Confederate constitution legalized slavery

[Asclepias]

Says right in the title what the OP is about. Matter of fact you dont look too intelligent trying to tell the author of the thread what her thread is about.

Her thread states (And she is the same idiot that I have bitch slapped around several times before) that it is about slavery within the CSA Constitution, hence we may point to the Immorality of the North. You don't set to sit in an ivory tower, you don't have the right to that position.
The thread is a gratuitous attempt to slap the Southern people around with a stick of guilt to deflect from the Yankees own immorality. The idiot opened the door, I just stepped it to bitch slap her and every other pious Yankee.

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

 

[hortysir]

Her thread states (And she is the same idiot that I have bitch slapped around several times before) that it is about slavery within the CSA Constitution, hence we may point to the Immorality of the North. You don't set to sit in an ivory tower, you don't have the right to that position.
The thread is a gratuitous attempt to slap the Southern people around with a stick of guilt to deflect from the Yankees own immorality. The idiot opened the door, I just stepped it to bitch slap her and every other pious Yankee.

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

 

[peach174]

Then why did they pass a bill for all new states to be slave free?

Where did you get that idea?

The Northwest Ordinance
American History USA
The Northwest Ordinance laid out the details of the admission process. When a territory reached 60,000 people it could create a constitution and apply for statehood. This procedure was first applied to Ohio in 1803, and served as a continuing model for the remainder of the United States.

Slavery and involuntary servitude were forbidden in the Northwest Territory, thereby making the Ohio River a natural dividing line between the free and slave states of the country.

ha ha. I guess that's why all the states admitted after the original 13 were Freeee!

Amirite?

Who ever said it earlier about you going back to knitting was right.

You're way out of your league here.

You are the one who asked.
It's your problem if you did not like the answer

The answer was *wrong.*

You said : "Then why did they pass a bill for all new states to be slave free?"

Then you posted the 1787 Northwest Ordinance.

Which makes people

Was it not introduced to congress and passed?
The Northwest Ordinance: Our First National Bill of Rights.
ERIC - The Northwest Ordinance Our First National Bill of Rights. 1986-May

 

[paperview]

Where did you get that idea?

The Northwest Ordinance
American History USA
The Northwest Ordinance laid out the details of the admission process. When a territory reached 60,000 people it could create a constitution and apply for statehood. This procedure was first applied to Ohio in 1803, and served as a continuing model for the remainder of the United States.

Slavery and involuntary servitude were forbidden in the Northwest Territory, thereby making the Ohio River a natural dividing line between the free and slave states of the country.

ha ha. I guess that's why all the states admitted after the original 13 were Freeee!

Amirite?

Who ever said it earlier about you going back to knitting was right.

You're way out of your league here.

You are the one who asked.
It's your problem if you did not like the answer

The answer was *wrong.*

You said : "Then why did they pass a bill for all new states to be slave free?"

Then you posted the 1787 Northwest Ordinance.

Which makes people

Was it not introduced to congress and passed?
The Northwest Ordinance: Our First National Bill of Rights.
ERIC - The Northwest Ordinance Our First National Bill of Rights. 1986-May

Quick question peachy: After 1787 to the Civil War - how many new states entered the union "slave free" states?

Think on it. Real hard.

 

[paperview]

Her thread states (And she is the same idiot that I have bitch slapped around several times before) that it is about slavery within the CSA Constitution, hence we may point to the Immorality of the North. You don't set to sit in an ivory tower, you don't have the right to that position.
The thread is a gratuitous attempt to slap the Southern people around with a stick of guilt to deflect from the Yankees own immorality. The idiot opened the door, I just stepped it to bitch slap her and every other pious Yankee.

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

Says right in the title what the OP is about. Matter of fact you dont look too intelligent trying to tell the author of the thread what her thread is about.

