rplain1 Loc: Dayton, Oh.

And did you proofread your own response?

gerdog

foxfirerodandgun Loc: Stony Creek, VA

With all due respect, the main cause for "The War of Northern Aggression was not slavery. It was solely states rights. Slavery was a secondary issue brought to the forefront by the liberals which resided north of the Mason/Dixion Line. I would suggest that you revisit the true history, not history made by the liberal faction depicting this event in order that you could learn the error of your ways.

BTW, there were many slaves used by the northern farmers and businessmen. Slavery in the north was a very real thing, What the North did not have were many accessible ports during the winter months. Therefore they wanted to have free use of the southern ports which violated the states rights of the affected southern states.. This is a subject that I WILL NOT DEBATE further since what I have stated is supported by cold. hard. unbiased facts. If you are truly interested in learning the REAL truth pertaining to the main cause of "The War of Northern Aggression", you should pay a visit to the Library of Congress to learn the REAL facts. Misrepresentation of historical facts by the liberals has helped to destroy much of this countries TRUE heritage. Again.....Sad, but true. Have a wonderful day, and I truly hope that you will take it upon yourself to learn the actual truth and facts regarding the true cause for the "War of Northern Aggression" in order that you may not negatively influence the youth of your family and community with the incorrect reasons fro the cause of this terrible tragedy. Cheers!!

phlash46 Loc: Westchester County, New York

Was it really necessary to write that? By the way, the worst educations, by State, are received, for the most part, in States carried by Donald Trump. Look it up.

It's not because the people in those States are stupid; they're not. It's because very conservative Republicans don't want to educate the kids because then they'll be able to figure out what a hosing they're getting.

andesbill

(Re: the Civil War was about states rights, period.)

The poor quality of your education is showing. Your benighted political slant has blinded you to the facts. So sad.

phlash46 Loc: Westchester County, New York

Actually, theSouthern States were all for States Rights until the northern States used their States Rights to refuse to return fugitive slaves. You are narrowly educated and largely unteachable and wouldn't know a "fact" if ran over you.

gerdog

The only "states rights" in question during that time was the "right" to own slaves! You can't clean it up by calling it states rights. That's exactly what the southern states tried back then. Slavery was a world-wide issue back then, not just an issue with the "liberal" north. Copies of newspapers and other publications still exist in libraries all over the country. They were not written by fake historians years after the fact. Here is a nice piece of history titled, "Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union." https://web.archive.org/web/20090201185344/http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp
South Carolina explicitly states its reason for seceding from the Union. I invite everyone to read it as it is not overly long. Here are a few of the most telling paragraphs:
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.

The ends for which the Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

The issue was always slavery. Trying to hide it by calling it states rights is simply another way to try to hide the immorality of slavery.

phlash46 Loc: Westchester County, New York

andesbill

Well said.

Diocletian

and as long as i decry the errors of those ‘LIBERALS’ why you have to believe what i say!!!!!!!

unfortunately, foxfire...whatever, when you use ALLCAPS to emphasize how RIGHT you are and talk about the ‘CONSPIRACIES’ of those ‘LIBERALS’ you immediately lose all legitimacy...

you might be right, you might be wrong, but I wouldn’t even bother to read it because you sound like just another whackadoodle....

Tex-s

While I agree whole-heartedly that slavery in all of its incarnations, from biblical times, tot he US, to the forced labor building v-2 rockets in WWII Germany, is an abomination, it would be, at best, disingenuous to suggest that the Civil War was ALL about slavery. It might interest you to know that northern states and their representatives pushed to count blacks as ZERO people prior to the 3/5 compromise, specifically to weaken southern representation in the new republic. Sure one can argue that weakening the leverage of slave-holding states is ultimately a good thing, but to deny a black person as a person is a tough sell. The southern states were guaranteed their legal status, each of them, within their articles of confederation, and Lincoln simply 'declaring' slavery illegal actually violated those contracts. I'm not suggesting slavery had no role, or even that it did not play a major role, but if the federal system can simply erase contracts, where do YOU find solace, find comfort, find safety? I'm guessing most left-leaning people deem the failure of the US government to honor agreements with native peoples as an egregious offense, so why is violating agreements with states OK? Especially since the modern incarnation of progressive-ism is actually a new form of slavery, where those with jobs and education, and planned children, work to pay the bills of those who chose to forego education, jobs, and planned offspring.

gerdog

Your argument is disingenuous. You state nothing that was not about slavery at its heart. The south won the 3/5 compromise, but still denied the slaves the vote. Here is a paragraph from the Texas " Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union."
"We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."
"That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states."
The "contract" with the slave-holding states was deemed necessary to keep them in the Union. However, those states were completely open in their views that blacks were inferior subhumans. The contract HAD to be broken in the name of human decency. Georgia and Mississippi also clearly stated that slavery was THE issue that caused them to secede. https://web.archive.org/web/19980128034930/http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html If all the slave-holding states stated on the record that slavery was THE issue that forced them to secede, any argument that asserts otherwise just falls flat on its face. That is REAL history, put to pen by the people who lived it.

andesbill

I’m betting that you are very angry that women and minorities are demanding their rights to have a greater part in how this country is run, and by whom. You expect minorities who are gunned down by police and American fascists to blindly pledge their allegiance to a nation which doesn’t want them, and whose white male leaders do everything they can to keep them politically and economically subjugated. Maybe women and ethnic and religious minorities are tired of the barriers put up by the white males in our nation who are afraid to compete on an even playing field.
I bet you hate it when African Americans take a knee during the National Anthem. I doubt that you even understand what they are protesting.
Unless we achieve a more equal society, one which includes all groups on an equal basis, from birth to death, our society will fail under the weight of hate.

phlash46 Loc: Westchester County, New York

It is black letter law that, any contract that violates public policy is void. You needn't worry about the Fed's voiding legal contracts.

By the way, do you really think most people without either "chose to forego" education and jobs?

SueScott Loc: Hammondsville, Ohio

Just out of curiosity, whatever happened to the original topic of this thread, "No wonder kids can't learn"?