Most Conservatives Still Believe The Civil War Wasn't Over Slavery

[Claudette]

Our Constitution made provisions for states joint the union. They said nothing about leaving it

Secession was treason

Really, it doesn't meet the Constitutional definition of treason.


.

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

Winger seems to forget that the whole South with the exception of West Virginia withdrew from the Union.

 

[Dana7360]

But the south was fighting to secede, so they were fighting for secession. They seceded over slavery. What don't you get?

No, the south had already seceded. They were fighting an invasion. The invasion was not to free the slaves, therefore the Civil War was not fought over slavery.

For some people it wasn't about slavery.
For some people it was.

It all came down to slavery and racism

For some it came down to loyalty to a State vs loyalty to a Federal Government.

Every College Graduate Can Be Replaced by Someone With a Higher IQ Who Didn't Graduate From College

Here is what Diploma Dumbos don't know about grammar and how changes in it change minds. Before the Civil War, the correct phrase was "The United States are." Postbellum, it became "The United States is."

Ok the next time you need a doctor go find one of those with a higher IQ who didn't graduate from college.

When you have a heart attack or are in a car accident and need your life to be saved, the last place you should go is to a hospital for help or even to a paramedic or EMT. All of them graduated from college. Or if you find a hard lump in your body like your breast or leg etc, don't do anything about it. Just go to one of those higher IQ people who didn't graduate college to do all the proper tests on it then treat it to save your life.

Oh and stop driving on our roads. They were designed and created by people who graduated from college.

Stop driving a car or using any contemporary transportation. It was developed by people who graduated college.

If you ever get into any legal problem whether criminal or civil don't go to a lawyer to defend you. Go find one of those higher IQ people who didn't graduate college.

Turn off your computer and never uses it again. People who did graduate from college invented computers and software.

Turn off your phone. It was invented and developed by people who graduated from college.

I can go on and on with all the services, devices and infrastructure you should not use or stop using because the person or people who invented or developed it were or are college graduates.

This is fun. You make it so easy to show all of cyberspace what a total fool you are. LOL. I'm having a great time.

 

[TNHarley]

I still want to know how secession was illegal and why the articles of confederation even mattered in the 18th century.
someone please me inform me using reality. TIA

 

[Claudette]

According to the constitution the states had the power to secede. They had the right.

The FF put all their faith in the States and wanted them to have the power. Not the Fed.

According to the tenth amendment to the Constitution, anything that is not expressly prohibited by the Constitution is allowed. Therefore, all states have a Constitutional right to secede. ... Although this amendment does not explicitly forbid secession, some have argued that it does so implicitly.Dec 28, 2003

 

[rightwinger]

Our Constitution made provisions for states joint the union. They said nothing about leaving it

Secession was treason

Really, it doesn't meet the Constitutional definition of treason.


.

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

It was Federal Property much like Gitmo is

S Carolina had no right to it. Attacking a US Govt Fort was an act of war
They paid a price

 

[there4eyeM]

Our Constitution made provisions for states joint the union. They said nothing about leaving it

Secession was treason

Really, it doesn't meet the Constitutional definition of treason.


.

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

...attempting to "withdraw"...

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

He said that at the end of the war, in 1864. You still have nothing showing that's why he started the war. You can't because he didn't

I showed you the 82 times the seceding states named slavery as the reason for secession.

The war was about slavery, and nothing but slavery. Period.

Secession was about slavery. The Civil War wasnt about slavery. The Civil War was about secession.

A = B = C

The war was about slavery. Period.

Slavery was a symptom. The south was motivated by economics. Slavery was part of economics. You dont grasp root causes

The South was capable of paying its workforce. Cotton was a huge cash cow and plantation owners made fortunes. The workers who planted, maintained the crop, picked the crop and brought it to market received zero compensation.

The Aristocrats and Sweatshop Owners Get Off Scot-Free in This MInd-Controlled Thread

The Africans got room and board, protection from their own predators, medical services, and many other benefits they never got back in the jungle. Most Whites at the time lived in misery, with the Jews and Irish being treated worse than slaves. The most miserable lifestyle in the whole world was that of the Africans who got stuck back in the jungle. That is, if you don't consider selling their fellow Blacks into slavery as being high entertainment.

 

[rightwinger]

Really, it doesn't meet the Constitutional definition of treason.


.

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

Winger seems to forget that the whole South with the exception of West Virginia withdrew from the Union.

