Are today's Southern Conservatives any different than Southern Conservatives from the Civil War?

[bripat9643]

Yes they could. What do you think happened in the former Soviet Union when it broke up? Does Russia still station troops in its bases in the Baltic countries?

You're a numskull.

Hey numbskull, what happened when the South did it?

They had their asses handed to them but good.


Boom. Bye bye idiocy

yeah, we know Lincoln invaded Virginia and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Southerners. The fact that you're proud of that says all we need to know about you.

The fact you defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals tells us all we need to know about you.

I see your back to accusing me of supporting slavery.
...

You defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals and the right to preserve, protect and and expand . slavery.

There's no getting around that.

You also defend such people. There's no getting around that.

You're a moron. You're too stupid to realize that you're getting your ass kicked in this discussion.

 

[bripat9643]

The Perpetual Union can only be dissolved by revolution, or by the consent of all the people in convention assembled.

Nevertheless a few years after that document was signed the "perpetual union" was dissolved and a new one put in its place.

So much for your "perpetual union."

...

Yes, we formed a More Perfect Union.


"The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom, and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it were intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It is intended for perpetual union, so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government (not a compact) which can only be dissolved by revolution, or by the consent of all the people in convention assembled."

Nevertheless, the "perpetual union" obviously wasn't perpetual.

Maybe someone hasn't told you, but...the South lost and we remain a Perpetual Union.

The union was already dissolved once, so it obviously isn't perpetual. It will be dissolved again. There's nothing sacred about the current political structure.

 

[paperview]

Hey numbskull, what happened when the South did it?

They had their asses handed to them but good.


Boom. Bye bye idiocy

yeah, we know Lincoln invaded Virginia and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Southerners. The fact that you're proud of that says all we need to know about you.

The fact you defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals tells us all we need to know about you.

I see your back to accusing me of supporting slavery.
...

You defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals and the right to preserve, protect and and expand . slavery.

There's no getting around that.

You also defend such people. There's no getting around that.

It's all yours buddy. These are the people you defend.

 

[bripat9643]

yeah, we know Lincoln invaded Virginia and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Southerners. The fact that you're proud of that says all we need to know about you.

The fact you defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals tells us all we need to know about you.

I see your back to accusing me of supporting slavery.
...

You defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals and the right to preserve, protect and and expand . slavery.

There's no getting around that.

You also defend such people. There's no getting around that.

It's all yours buddy. These are the people you defend.

That's right, run away like a scared little puppy with your tail between your legs.

You're a loser and a coward.

 

[paperview]

No one is running away, shrill little toddler boy flipping the finger.

Must really suck to be on the wrong side of history so often.

 

[bripat9643]

No one is running away, shrill little toddler boy flipping the finger.

Must really suck to be on the wrong side of history so often.

You worship a confessed white supremacist and mass murderer.

 

[Asclepias]

The fact you defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals tells us all we need to know about you.

I see your back to accusing me of supporting slavery.
...

You defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals and the right to preserve, protect and and expand . slavery.

There's no getting around that.

You also defend such people. There's no getting around that.

It's all yours buddy. These are the people you defend.

That's right, run away like a scared little puppy with your tail between your legs.

You're a loser and a coward.

Your a fucking idiot. Your boys..the loser confederates...were nothing but peddlers of human flesh that didnt know when the gig was up.

 

[bripat9643]

I see your back to accusing me of supporting slavery.
...

You defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals and the right to preserve, protect and and expand . slavery.

There's no getting around that.

You also defend such people. There's no getting around that.

It's all yours buddy. These are the people you defend.

That's right, run away like a scared little puppy with your tail between your legs.

You're a loser and a coward.

Your a fucking idiot. Your boys..the loser confederates...were nothing but peddlers of human flesh that didnt know when the gig was up.

You added what you usual add to a thread: nothing.

 

[Asclepias]

You defend people who went to war to keep black human beings in bondage as farm animals and the right to preserve, protect and and expand . slavery.

There's no getting around that.

You also defend such people. There's no getting around that.

It's all yours buddy. These are the people you defend.

That's right, run away like a scared little puppy with your tail between your legs.

You're a loser and a coward.

Your a fucking idiot. Your boys..the loser confederates...were nothing but peddlers of human flesh that didnt know when the gig was up.

You added what you usual add to a thread: nothing.

You loser confederate rednecks add nothing to life. Youre like a shitstain in the boxers of America.

