Confederacy not as bad?

[Immanuel]

You are welcome to your opinion, but please explain why you do not think it is a grey area....Did a state have the right to secede or not and if so under what conditions.

Two words: Tenth Amendment

That doesn't change a thing.

The Constitution granted rights to the states that the two sides disagreed on.

The South claimed the right to secede. The North claimed that the right to secede did not exist, but that did not mean that there were no states rights. Basically, the North believed that the States were subservient to the Federal Government and the South contended that it was the other way around.

That still leaves room for give and take by both sides thus leaving it a grey area. I submit the following in my assertion that there was no hard and fast rule as to the rights of the States.

From Wikipedia.

Interpretations of the amendment can be divided into two camps. The first interpretation, as held by the Tenth Amendment Center, the Libertarian and Constitution Parties, and a few Republicans including Ron Paul and Jeff Flake, is that the Constitution does not grant the United States any power that it does not expressly mention. This has been used as the basis for such court cases as Gonzales v. Raich, and for arguments in favor of repealing a large number of Federal laws, abolishing the Federal Reserve, and drastically slashing the Federal budget by 50% or more. It is also why amendments were necessary for the abolition of slavery and the prohibition of alcohol - without said amendments, Congress did not have the authority to do those things.

The contrary opinion is that the Constitution grants Congress the authority to do more or less anything that is not explicitly prohibited by the first eight amendments.

James Ostrowski - Lincoln's Secession Arguments

President Lincoln set forth his views on secession mainly in his First Inaugural Address (March 4, 1861), and his Special Message to Congress (July 4, 1861). In the first speech, Lincoln made primarily political arguments against secession, apparently hoping to persuade secessionists with his arguments. However, with secession already accomplished by July 4, 1861, Lincoln's Special Address to Congress focused on the alleged illegality of secession, to establish the legitimacy of his intended military resistance to it. This paper will therefore first consider the Special Message's legal arguments against secession, then the First Inaugural's political arguments against secession.

In his July 4, 1861 address to Congress, President Lincoln called the doctrine of the secessionists "an insidious debauching of the public mind." "They invented," he said, "an ingenious sophism, which, if conceded, was followed by perfectly logical steps, through all the incidents, to the complete destruction of the Union. The sophism itself is, that any state of the Union may, consistently with the national Constitution, and therefore lawfully, and peacefully, withdraw from the Union, without the consent of the Union, or of any other state." Ironically, it was not "fire-eating" Southern rebels who had originated this "sophism," but the man Lincoln called "the most distinguished politician in our history"--Thomas Jefferson.11 Jefferson, who called Virginia his "country," planted the seeds of the secession doctrine with his Kentucky Resolution of 1798, written in protest to the Alien and Sedition laws:

"[T]he several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by compact, under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States, and of certain amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for general purposes, delegated to that government certain powers, reserving, each state to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void and of no effect."12

Hannis Taylor called Jefferson's compact doctrine the "Pandora's Box" out of which flew the "closely related doctrines of nullification and secession," which he notes, with less than perfect foresight, "were extinguished once and forever by the Civil War."13 Jefferson's biographer, Willard Sterne Randall agrees:

"[Jefferson] forthrightly held that where the national government exercised powers not specifically delegated to it, each state 'has an equal right to judge . . . the mode and measure of redress.' . . . He was, he assured Madison, 'confident in the good sense of the American people,' but if they did not rally round 'the true principles of our federal compact,' he was 'determined . . . to sever ourselves from that union we so much value rather than give up the rights of self-government . . . in which alone we see liberty, safety and happiness.'"14

In reply to this "insidious debauching of the public mind," Lincoln constructs a straw man secessionist argument: "This sophism derives much--perhaps the whole--of its currency, from the assumption, that there is some omnipotent, and sacred supremacy, pertaining to a State--to each State of our Federal Union." No secessionist including Jefferson made such an argument, though it sounds ominously like a description of Lincoln's own feelings about the Union. Since the States created the Union, Lincoln's denigration of the States and glorification of the Union is paradoxical.

