New Website on the American Civil War

[RetiredGySgt]

Slavery was already in the U.S. Constitution.

Yes, I wonder why.

Quantrill

quote for us where slavery is mentioned in the US Constitution. and no the 3/5ths compromise isn't it.

 

[mikegriffith1]

you [Quantrill] are defending an organization that left the Union to enshrine SLAVERY in their Constitution, and you wonder why people claim you are a white supremist?

Holy cow, this is silly, and a perfect example of your lack of research and your robotic mindset about any view that departs from the official story.

Slavery was already enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. How can you not know this? How? This is History 101 material.

Furthermore, Lincoln publicly endorsed a constitutional amendment that would have made it impossible for the federal government to ever abolish slavery.

Moreover, FYI, the Confederate constitution allowed for the admission of free states to the Confederacy, and banned the overseas slave trade.

Seriously, do a little, just a little, serious research before you get on a public board and make such flat-Earth statements.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Holy cow, this is silly, and a perfect example of your lack of research and your robotic mindset about any view that departs from the official story.

Slavery was already enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. How can you not know this? How? This is History 101 material.

Furthermore, Lincoln publicly endorsed a constitutional amendment that would have made it impossible for the federal government to ever abolish slavery.

Moreover, FYI, the Confederate constitution allowed for the admission of free states to the Confederacy, and banned the overseas slave trade.

Seriously, do a little, just a little, serious research before you get on a public board and make such flat-Earth statements.

still no quote I see and allowing free states does not change the fact that the Confederacy enshrined the owning of human beings in their Constitution,

 

[Quantrill]

quote for us where slavery is mentioned in the US Constitution. and no the 3/5ths compromise isn't it.

Article IV Sect. II Clause III, known as the Fugitive Slave Clause. Which was reinforced in the Compromise of 1850 witht the Fugitive Slave Law.

Now show me where slavery is declared illegal in the U.S. Constitution?

Quantrill

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Article IV Sect. II Clause III, known as the Fugitive Slave Clause. Which was reinforced in the Compromise of 1850 witht the Fugitive Slave Law.

Now show me where slavery is declared illegal in the U.S. Constitution?

Quantrill

never said it was but it wasn't enshrined like in the Confederate one. The confederate one specifically states that slavery is legal and right and will be enforced in the Confederate states.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

never said it was but it wasn't enshrined like in the Confederate one. The confederate one specifically states that slavery is legal and right and will be enforced in the Confederate states.

and you support that document meaning you support the enslavement of human beings.

 

[ding]

Again, show me what I have said that implies I am a white supremacist. Show me the websites or white supremacy you accuse me of using.

Quantrill

Or you could say you don't believe you are superior to blacks. But we both know you won't do that or admit that you believe you are superior to blacks because you are too much of a coward to openly say what you really believe.

 

[mikegriffith1]

still no quote I see and allowing free states does not change the fact that the Confederacy enshrined the owning of human beings in their Constitution,

"Still no quote"??? Seriously? If you would just bother doing a Google AI search on slavery and the U.S. Consitution, you would learn the following:

The U.S. Constitution originally protected slavery through the Three-Fifths Clause (representation/taxation), the Importation Clause (banning Congress from ending the slave trade until 1808), and the Fugitive Slave Clause.

The Fugitive Slave Clause required states to aid in the capture of runaway slaves:

No Person held to Service or Labour 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 Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due". (IV:2:3)

I notice you ignored the point that Lincoln supported the Corwin Amendment, which would have made it impossible for the federal government to ever abolish slavery.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

"Still no quote"??? Seriously? If you would just bother doing a Google AI search on slavery and the U.S. Consitution, you would learn the following:

The U.S. Constitution originally protected slavery through the Three-Fifths Clause (representation/taxation), the Importation Clause (banning Congress from ending the slave trade until 1808), and the Fugitive Slave Clause.

The Fugitive Slave Clause required states to aid in the capture of runaway slaves:

No Person held to Service or Labour 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 Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due". (IV:2:3)

I notice you ignored the point that Lincoln supported the Corwin Amendment, which would have made it impossible for the federal government to ever abolish slavery.

he was trying to avoid a war,

 

[Quantrill]

never said it was but it wasn't enshrined like in the Confederate one. The confederate one specifically states that slavery is legal and right and will be enforced in the Confederate states.