They have no rights to Federal property

 

[rightwinger]

I showed you the 82 times the seceding states named slavery as the reason for secession.

The war was about slavery, and nothing but slavery. Period.

Secession was about slavery. The Civil War wasnt about slavery. The Civil War was about secession.

A = B = C

The war was about slavery. Period.

Slavery was a symptom. The south was motivated by economics. Slavery was part of economics. You dont grasp root causes

The South was capable of paying its workforce. Cotton was a huge cash cow and plantation owners made fortunes. The workers who planted, maintained the crop, picked the crop and brought it to market received zero compensation.

The Aristocrats and Sweatshop Owners Get Off Scot-Free in This MInd-Controlled Thread

The Africans got room and board, protection from their own predators, medical services, and many other benefits they never got back in the jungle. Most Whites at the time lived in misery, with the Jews and Irish being treated worse than slaves. The most miserable lifestyle in the whole world was that of the Africans who got stuck back in the jungle. That is, if you don't consider selling their fellow Blacks into slavery as being high entertainment.

Your posting style is tedious

Your celebration of slavery is not worth reading

 

[Claudette]

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

Winger seems to forget that the whole South with the exception of West Virginia withdrew from the Union.

They have no rights to Federal property

Well anything in the south belonged to the south. Once they seceded it belong to them.

And they did secede.

 

[there4eyeM]

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

Winger seems to forget that the whole South with the exception of West Virginia withdrew from the Union.

They have no rights to Federal property

There was a rebellion against the Union in an attempt to render it. The rebellion was suppressed. The Nation was preserved, never sundered.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Civil War still divides Americans

So after 150 years, the majority of conservatives still believe the Civil War wasn't over slavery?

Why is this? Why do they believe the "States Rights" claim is sufficient enough to shield them from the fact that -- those states rights were those states preserving the right to maintain slavery -- so either way you slice it, the civil war was over slavery --


This is why whenever I see a conservative twisting themselves into pretzels to claim otherwise --- it makes their subsequent claims of not being racist look foolish.


Next time conservatives want to pretend that the Civil War wasn't over slavery -- they better travel back in time and tell all of those southern states to stop telling everyone it was over slavery

slavery was the root cause....we all know that. States rights though was the machinery that made the civil war happen.
If people didn't believe in states rights, we wouldn't have had the civil war...people would have just accepted Lincon's plan to prevent slavery in new territories (but keep it in the existing ones)...and would have been fine.......but they weren't fine...because they thought states had the right to make their own policies ( I agree with that in most cases, but in terms of slavery, abortion and a few others, it is never ok)

 

[Dana7360]

The poster already showed you where in the constitution it says that we are a united states in perpetuity. All the continuous states. Those states willingly joined our union. That means the constitution doesn't allow any part of this nation to leave the union.

Show me.

If you read this whole thread you were already shown. As I said in my post you replied to.

The poster already showed you where in the constitution it says that we are a united states in perpetuity.

You might want to read the whole thread to get the answer. Again.

I can lead you to water but I can't make you drink.

 

[OKTexas]

Really, it doesn't meet the Constitutional definition of treason.


.

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

It was Federal Property much like Gitmo is

S Carolina had no right to it. Attacking a US Govt Fort was an act of war
They paid a price

Maintaining a garrison of foreign soil and attempting to reinforce them was an act of war.


.

 

[Dana7360]

Yea.....a States right to own slaves

Not many Southerners owned slaves you idiot.

States Rights was the biggest concern.

Ok what right did those states have that the federal government was trying to take from them beyond owning human beings as slaves?

I've asked that question for decades yet not one conservative can answer it honestly or without deflection.

So I invite you to be the first conservative to honestly answer that question without any filibuster or deflection.

Oh slavery was a part of it but the Southern States didn't like the Fed telling them what they could couldn't do.

Slavery was barbaric and I'm glad it was one of the things that was changed because of the civil war but it still wasn't the main reason for that war.

So what was the federal government telling them to do that they didn't want to do?

The answer, the lazy people in the south didn't want to have to actually work for a living. They didn't want to stop owning human beings as slaves.

You can deny it all you want. I'm not here to get you to see reality and truth. However by denying truth you're giving me and others the opportunity to show all of cyberspace just how down right cowardly and dishonest you are. It's fun watching you make a fool of yourself and other posters make fools of you. Keep it up. I can't believe you like showing all of cyberspace how much you like to make a fool of yourself. You're great comic relief. LOL.