American Civil War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Causes of secession
Main articles: Origins of the American Civil War and Timeline of events leading to the American Civil War

The coexistence of a slave-owning South with an increasingly anti-slavery North made conflict likely. Lincoln did not propose federal laws against slavery where it already existed, but he had, in his 1858 House Divided Speech, expressed a desire to "arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction."[1] Much of the political battle in the 1850s focused on the expansion of slavery into the newly created territories.[2][3][4] All of the organized territories were likely to become free-soil states, which increased the Southern movement toward secession. Both North and South assumed that if slavery could not expand it would wither and die.[5][6][7]

Southern fears of losing control of the federal government to antislavery forces, and Northern fears that the slave power already controlled the government, brought the crisis to a head in the late 1850s. Sectional disagreements over the morality of slavery, the scope of democracy and the economic merits of free labor vs. slave plantations caused the Whig and "Know-Nothing" parties to collapse, and new ones to arise (the Free Soil Party in 1848, the Republicans in 1854, the Constitutional Union in 1860). In 1860, the last remaining national political party, the Democratic Party, split along sectional lines.

Both North and South were influenced by the ideas of Thomas Jefferson. Southerners emphasized, in connection with slavery, the states' rights[8][9][10] ideas mentioned in Jefferson's Kentucky Resolutions. Northerners ranging from the abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison to the moderate Republican leader Abraham Lincoln[11] emphasized Jefferson's declaration that all men are created equal. Lincoln mentioned this proposition in his Gettysburg Address.

Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens said[12][13] that slavery was the chief cause of secession[14] in his Cornerstone Speech shortly before the war. After Confederate defeat, Stephens became one of the most ardent defenders of the Lost Cause.[15] There was a striking contrast[14][16] between Stephens' post-war states' rights assertion that slavery did not cause secession[15] and his pre-war Cornerstone Speech. Confederate President Jefferson Davis also switched from saying the war was caused by slavery to saying that states' rights was the cause. While Southerners often used states' rights arguments to defend slavery, sometimes roles were reversed, as when Southerners demanded national laws to defend their interests with the Gag Rule and the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. On these issues, it was Northerners who wanted to defend the rights of their states.[17]

Sometimes the roles were reversed... grey area. No hard and fast rule.

Immie

 

[JBeukema]

The right existed because it was not denied the states in the constitution

again, after they attacked US land, it made no difference

 

[Immanuel]

The right existed because it was not denied the states in the constitution

again, after they attacked US land, it made no difference

That is not what we are discussing. We are not arguing whether or not the right existed but rather if it was a "hard and fast rule" seen the same by both sides.

I do not disagree that the right existed, although I imagine there are some "federalists" on this board that would argue that the right does not exist. What I said in the post that brought you into the discussion was that it was a grey area. The two sides did not agree but neither side saw it as an either/or situation.

There were times when the sides reversed their points of view on states right vs federal rights. Much like I would say "No abortions... period!... except when the mother's life is at risk". You see, even someone as stubborn as myself realizes that there are times when rules don't or shouldn't apply.

Immie

 

[JBeukema]

We are not arguing whether or not the right existed but rather if it was a "hard and fast rule" seen the same by both sides.

The right to exist isn't seen by both sides, yet it exists

I do not disagree that the right existed, although I imagine there are some "federalists" on this board that would argue that the right does not exist.[/QUOTE

Then they are fools who understand neither the Constitution nor the consent of the governed

Much like I would say "No abortions... period!... except when the mother's life is at risk"

Actually, that's reason and the logical implications of the physician's oath to preserve life. States' rights have nothing to do with it

 

[Immanuel]

Then they are fools who understand neither the Constitution nor the consent of the governed

Then you would be calling Abe Lincoln a fool, because he did not recognize the right of secession either. I am quite confident that President Lincoln was not alone in that belief either. How many Union soldiers died for the anti-secession cause?