Her thread states (And she is the same idiot that I have bitch slapped around several times before) that it is about slavery within the CSA Constitution, hence we may point to the Immorality of the North. You don't set to sit in an ivory tower, you don't have the right to that position.
The thread is a gratuitous attempt to slap the Southern people around with a stick of guilt to deflect from the Yankees own immorality. The idiot opened the door, I just stepped it to bitch slap her and every other pious Yankee.

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Just when was the Corwin Amendment introduced in the House, and when was it passed?

Gowan. Tell us.

 

[Ravi]

Says right in the title what the OP is about. Matter of fact you dont look too intelligent trying to tell the author of the thread what her thread is about.

Her thread states (And she is the same idiot that I have bitch slapped around several times before) that it is about slavery within the CSA Constitution, hence we may point to the Immorality of the North. You don't set to sit in an ivory tower, you don't have the right to that position.
The thread is a gratuitous attempt to slap the Southern people around with a stick of guilt to deflect from the Yankees own immorality. The idiot opened the door, I just stepped it to bitch slap her and every other pious Yankee.

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Link?

 

[Ravi]

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

 

[hortysir]

Her thread states (And she is the same idiot that I have bitch slapped around several times before) that it is about slavery within the CSA Constitution, hence we may point to the Immorality of the North. You don't set to sit in an ivory tower, you don't have the right to that position.
The thread is a gratuitous attempt to slap the Southern people around with a stick of guilt to deflect from the Yankees own immorality. The idiot opened the door, I just stepped it to bitch slap her and every other pious Yankee.

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Link?

Later in 1861, another proposed amendment, also numbered thirteen, was signed by President Lincoln. This was the only proposed amendment that was ever signed by a president. That resolve to amend read: "ARTICLE THIRTEEN, No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State." (In other words, President Lincoln had signed a resolve that would have permitted slavery, and upheld states' rights.) Only one State, Illinois, ratified this proposed amendment before the Civil War broke out in 1861.
The Missing 13th Amendment - 13

 

[paperview]

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

In the US, Constitutionally, it was legal.

 

[paperview]

When have you ever bitch slapped anyone, let alone me?

Southern people for the most part are not as stupid as you are and most of them realize that the Civil War was about slavery. This thread was intended to point out to the few idiots left in the South (the ones that enjoy making asses of themselves on messageboards) that they are absolutely incorrect about the intent of the Confederacy.

You are invited to stop deflecting and prove that the Confederacy didn't legalize slavery.

On other related threads, that's where.
Again, slavery is an irrelevant issue when it comes to the issue of secession. The law is what matters, and there was no law against secession, and at that time, there was no law passed by congress making slavery illegal, that's a sad fact.
The question has nothing to do with slavery. The U.S. CONstitution didn't address slavery, the U.S. Congress never produced a bill, and a U.S. President never signed such into law, therefore the U.S. CONstitution via not addressing the issue of slavery, allowed such hence made it legal until the 13th.
The questions are .....
When Lincoln and the North rebelled against the lawful authority of their U.S. CONstitition what was their reason?
If it was to end Slavery in the U.S., that was accomplished with the secessions of the Southern States, at that point, there was nothing standing in the way of a constitutional amendment making slavery illegal in the U.S.
If it was to preserve the union, that is a fallacy because the union remained after the Southern States seceded, or there would have been no United States to go to war with the Confederate States.
So, what exactly is your point that slavery was legal in our CSA Constitution? It was just as legal under your U.S. CONstitution since it's RATification, else it would have stated such within. Why don't you just stick to concerns about your own government?

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Link?

Later in 1861, another proposed amendment, also numbered thirteen, was signed by President Lincoln. This was the only proposed amendment that was ever signed by a president. That resolve to amend read: "ARTICLE THIRTEEN, No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State." (In other words, President Lincoln had signed a resolve that would have permitted slavery, and upheld states' rights.) Only one State, Illinois, ratified this proposed amendment before the Civil War broke out in 1861.
The Missing 13th Amendment - 13

No bub. That's wrong.

Lincoln never signed that amendment. The one he signed was the actual 13th amendment, freeing the slaves, in 1865.