LMAO Not as great as you are.

Talk about cowardly, dishonest and a fool. WOW

What questions have you asked me that have not answered?

What lies have I posted?

LOL classic conservative projection doesn't work with me.

 

[OKTexas]

Really, it doesn't meet the Constitutional definition of treason.


.

If it wasn`t treason can we call the firing on Ft. Sumter southern terrorism? Choose one or the other or you can choose both.

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

...attempting to "withdraw"...

Wrong, it was withdrawn.


.

 

[Claudette]

Secession was about slavery. The Civil War wasnt about slavery. The Civil War was about secession.

A = B = C

The war was about slavery. Period.

Slavery was a symptom. The south was motivated by economics. Slavery was part of economics. You dont grasp root causes

The South was capable of paying its workforce. Cotton was a huge cash cow and plantation owners made fortunes. The workers who planted, maintained the crop, picked the crop and brought it to market received zero compensation.

The Aristocrats and Sweatshop Owners Get Off Scot-Free in This MInd-Controlled Thread

The Africans got room and board, protection from their own predators, medical services, and many other benefits they never got back in the jungle. Most Whites at the time lived in misery, with the Jews and Irish being treated worse than slaves. The most miserable lifestyle in the whole world was that of the Africans who got stuck back in the jungle. That is, if you don't consider selling their fellow Blacks into slavery as being high entertainment.

Your posting style is tedious

Your celebration of slavery is not worth reading

The only one celebrating slavery seems to be you.

No one on this board approved of slavery. It was barbaric and everyone on this board knows it. The op is about what caused the Civil War.

You think it was slavery. I and others think it was more about State Rights. Slavery was a part of it but not the main part. We have a difference of opinion. Period.

Hell the emancipation proclamation wasn't signed till 1863. That should tell anyone smarter than a rock that slavery wasn't the major cause of the civil war. If it had been that bill would have been signed three years earlier.

 

[Dana7360]

Yea.....a States right to own slaves

Not many Southerners owned slaves you idiot.

States Rights was the biggest concern.

Ok what right did those states have that the federal government was trying to take from them beyond owning human beings as slaves?

I've asked that question for decades yet not one conservative can answer it honestly or without deflection.

So I invite you to be the first conservative to honestly answer that question without any filibuster or deflection.

Oh slavery was a part of it but the Southern States didn't like the Fed telling them what they could couldn't do.

Slavery was barbaric and I'm glad it was one of the things that was changed because of the civil war but it still wasn't the main reason for that war.

So what was the federal government telling them to do that they didn't want to do?

The answer, the lazy people in the south didn't want to have to actually work for a living. They didn't want to stop owning human beings as slaves.

You can deny it all you want. I'm not here to get you to see reality and truth. However by denying truth you're giving me and others the opportunity to show all of cyberspace just how down right cowardly and dishonest you are. It's fun watching you make a fool of yourself and other posters make fools of you. Keep it up. I can't believe you like showing all of cyberspace how much you like to make a fool of yourself. You're great comic relief. LOL.

LOL...they didn't want to work for a living? Is that your version of the truth? Bringing that forward, evidently Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos, and Howard Shultz are too fricken lazy to work for a living.

Oh really?

Then why were all those slaves doing all the work while the masters didn't?

 

[TNHarley]

The poster already showed you where in the constitution it says that we are a united states in perpetuity. All the continuous states. Those states willingly joined our union. That means the constitution doesn't allow any part of this nation to leave the union.

Show me.

If you read this whole thread you were already shown. As I said in my post you replied to.

The poster already showed you where in the constitution it says that we are a united states in perpetuity.

You might want to read the whole thread to get the answer. Again.

I can lead you to water but I can't make you drink.

The constitution does not have the word "perpetuity" in it whatsoever.
I believe you are referring to the Articles of Confederation that was repealed in 1787.

 

[rightwinger]

Sumter was no longer within the US, the US had no right to maintain a garrison there.


.

It was Federal property not state property

S Carolina had no right to it

Sure they did, it was part of the area that was withdrawn from the union.


.

Winger seems to forget that the whole South with the exception of West Virginia withdrew from the Union.

They have no rights to Federal property

Well anything in the south belonged to the south. Once they seceded it belong to them.

And they did secede.

No it didn’t

Ft Sumter was built and maintained by We the People of the United States

The Confederacy had no rights to it