Immie

 

[Xenophon]

Confederacy sucked, they had horrible uniforms.

I'd want to fight too if they made me wear that.

 

[ItsFairmont]

Uh oh... Got your flak jacket on?

What's that supposed to be, a threat?

 

[JohnStOnge]

I've been seriously thinking about the civil war and the circumstances that led to the confederacy breaking the Union. I grew up as thinking South bad - North good, but my mind is changing. Where are States Right anymore, now i know how they feel. Yea Slavery was wrong and I'm more than glad it was abolished, but as for states rights, who was really right and who was really in the wrong.

Tell me your opinion.

I think the South was right about the States Rights issue in terms of what the original intent of the Contitution was and what the understanding of the original 13 colonies was when they agreed to enter into the Union. But, as we know, might makes right and the North had a much bigger population, a far superior industrial base, and a navy.

 

[Iriemon]

The right existed because it was not denied the states in the constitution

again, after they attacked US land, it made no difference

Why was Ft. Sumner US land after SC seceded? Isn't in SC territory?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The right existed because it was not denied the states in the constitution

again, after they attacked US land, it made no difference

Why was Ft. Sumner US land after SC seceded? Isn't in SC territory?

Exactly. Which is why they attacked Fort Sumter in the first place. They didn't want a Union base in their borders.

 

[JBeukema]

Then they are fools who understand neither the Constitution nor the consent of the governed

Then you would be calling Abe Lincoln a fool, because he did not recognize the right of secession either. I am quite confident that President Lincoln was not alone in that belief either. How many Union soldiers died for the anti-secession cause?

Immie

Abe Lincoln was a fool in that regard, though he deafened the union and crush her attacker

Why was Ft. Sumner US land after SC seceded? Isn't in SC territory?

No. The fort was the territory of the Union Army. The commander of the fort and his mean diod not succeed. When the CSA seceded, they claimed land belonging to and held by loyalists who stayed with the Union. They then attacked a union fort, killing American soldiers on American soil- an act of war... a war they could not win

They didn't want a Union base in their borders.

On their border, not on their land. They crossed the borders of the land they held under Confederate control and attacked union soil- attacked a union fort. That act of war would lead to their destruction

 

[007]

I think it's rather safe to say that the south and the north "didn't like each other," and when the north threw down the, "you have to set all your slaves free" gauntlet to the south, they told them to piss off, and secession was how they did it, and that lead to war.

Now today I think it's probably just as safe to say that liberals and conservatives don't like each other either, and now that the liberals have an ultra liberal empty suit with zero experience at anything running everything, and fucking up is putting what he and his cohorts have been up to, the conservatives are looking back at what happened during the Civil War and saying, "maybe we need to do that again."

Here's a quote from President Jefferson that's eerily relavent to matters today...

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

And another from Abraham Lincoln...

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. ~Abraham Lincoln

Our country is reaching the point of no return. We can't vote our way out of this mess, we can't buy our way out of this mess, we can't borrow our way out of this mess. It's going to take something a lot more intense, like a revolution... like a Civil War.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Then they are fools who understand neither the Constitution nor the consent of the governed

Then you would be calling Abe Lincoln a fool, because he did not recognize the right of secession either. I am quite confident that President Lincoln was not alone in that belief either. How many Union soldiers died for the anti-secession cause?

Immie

Abe Lincoln was a fool in that regard, though he deafened the union and crush her attacker

Why was Ft. Sumner US land after SC seceded? Isn't in SC territory?

No. The fort was the territory of the Union Army. The commander of the fort and his mean diod not succeed. When the CSA seceded, they claimed land belonging to and held by loyalists who stayed with the Union. They then attacked a union fort, killing American soldiers on American soil- an act of war... a war they could not win

They didn't want a Union base in their borders.