The Corwin Amendment passed the Senate in 1860. Lincoln had nothing to do with it.

In March of 1861 - how many states had already left the Union and begun hostilities?

Better not to get your information from stupid conspiracy laced websites.

 

[Ravi]

Yes, it is revolting that slavery was ever allowed. But this thread is about how the confederates made it legal in their constitution.

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

In the US, Constitutionally, it was legal.

No. All are created equal. The interpretation pretended it was legal but it was not.

 

[Valerie]

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

In the US, Constitutionally, it was legal.

No. All are created equal. The interpretation pretended it was legal but it was not.

right, laws don't become recognized as 'unconstitutional' until properly legally challenged as such.

 

[paperview]

While conveniently omitting how Lincoln would have made it permanently legal for all states in a lame attempt to lure the CSA back into the Union

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

In the US, Constitutionally, it was legal.

No. All are created equal. The interpretation pretended it was legal but it was not.

Those words aren't in the Constitution.

Slavery was legally Constitutional - with three separate places it explicitly recognized and protected slavery.

Because it was Constitutional was why Lincoln couldn't just free the slaves. An Amendment was needed for that.

And he signed that Amendment. Even though it wasn't required or ever done before - he signed it.

 

[Valerie]

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

In the US, Constitutionally, it was legal.

No. All are created equal. The interpretation pretended it was legal but it was not.

Those words aren't in the Constitution.

Slavery was legally Constitutional - with three separate places it explicitly recognized and protected slavery.

Because it was Constitutional was why Lincoln couldn't just free the slaves. An Amendment was needed for that.

And he signed that Amendment. Even though it wasn't required or ever done before - he signed it.

slavery was legal however unconstitutional, as evidenced by the results of having been properly legally challenged...

 

[paperview]

Another deflection. Did the loser confederates legalize slavery in their constitution and go to war over slavery or not?

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

In the US, Constitutionally, it was legal.

No. All are created equal. The interpretation pretended it was legal but it was not.

Those words aren't in the Constitution.

Slavery was legally Constitutional - with three separate places it explicitly recognized and protected slavery.

Because it was Constitutional was why Lincoln couldn't just free the slaves. An Amendment was needed for that.

And he signed that Amendment. Even though it wasn't required or ever done before - he signed it.

slavery was legal however unconstitutional, as evidenced by the results of having been properly legally challenged...

"slavery was legal however unconstitutional, as evidenced by the results of having been properly legally challenged."

What the heck does that mean? Yes. It was constitutional . The Constitution protected and recognized slavery. It wasn't legally challenged in SCOTUS - it took a war to happen to end it.

It was affirmed in 1857 with Dred Scott.

 

[Valerie]

No deflection.
Never denied slavery wasn't legal.
But it wasn't the sole reason for secession.....unless you can show that slave ownership is the only issue mentioned in the constitution of the CSA

Constitutionally, slavery was never legal. The confederacy made it legal. Connect the dots.

In the US, Constitutionally, it was legal.

No. All are created equal. The interpretation pretended it was legal but it was not.

Those words aren't in the Constitution.

Slavery was legally Constitutional - with three separate places it explicitly recognized and protected slavery.

Because it was Constitutional was why Lincoln couldn't just free the slaves. An Amendment was needed for that.

And he signed that Amendment. Even though it wasn't required or ever done before - he signed it.

slavery was legal however unconstitutional, as evidenced by the results of having been properly legally challenged...

"slavery was legal however unconstitutional, as evidenced by the results of having been properly legally challenged."

What the heck does that mean. Yes. It was constitutional . The Constitution protected and recognized slavery.

unconstitutional laws stand until properly challenged...

 

[paperview]

Oh, you're playing word games. I see.

 

[Valerie]

our constitution merely provided the avenue to equality under the law...

 

[Valerie]

Oh, you're playing word games. I see.

what the heck does that mean?

 

[paperview]

Oh, you're playing word games. I see.

what the heck does that mean?

Saying it's unconstitutional when it was Constitutional.

Up until they changed the Constitution.