 

[Boss]

There are MANY aspects of the Civil War that we don't have the frame of reference for in a post-Civil War America. And I think that is worth a great deal of consideration when trying to comprehend the times and what was actually happening. We have to realize the federal government was not outlawing slavery and the South rebelled, there had been no legislation suggesting any sort of a thing. We outlawed slave trade, the slave markets, etc., that had been done years before, it wasn't happening in America in 1860. The SCOTUS had ruled in several cases and the US law of the land said slaves were property and the fundamental right to own them rests with their owner. The Southern states didn't do this on their own. This was the actions of US Presidents and Congress all the way up to Lincoln.

So from a purely Constitutional standpoint, what power does the government have to come seize your property? It's covered in the 4th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. It was literally for this very reason the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to the seceded states... they weren't protected by the Constitution anymore. It was well after the end of the war that Congress got around to drafting the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments rendering slavery unconstitutional.

Now, as much as there was any kind of "conservatives" back then, they were the business men who mostly favored states having the right to decide on slavery. Cotton was our #1 trade good.... King Cotton. Mills all along the Eastern seaboard were making tons of money on cotton thanks to Eli Whitney, and life was sweet. New York threatened to secede over the war because they simply didn't want to fight it. But the war happened, the South lost and the history books were written so as to make the war about slavery. And the South has been the scapegoat ever since.

The war was entirely about slavery because if you take slavery out of the equation it is impossible to envision a plausible scenario where 11 states would secede while unifying around the forming of a completely new nation,
the result being a war between that nation and the states remaining in the Union.

I have to say yes and no. The war was actually about whether states have the right to secede from the US. It happened to involve the slavery issue, but the issue was not enslavement of people. SCOTUS and Congress had determined slavery was legal and constitutional. Slave owners had the constitutional right to own slaves as property protected by the 4th Amendment. Slaves had no constitutional rights.

 

[Asclepias]

There are MANY aspects of the Civil War that we don't have the frame of reference for in a post-Civil War America. And I think that is worth a great deal of consideration when trying to comprehend the times and what was actually happening. We have to realize the federal government was not outlawing slavery and the South rebelled, there had been no legislation suggesting any sort of a thing. We outlawed slave trade, the slave markets, etc., that had been done years before, it wasn't happening in America in 1860. The SCOTUS had ruled in several cases and the US law of the land said slaves were property and the fundamental right to own them rests with their owner. The Southern states didn't do this on their own. This was the actions of US Presidents and Congress all the way up to Lincoln.

So from a purely Constitutional standpoint, what power does the government have to come seize your property? It's covered in the 4th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. It was literally for this very reason the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to the seceded states... they weren't protected by the Constitution anymore. It was well after the end of the war that Congress got around to drafting the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments rendering slavery unconstitutional.

Now, as much as there was any kind of "conservatives" back then, they were the business men who mostly favored states having the right to decide on slavery. Cotton was our #1 trade good.... King Cotton. Mills all along the Eastern seaboard were making tons of money on cotton thanks to Eli Whitney, and life was sweet. New York threatened to secede over the war because they simply didn't want to fight it. But the war happened, the South lost and the history books were written so as to make the war about slavery. And the South has been the scapegoat ever since.

The war was entirely about slavery because if you take slavery out of the equation it is impossible to envision a plausible scenario where 11 states would secede while unifying around the forming of a completely new nation,
the result being a war between that nation and the states remaining in the Union.

I have to say yes and no. The war was actually about whether states have the right to secede from the US. It happened to involve the slavery issue, but the issue was not enslavement of people. SCOTUS and Congress had determined slavery was legal and constitutional. Slave owners had the constitutional right to own slaves as property protected by the 4th Amendment. Slaves had no constitutional rights.

Thats what they want you to think. If it was about the right to secede instead of slavery they would not have mentioned they were seceding because of slavery. It says it right in the articles of secession. It also says the same thing in the Keystone address. It was the most important issue of the day for decades leading up to the civil war. Slavery in the US was a money maker like none other in history. Its thee reason the US became an economic power. Of course for the south slavery was the issue.

Cornerstone Speech - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition."

That simply leaves no room for doubt.

 

[Pheonixops]

I think you are naive. Most confederates fought to keep Black people slaves. Says so right in the articles of secession. If he knew thats what they were fighting for then he would have known it was wrong. I'm glad he lost.

Stop being a dumbass. You obviously only have a Jr High School history textbook knowledge of the Civil War. You are the one that is naive or maybe it is just simple ignorance. Sometime it is hard to tell the difference.

I suggest that if you really want to know about the war instead of reading the crap the winners wrote you should actually read first hand accounts from the people that experienced it. They will tell you reasons why they fought it.

On second thought who cares? Believe what you want.