On their border, not on their land. They crossed the borders of the land they held under Confederate control and attacked union soil- attacked a union fort. That act of war would lead to their destruction

Actually, nobody was killed at Fort Sumter. They surrendered and were allowed to return to the north.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I think it's rather safe to say that the south and the north "didn't like each other," and when the north threw down the, "you have to set all your slaves free" gauntlet to the south, they told them to piss off, and secession was how they did it, and that lead to war.

Now today I think it's probably just as safe to say that liberals and conservatives don't like each other either, and now that the liberals have an ultra liberal empty suit with zero experience at anything running everything, and fucking up is putting what he and his cohorts have been up to, the conservatives are looking back at what happened during the Civil War and saying, "maybe we need to do that again."

Here's a quote from President Jefferson that's eerily relavent to matters today...

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

And another from Abraham Lincoln...

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. ~Abraham Lincoln

Our country is reaching the point of no return. We can't vote our way out of this mess, we can't buy our way out of this mess, we can't borrow our way out of this mess. It's going to take something a lot more intense, like a revolution... like a Civil War.

The north never told the south that they have to set all their slaves free, in fact the north was quite content with the slaves where they were. They didn't want all the freed slaves to move to the north. And the Lincoln quote you provided is actually a fake, Lincoln never said that.

 

[JBeukema]

Actually, nobody was killed at Fort Sumter. They surrendered and were allowed to return to the north.

Really? *Google*

No one from either side was killed during the bombardment, with only five Union and four Confederate soldiers severely injured.

I stand corrected. So they attacked and wounded union soldiers...

During the 100-gun salute to the U.S. flag—Anderson's one condition for withdrawal—a pile of cartridges blew up from a spark, killing one soldier instantly (Private Daniel Hough) and seriously injuring the rest of the gun crew, one mortally (Private Edward Galloway); these were the first fatalities of the war.[12] The salute was stopped at fifty shots. Galloway and another injured crewman were sent to the hospital in Charleston where Galloway died.

(Wikipedia)

that's... sad...

 

[007]

I think it's rather safe to say that the south and the north "didn't like each other," and when the north threw down the, "you have to set all your slaves free" gauntlet to the south, they told them to piss off, and secession was how they did it, and that lead to war.

Now today I think it's probably just as safe to say that liberals and conservatives don't like each other either, and now that the liberals have an ultra liberal empty suit with zero experience at anything running everything, and fucking up is putting what he and his cohorts have been up to, the conservatives are looking back at what happened during the Civil War and saying, "maybe we need to do that again."

Here's a quote from President Jefferson that's eerily relavent to matters today...

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

And another from Abraham Lincoln...

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. ~Abraham Lincoln

Our country is reaching the point of no return. We can't vote our way out of this mess, we can't buy our way out of this mess, we can't borrow our way out of this mess. It's going to take something a lot more intense, like a revolution... like a Civil War.

The north never told the south that they have to set all their slaves free, in fact the north was quite content with the slaves where they were. They didn't want all the freed slaves to move to the north. And the Lincoln quote you provided is actually a fake, Lincoln never said that.

Then what do you think the Emancipation Proclamation was? The north wanted the slaves free. They made no qualms about it. Whether they insisted the south free all their slaves or not was irrelevant. The south wasn't going to have any of it, so there was war.

And yes, Lincoln did say that. If you think otherwise, prove it.

A couple more Jefferson quotes...

Every generation needs a new revolution.
-Thomas Jefferson

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
-Thomas Jefferson

 

[JBeukema]

logically, you must prove the positive- that he said it- by providing a source. Otherwise, we must assume the negative, making you a liar

 

[Zoomie1980]

I've been seriously thinking about the civil war and the circumstances that led to the confederacy breaking the Union. I grew up as thinking South bad - North good, but my mind is changing. Where are States Right anymore, now i know how they feel. Yea Slavery was wrong and I'm more than glad it was abolished, but as for states rights, who was really right and who was really in the wrong.

Tell me your opinion.

