative 4th Congressional District. By all appearances, her primary focus is school choice, a subject that is extremely contentious in Douglas County.
The subject of this thread is, imho, a TWIT, that is, a Train Wreck In Training.

& I'm about done here, not flouncing, just done. G'night.
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 08:49 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