I'm pretty sure Asclepias submitted an actual quote from the losers in their Articles of Scession.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Oh, my goodness. This is the kind of reckless, irresponsible polemic that we don't need in our public discourse. Fire-eating rhetoric like yours needlessly polarizes our political debate.

 

[Boss]

...
But the war happened, the South lost and the history books were written so as to make the war about slavery. And the South has been the scapegoat ever since.

When the South wrote their Declarations of Causes to secede -- *they* made pretty much all about slavery. You ever read them?

The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States

I have read them and the issue of their right to maintain the institution of slavery was indeed at the forefront. It could have just as easily been mules and horses if that had been the property federal government threatened to take from them.

Let's try this... Imagine for a moment it's 2024... Liberal morons have been totally unsuccessful at pushing their 'green' agenda and decide that internal combustion engines are immoral and have to go! They are electing candidates who are talking crazy stuff... like the government seizing all cars and trucks operating on internal combustion, or rendering such engines inoperable. Several times it has gone to court and SCOTUS keeps saying the same thing... people have the right to own cars and trucks and keep them as property.

Now when things finally come to a head and the liberals have elected a man who speaks of abolishing cars and trucks, the secession documents will likely mention cars and trucks and our inalienable right to own them and how it's unconstitutional for the government to take them. But that does not mean the ensuing war is about the morality of the internal combustion engine. You can turn it into that after the war is over, and you can promote that myth for the next 200 years, teaching all the little kiddies about those mean old people who hated the environment and didn't see the evils of internal combustion. After a while, many will just come to accept that was what the war was all about.

 

[Pheonixops]

I'm a Liberal and I think that everyone should be treated equally and that we are pretty much responsible for our own happiness as individuals.

Okay...I could see Obama or Hillary making that same statement, word for word. Their policies and actions belie the rhetoric though.

I agree, but I can also see and have seen the results from so-called conservatives when they have enacted their policies as well.

 

[Pheonixops]

Southern conservatives in 1860 were state rights Democrats. Southern conservatives today are states rights Republicans.

Many people back then were for state rights, even in the North. One of the reasons Lincoln was opposed so much was because his campaign rhetoric was to have a bigger Federal role in the government of the US. By the way, he was elected President with less than 40% of the votes.

The other thing that most people tend to forget is that slavery was legal on the Federal level almost 100 years before the Confederacy was created, stayed legal while the Confederacy existed and continued to be legal until almost a year after the Confederacy dissolved. The US is the nation of slavery.

It certainly WAS the nation of slavery at one time.

 

[paperview]

...
But the war happened, the South lost and the history books were written so as to make the war about slavery. And the South has been the scapegoat ever since.

When the South wrote their Declarations of Causes to secede -- *they* made pretty much all about slavery. You ever read them?

The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States

I have read them and the issue of their right to maintain the institution of slavery was indeed at the forefront. It could have just as easily been mules and horses if that had been the property federal government threatened to take from them.

Let's try this... Imagine for a moment it's 2024... Liberal morons have been totally unsuccessful at pushing their 'green' agenda and decide that internal combustion engines are immoral and have to go! They are electing candidates who are talking crazy stuff... like the government seizing all cars and trucks operating on internal combustion, or rendering such engines inoperable. Several times it has gone to court and SCOTUS keeps saying the same thing... people have the right to own cars and trucks and keep them as property.

Now when things finally come to a head and the liberals have elected a man who speaks of abolishing cars and trucks, the secession documents will likely mention cars and trucks and our inalienable right to own them and how it's unconstitutional for the government to take them. But that does not mean the ensuing war is about the morality of the internal combustion engine. You can turn it into that after the war is over, and you can promote that myth for the next 200 years, teaching all the little kiddies about those mean old people who hated the environment and didn't see the evils of internal combustion. After a while, many will just come to accept that was what the war was all about.

No, it wasn't anything like that.

Hang on...sorry for the long one here folks:
The seceding States themselves to told us exactly why they were seceding ...

Louisiana:
"Louisiana looks to the formation of a Southern confederacy to preserve the blessings of African slavery, and of the free institutions of the founders of the Federal Union, bequeathed to their posterity...

The people of Louisiana would consider it a most fatal blow to African slavery, if Texas either did not secede or having seceded should not join her destinies to theirs in a Southern Confederacy. If she remains in the union the abolitionists would continue their work of incendiarism and murder. Emigrant aid societies would arm with Sharp's rifles predatory bands to infest her northern borders. The Federal Government would mock at her calamity in accepting the recent bribes in the army bill and Pacific railroad bill, and with abolition treachery would leave her unprotected frontier to the murderous inroads of hostile savages....