Virtually ALL domestic policy should be decided and implemented at the local and state level. A Federal gov't responsibility pretty much begins and ends with national defense. Domestically, it's only viable role is ensuring the free flow of interstate commerce. That's what the founding fathers envisioned, anyway. People must remember, this nation came very close to never forming and actually spent it's early years as only a very loosely tied "federation" of 13 mostly autonomous states. When we won the Mexican-American war in 1848, California pretty much existed as an independent nation-state until the Intercontinental railroad connected to the east in 1869. It didn;t even really participate in the Civil War, being so far removed.

States rights are the at the core of our founding father's beliefs.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I think it's rather safe to say that the south and the north "didn't like each other," and when the north threw down the, "you have to set all your slaves free" gauntlet to the south, they told them to piss off, and secession was how they did it, and that lead to war.

Now today I think it's probably just as safe to say that liberals and conservatives don't like each other either, and now that the liberals have an ultra liberal empty suit with zero experience at anything running everything, and fucking up is putting what he and his cohorts have been up to, the conservatives are looking back at what happened during the Civil War and saying, "maybe we need to do that again."

Here's a quote from President Jefferson that's eerily relavent to matters today...



And another from Abraham Lincoln...



Our country is reaching the point of no return. We can't vote our way out of this mess, we can't buy our way out of this mess, we can't borrow our way out of this mess. It's going to take something a lot more intense, like a revolution... like a Civil War.

The north never told the south that they have to set all their slaves free, in fact the north was quite content with the slaves where they were. They didn't want all the freed slaves to move to the north. And the Lincoln quote you provided is actually a fake, Lincoln never said that.

Then what do you think the Emancipation Proclamation was? The north wanted the slaves free. They made no qualms about it. Whether they insisted the south free all their slaves or not was irrelevant. The south wasn't going to have any of it, so there was war.

And yes, Lincoln did say that. If you think otherwise, prove it.

A couple more Jefferson quotes...

Every generation needs a new revolution.
-Thomas Jefferson

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
-Thomas Jefferson

Well I can't technically prove that he didn't say it because I can't point to something and say, "There it isn't!" You can simply say I'm wrong, take my word for it, or try to prove me wrong by finding where exactly he said it.

As to the Emancipation Proclamation, that came well after the south had already seceded. Your previous post said that the north said that the south had to free their slaves so the south seceded, which is incorrect.

 

[Zoomie1980]

I think it's rather safe to say that the south and the north "didn't like each other," and when the north threw down the, "you have to set all your slaves free" gauntlet to the south, they told them to piss off, and secession was how they did it, and that lead to war.

Now today I think it's probably just as safe to say that liberals and conservatives don't like each other either, and now that the liberals have an ultra liberal empty suit with zero experience at anything running everything, and fucking up is putting what he and his cohorts have been up to, the conservatives are looking back at what happened during the Civil War and saying, "maybe we need to do that again."

Here's a quote from President Jefferson that's eerily relavent to matters today...



And another from Abraham Lincoln...



Our country is reaching the point of no return. We can't vote our way out of this mess, we can't buy our way out of this mess, we can't borrow our way out of this mess. It's going to take something a lot more intense, like a revolution... like a Civil War.

The north never told the south that they have to set all their slaves free, in fact the north was quite content with the slaves where they were. They didn't want all the freed slaves to move to the north. And the Lincoln quote you provided is actually a fake, Lincoln never said that.

Then what do you think the Emancipation Proclamation was? The north wanted the slaves free. They made no qualms about it. Whether they insisted the south free all their slaves or not was irrelevant. The south wasn't going to have any of it, so there was war.

And yes, Lincoln did say that. If you think otherwise, prove it.

A couple more Jefferson quotes...

Every generation needs a new revolution.
-Thomas Jefferson

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
-Thomas Jefferson

Many Jefferson quotes:

John Kennedy once said to a assembled group of scholars in the White House, "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

The quotes below could prove his point.

When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe
Thomas Jefferson

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.
Thomas Jefferson

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson


No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson


Very Interesting Quote:


In light of the present financial crisis, it's interesting to read what Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:

Banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.