Page 34 of 1877 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644841345341034 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 18763

Thread: Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

  1. #331
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    PWC, VA
    Posts
    9,132
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Latrinsorm View Post
    That's the whole reason why the South seceded in the first place. They could see the writing on the wall, that they were becoming more and more outnumbered by people who explicitly did not want slavery. If the average Northerner really didn't care about slavery in the South, why secede at all? Where was the threat to provoke such an extreme response?
    I would guess because the average northerner's voice wasn't what was going into legislation, similar to today.

  2. #332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tyrant-201 View Post
    You're viewing this through a modern moral lens that I assure you most people did not have back then.

    That said, I'm still at work. I'll answer more extensively later.
    I would dispute that fully. Clearly there were anti-slavery sentiments to the extent a war was fought over it.

  3. #333
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    PWC, VA
    Posts
    9,132
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    You have the right to think what you want but I would say that the main reason slavery was considered legal was because of the laws at the time. Abolition and anti-slavery movements were well pre-Civil War and mainly sprang from religious groups.
    http://www.ushistory.org/us/27f.asp

    You realize there are different religions that have different views on subjects, right?

  4. #334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    Clearly there were anti-slavery sentiments to the extent a war was fought over it.
    No. No it wasn't. The civil war wasn't "fought over" slavery, it was fought because the north wanted to keep the union together. You could argue state's rights and slavery were pretty much interchangeable on the south's part for why they wanted to secede, but the north's goal was to keep the union together.

    Brainwashed people like yourself think the north started the war to "free" the slaves in the south. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

  5. #335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgo01 View Post
    No. No it wasn't. The civil war wasn't "fought over" slavery, it was fought because the north wanted to keep the union together. You could argue state's rights and slavery were pretty much interchangeable on the south's part for why they wanted to secede, but the north's goal was to keep the union together.

    Brainwashed people like yourself think the north started the war to "free" the slaves in the south. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.
    I know the South started the war and slavery was the reason for it. No matter how you get to it the reason is always slavery.

    Why are you and others so adamant about refusing to acknowledge this? Is it such a horrible thing that people decided slavery was wrong and did something about it?

  6. #336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drauz View Post
    I would guess because the average northerner's voice wasn't what was going into legislation, similar to today.
    Again though, we have a record in this period of free state after free state being admitted to the Union. These are states that have made an explicit and intentional choice against slavery. Slave state doesn't mean that everyone has to own a slave, it just means slavery is allowed. If it were actually the case that Northerners were for the most part indifferent, surely they would have acceded to this option, no? We're not talking about fat cat Senators hundreds of miles away, these were choices made by popular vote.
    Hasta pronto, porque la vida no termina aqui...
    America, stop pushing. I know what I'm doing.

  7. #337
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Peyton Place
    Posts
    5,210

    Default

    The south wanted any new states to either be slave states or have that right, so as not to be outnumbered and have slavery made illegal etc etc
    '
    Khaladon starts to turn the crystal knob, but stops with a frightened look on his face. He begins shaking uncontrollably and flies across the room, as though by some invisible force.

    **SPLAT!!** Khaladon careens off the far wall, slides down the smooth wood panelling and collapses into a quivering heap on the floor, with only his dignity bruised.

  8. #338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgo01 View Post
    No. No it wasn't. The civil war wasn't "fought over" slavery, it was fought because the north wanted to keep the union together. You could argue state's rights and slavery were pretty much interchangeable on the south's part for why they wanted to secede, but the north's goal was to keep the union together.
    You could argue that, but you'd be wrong. The Confederate Constitution explicitly puts slavery ahead of states' rights by forbidding any state from ever banning slavery. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4.
    Hasta pronto, porque la vida no termina aqui...
    America, stop pushing. I know what I'm doing.

  9. #339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    Why are you and others so adamant about refusing to acknowledge this? Is it such a horrible thing that people decided slavery was wrong and did something about it?
    Because we're not going to rewrite history because of your feelings. The North did not go to war with the south to free the slaves. Period. End of discussion. Just because you so badly want it to be true does not make it true.

  10. #340
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    PWC, VA
    Posts
    9,132
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Latrinsorm View Post
    Again though, we have a record in this period of free state after free state being admitted to the Union. These are states that have made an explicit and intentional choice against slavery. Slave state doesn't mean that everyone has to own a slave, it just means slavery is allowed. If it were actually the case that Northerners were for the most part indifferent, surely they would have acceded to this option, no? We're not talking about fat cat Senators hundreds of miles away, these were choices made by popular vote.
    If by popular vote you mean Congress... North of the Ohio River slavery was prohibited by Federal law for new territories.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Ordinance

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2442
    Last Post: 03-15-2025, 10:59 AM
  2. Replies: 8044
    Last Post: 03-15-2025, 10:05 AM
  3. Replies: 6245
    Last Post: 01-21-2025, 01:55 PM
  4. Things that made you frown today (Political version)
    By Warriorbird in forum Politics
    Replies: 185
    Last Post: 08-01-2024, 01:08 PM
  5. Replies: 1017
    Last Post: 03-12-2024, 09:22 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •