Legal because they made it legal. They wrote the laws. That's like arguing it's okay when Iran executes people for being gay because that is legal and acceptable in Iran.
Most Americans give 0 ***** about Zelensky you assholes wanna build him statues
Wrong on both counts. Also irrelevant to this discussion
Not when Biden has "Ukraine garden" in the Omnibus bill. You support that
You have to love how confused these assclowns are. They are crying over statues to people who were bigger pieces of shit than the Taliban while calling people who oppose those statues the Taliban. Opposing statues is bad but fighting for slavery is good. White wing logic in action.
Nope.
Oh sure, those at the Constitutional Convention could have insisted slavery end and the Constitution would never have been written. The Southern States would have simply walked out of the Constitutional Convention.
billofrightsinstitute.org
A lot of Yankees possibly including some of my ancestors fought and died in the Civil War to free slaves.You have to love how confused these assclowns are. They are crying over statues to people who were bigger pieces of shit than the Taliban while calling people who oppose those statues the Taliban. Opposing statues is bad but fighting for slavery is good. White wing logic in action.
And? Those just sound like excuses made by whites for whites to absolve whites. It sounds like propaganda. The decision to end the importation of slaves just so happened to coincide with rise of a healthy domestic slave trade. Through acts of brutal rapes and forced breeding and the selling away of husband's and wives and children America managed to sell and transport more than twice as many slaves between 1808 and the start of the Civil War than during the entire international slave trade. Around 400,000 slaves were brought here from Africa and by the start of the Civil War there were around 4 million slaves.Oh sure, those at the Constitutional Convention could have insisted slavery end and the Constitution would never have been written. The Southern States would have simply walked out of the Constitutional Convention.
Slavery and the US Constitution
***snip***
The Framers made a prudential compromise with slavery because they sought to achieve their highest goal of a stronger Union of republican self-government. Since some slaveholding delegations threatened to walk out of the Constitution if slavery was threatened, there was a real possibility that there would have been separate free and slave confederacies instead of the United States. The free states would have lost all leverage over the slave states to end slavery if they had separated. The Framers had to create the Union with the institution of slavery but built a regime of liberty that they hoped would lead to slavery’s ultimate extinction.
The specific clauses of the Constitution related to slavery were the Three-Fifths Clause, the ban on Congress ending the slave trade for twenty years, the fugitive slave clause, and the slave insurrections. However, the Constitution only very obliquely referred to slavery and never used the words slave or slavery because the Framers were embarrassed by the institution. They believed that slavery was morally wrong and would die out, and they did not want that permanent moral stain on the document. Interestingly, they avoided the word slave and referred to slaves as persons.
Also don’t forget the states had to ratify the Constitution before it could take effect. If the Constitution had banned slavery or freed all slaves in 10 years, the Southern states would have rejected the Constitution at their conventions.
I appreciate that a lot of them died, I'm sorry more of them didn't. The whites in the North may not of cared for slavery but not many of them cared for equal rights either. They fought to restore the Union, freeing the slaves in the South was war time strategy. At the end of reconstruction once they had brought the Southern states back into the fold and after the North got a little taste of free blacks heading North looking for work they quickly embrace the idea of segregation and an apartheid state and allowed white racist terrorists in the south to brutalize Black Americans yet again for another 100 years.
Do you hate all whites?
Of course I don't hate all whites. In fact I have a very diverse family that includes a lot of white and mixed white people who I love dearly and there are many decent hearted white Americans all around the country. Who I dislike are the slaver and segregationist idolizing whites. And what's wrong with that? What's wrong with hating slavers and segregationists and lovers of slavers and segregationists? It would be like finding fault with hating Nazis and nazi supporters.
Hate is a very strong word. I try not to hate anyone. I would have been an abolitionist in the Civil War times and would have joined the Union Army to fight slavery.
And then you would of supported statues to idolaize men who killed your brothers in arms. I don't think that makes you noble, I think that makes you a confused moron.
I don’t hate statues. I don’t hate people whose ancestors fought in the Civil War and they still respect and admire them. In my opinion Robert E. Lee was a brilliant general and deserves a statue. You realize he also distinguished himself in the Mexican War.
You dont hate them but you would of taken up arms to kill them. Like I said you're one confused cat.