That constitution the Southern States have never violated, and taking it as the basis of our new government we hope to form a slave-holding confederacy that will secure to us and our remotest posterity the great blessings its authors designed in the Federal Union. With the social balance wheel of slavery to regulate its machinery, we may fondly indulge the hope that our Southern government will be perpetual."

Geo. Williamson
Commissioner of the State of Louisiana
City of Austin Feby 11th 1861.
Address of George Williamson to the Texas Secession Convention
The plea from South Carolina to the other southern states:

"We prefer, however, our system of industry, by which labor and capital are identified in interest, and capital, therefore, protects labor; by which our population doubles every twenty years; by which starvation is unknown, and abundance crowns the land; by which order is preserved by unpaid police, and the most fertile regions of the world where the Caucasian cannot labor are brought into usefulness by the labor of the African, and the whole world is blessed by our own productions....

We ask you to join us in forming a confederacy of Slaveholding States."Address of South Carolina to Slaveholding States by Convention of South Carolina
Texas:
The States of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa, by solemn legislative enactments, have deliberately, directly or indirectly violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article [the fugitive slave clause] of the federal constitution, and laws passed in pursuance thereof; thereby annulling a material provision of the compact, designed by its framers to perpetuate the amity between the members of the confederacy and to secure the rights of the slave-holding States in their domestic institutions-- a provision founded in justice and wisdom, and without the enforcement of which the compact fails to accomplish the object of its creation. Some of those States have imposed high fines and degrading penalties upon any of their citizens or officers who may carry out in good faith that provision of the compact, or the federal laws enacted in accordance therewith.

"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union

Speech to Tennessee Legislature by the Governor:
In discharge of official duty, I had occasion, within the past year, to demand of the Governor of Ohio " a person charged in the State (of Tennessee) with the crime " of slave stealing, who had fled from justice, and was found in the State of Ohio.' The Governor refused to issue his warrant for the arrest and delivery of the fugitive, and in answer to a letter of inquiry which I addressed to him, said: 'The crime of negro stealing not being known to either the common law or the criminal code of Ohio, it is not of that class of crimes contemplated by the Federal Constitution, for the commission of which I am authorized, as the executive of Ohio, to surrender a fugitive from the justice of a sister State, and hence I declined to issue a warrant," &c.; thus deliberately nullifying and setting at defiance the clause of the Constitution above quoted, as well as the act of Congress of February 12th, 1793, and grossly violating the ordinary comity existing between separate and independent nations, much less the comity which should exist between sister States of the same great Confederacy; the correspondence connected with which is herewith transmitted.
It has, through the executive authority of other States, denied extradition of murderers and marauders.
It obtained its own compromise in the Constitution to continue the importation of slaves, and now sets up a law, higher than the Constitution, to destroy this property imported and sold to us by their fathers.

It has caused the murder of owners in pursuit of their fugitive slaves, and shielded the murderers from punishment.

It has, upon many occasions, sent its emissaries into the Southern States to corrupt our slaves; induce them to run off, or excite them to insurrection.

It has run off slave property by means of the "underground railroad," amounting in value to millions of dollars, and thus made the tenure by which slaves are held in the border States so precarious as to materially impair their value.
Alabama."
Speech of Tennessee Governor Isham G. Harris for Secession

(I particularly like this speech; if slavery was abolished and slaves set free, then Whites would be forced to commit murder!):

ALABAMA:
"I wish, Mr. President, to express the feelings with which I vote for the secession of Alabama from the Government of the United States; and to state, in a few words, the reasons that impel me to this act.

I feel impelled, Mr. President, to vote for this Ordinance by an overruling necessity. Years ago I was convinced that the Southern States would be compelled either to separate from the North, by dissolving the Federal Government, or they would be compelled to abolish the institution of African Slavery. This, in my judgment, was the only alternative; and I foresaw that the South would be compelled, at some day, to make her selection. The day is now come, and Alabama must make her selection, either to secede from the Union, and assume the position of a sovereign, independent State, or she must submit to a system of policy on the part of the Federal Government that, in a short time, will compel her to abolish African Slavery.
Mr. President, if pecuniary loss alone were involved in the abolition of slavery, I should hesitate long before I would give the vote I now intend to give. If the destruction of slavery entailed on us poverty alone, I could bear it, for I have seen poverty and felt its sting. But poverty, Mr. President, would be one of the least of the evils that would befall us from the abolition of African slavery. There are now in the slaveholding States over four millions of slaves; dissolve the relation of master and slave, and what, I ask, would become of that race? To remove them from amongst us is impossible. History gives us no account of the exodus of such a number of persons. We neither have a place to which to remove them, nor the means of such removal. They therefore must remain with us; and if the relation of master and slave be dissolved, and our slaves turned loose amongst us without restraint, they would either be destroyed by our own hands-- the hands to which they look, and look with confidence, for protection-- or we ourselves would become demoralized and degraded. The former result would take place, and we ourselves would become the executioners of our own slaves. To this extent would the policy of our Northern enemies drive us; and thus would we not only be reduced to poverty, but what is still worse, we should be driven to crime, to the commission of sin; and we must, therefore, this day elect between the Government formed by our fathers (the whole spirit of which has been perverted), and POVERTY AND CRIME!

Speech of E.S. Dargan Secession Convention of Alabama 1861
South Carolina:

Quote:
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." [Fugitive Slave Clause]

This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.

The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them.
In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed....

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.
Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union
================
(note how they assert their States' Rights plea, while at the same time asserting their Right to interfere with Northern States' Rights.)
=================
Mississippi:

Quote:
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Mississippi Declaration of Secession

Georgia:
For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery...

All these classes saw this and felt it and cast about for new allies. The anti-slavery sentiment of the North offered the best chance for success. An anti-slavery party must necessarily look to the North alone for support, but a united North was now strong enough to control the Government in all of its departments, and a sectional party was therefore determined upon. Time and issues upon slavery were necessary to its completion and final triumph. The feeling of anti-slavery, which it was well known was very general among the people of the North, had been long dormant or passive; it needed only a question to arouse it into aggressive activity. This question was before us. We had acquired a large territory by successful war with Mexico; Congress had to govern it; how, in relation to slavery, was the question then demanding solution. This state of facts gave form and shape to the anti-slavery sentiment throughout the North and the conflict began. Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and firmness by the South...
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.

With these principles on their banners and these utterances on their lips the majority of the people of the North demand that we shall receive them as our rulers.

But they know the value of parchment rights in treacherous hands, and therefore they refuse to commit their own to the rulers whom the North offers us. Why? Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property** in the common territories of the Union; put it under the ban of the Republic in the States where it exists and out of the protection of Federal law everywhere; because they give sanctuary to thieves and incendiaries who assail it to the whole extent of their power, in spite of their most solemn obligations and covenants; because their avowed purpose is to subvert our society and subject us not only to the loss of our property but the destruction of ourselves, our wives, and our children, and the desolation of our homes, our altars, and our firesides. To avoid these evils we resume the powers which our fathers delegated to the Government of the United States, and henceforth will seek new safeguards for our liberty, equality, security, and tranquility.
**property = humans

Liberty! Equality! Security! -- except for the nearly half of our population that are in bondage and we own as one might own a horse or cattle and place up on auction blocks..
Georgia Declarations of Causes of Seceding States Civil War

Confederate Constitution Secession Articles of American Civil War

 

[Pheonixops]

Southern conservatives in 1860 were state rights Democrats. Southern conservatives today are states rights Republicans.

Exactly right. You can call the Democrats back then or you can call them Republicans today. Doesn't matter. The racist south was, and is, Conservative right.

Pretty much the same with the "racist North" as well. They spout the same rhetoric as their brethren to the South and West.

 

[bripat9643]

You also defend such people. There's no getting around that.

It's all yours buddy. These are the people you defend.

That's right, run away like a scared little puppy with your tail between your legs.

You're a loser and a coward.

Your a fucking idiot. Your boys..the loser confederates...were nothing but peddlers of human flesh that didnt know when the gig was up.

You added what you usual add to a thread: nothing.

You loser confederate rednecks add nothing to life. Youre like a shitstain in the boxers of America.

Ooooh, that is so hateful! Hissssssssssss!

You Lincoln cult members just can't stand to learn the truth about your bloodthirsty hero, can you?

 

[Pheonixops]

Southern conservatives in 1860 were state rights Democrats. Southern conservatives today are states rights Republicans.

Exactly right. You can call the Democrats back then or you can call them Republicans today. Doesn't matter. The racist south was, and is, Conservative right.

Historically, Conservatives have opposed the expansion of rights in this country at virtually every turn, generation by generation,

issue by issue.

Why are they called conservatives, afterall?

Because they want to CONSERVE things the way they are. Or, they want to move backwards, and then conserve things the way they were.

Liberal "rights" are just excuses to give people stuff while others pay for it.

I guess you feel the same thing about the Liberal Bill of Rights and the Liberal Constitution?