So, you agree slavery was legal according to the U.S. Constitution. Which means the North were the traitors to the U.S. Constitution. Not the South. Glory, glory...hallelujah.

As did Article IV, Sec. II, Clause III of the U.S. Constitution for the U.S. of America. As did the Supreme Court Dred Scott decision for the U.S. of America. Glory, glory...hallelujah.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Or you could say you don't believe you are superior to blacks. But we both know you won't do that or admit that you believe you are superior to blacks because you are too much of a coward to openly say what you really believe.

In other words, I have said nothing to imply that I am a white supremacist. I have said nothing to imply I get information from white supremacist websites. In fact, everything I have said, says otherwise. But you feel the need to label me as I have shown you don't know shit about what you're talking about.

Dumbass in glasses. True to your user name.

I am saying what I really believe. And can defend it. You speak bullshit. Which you cannot defend because it is bullshit. Thus you must turn to 'identification' slander.

Again, what have 'I said' that implies white supremacy? What have I said that comes from white supremacist websites? It's your accusation. Shit or get off the pot.

Quantrill

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So, you agree slavery was legal according to the U.S. Constitution. Which means the North were the traitors to the U.S. Constitution. Not the South. Glory, glory...hallelujah.

As did Article IV, Sec. II, Clause III of the U.S. Constitution for the U.S. of America. As did the Supreme Court Dred Scott decision for the U.S. of America. Glory, glory...hallelujah.

Quantrill

the south was looking for a war and started it for no reason at all. the issue of slavery was not going to come up in any meaningful way that would curtail it or ban it. Further they enshrined the Institution in their constitution making it part and parcel of who and what they Governed for. the enslavement of human beings the stealing of their freedom and their labor.

And that is what you support whole heartedly in every post you make about the Civil war.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

In other words, I have said nothing to imply that I am a white supremacist. I have said nothing to imply I get information from white supremacist websites. In fact, everything I have said, says otherwise. But you feel the need to label me as I have shown you don't know shit about what you're talking about.

Dumbass in glasses. True to your user name.

I am saying what I really believe. And can defend it. You speak bullshit. Which you cannot defend because it is bullshit. Thus you must turn to 'identification' slander.

Again, what have 'I said' that implies white supremacy? What have I said that comes from white supremacist websites? It's your accusation. Shit or get off the pot.

Quantrill

you openly support slavery with every post on the civil war. You are evil.

 

[Quantrill]

and you support that document meaning you support the enslavement of human beings.

So you do not support the original Constitution? You only support the Constitution made after the Yankee military victory? As I said, you and the North are the traitors. Not the South.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

the south was looking for a war and started it for no reason at all. the issue of slavery was not going to come up in any meaningful way that would curtail it or ban it. Further they enshrined the Institution in their constitution making it part and parcel of who and what they Governed for. the enslavement of human beings the stealing of their freedom and their labor.

And that is what you support whole heartedly in every post you make about the Civil war.

No, that is a lie. The South was looking for peace. It could not find it within the Union.

Slavery was legal in the U.S. of America. The South was doing nothing wrong. Yet they were continually harassed and eventually attacked by the North.

Again, the U.S. supported slavery.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

you openly support slavery with every post on the civil war. You are evil.

You see Gunny...you don't know shit about history.

Because you don't know shit about it, you must label me 'evil'. Typical move.

Quantrill

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You see Gunny...you don't know shit about history.

Because you don't know shit about it, you must label me 'evil'. Typical move.

Quantrill

you openly support slavery what's to get?

 

[my2¢]

John Brown paid the ultimate price for his unsuccessful raid of a U.S. armory. Seems to me that the South expected to seize such U.S. assets without reprisal.

 

[ding]

In other words, I have said nothing to imply that I am a white supremacist. I have said nothing to imply I get information from white supremacist websites. In fact, everything I have said, says otherwise. But you feel the need to label me as I have shown you don't know shit about what you're talking about.

Dumbass in glasses. True to your user name.

I am saying what I really believe. And can defend it. You speak bullshit. Which you cannot defend because it is bullshit. Thus you must turn to 'identification' slander.

Again, what have 'I said' that implies white supremacy? What have I said that comes from white supremacist websites? It's your accusation. Shit or get off the pot.

Quantrill

Until you deny being a white supremacist, I don't have to prove it. You are one.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Until you deny being a white supremacist, I don't have to prove it. You are one.

he openly supports having Blacks as slaves.