Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,244 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 2,543,203
Pageviews Today: 3,470,720Threads Today: 899Posts Today: 16,778
11:44 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10873455
United States
11/15/2012 02:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
Okay, so with all the BS secession shit going on, it makes me question the civil war, if all these rednecks, and so-called rebels believe the civil war was about states rights (which i can see, but what state rights were being provoked by the union? anti-slavery laws or what) how could the south, being Christians and followers of Jesus, justify using slaves the way they did to achieve proficient income.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 13027288
United States
11/15/2012 02:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
They were actually right about States Rights. Their view of the Constitution was valid.

As to your question about slavery....pure rationalization based on fear and preservation of their status quo.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 10873455
United States
11/15/2012 02:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
They were actually right about States Rights. Their view of the Constitution was valid.

As to your question about slavery....pure rationalization based on fear and preservation of their status quo.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13027288


what was there view of the constitution? what state rights did they want to keep?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 03:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
They were actually right about States Rights. Their view of the Constitution was valid.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13027288


my great great grandaddy thanks you
for that compliment :)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 03:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
Slavery flourished in the Colonies
because the English Crown profited
immensely from it.

Those high class dresses made for the Royals
was made from southern cotton grown
in the south and shipped to London.

George Washington was a slave trader
by profession. He traded about 250 slaves
a yr for profit and he owned 225 slaves
of his own.

The English brought slavery here
and they made riches off it's cheap labor
picking cotton, tobacco and hemp.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 03:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
another thing your history books
don't tell you is that about 35-40%
of the freed slaves returned to
their masters who could not function
as a free man and make it on their own
whom sought to return to slavery.
Thus the welfare state was born.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11330901
United States
11/15/2012 03:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
They were actually right about States Rights. Their view of the Constitution was valid.

As to your question about slavery....pure rationalization based on fear and preservation of their status quo.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13027288


They were incorrect about state's rights regarding their own reasons for secession. Much of it had to do with prohibiting slavery in federal territories not yet made states. The South felt adding more free states to the Union would upset the balance of power between slave and non-slave states.

They were more concerned with regional interest as opposed to individual state's rights. If anything, the North was more concerned with state's rights in their desire to admit new states which prohibited slavery, as mandating slavery in such new states would oppose the right of the new state to be non-slave.

The Confederate Constitution was basically just a copy of the US Constitution, except it made it clear that slavery was legal in any confederate state or territory.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11330901
United States
11/15/2012 03:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
...and to clarify, the Civil War itself was not about slavery or state's rights. It was about preserving the Union.

In theory, when the South seceded, the North could have said, "okay, goodbye." However, the North said "No, and we'll fight you to keep you in the Union." Hence, the war itself was about preserving the Union.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 03:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
...and to clarify, the Civil War itself was not about slavery or state's rights. It was about preserving the Union.

In theory, when the South seceded, the North could have said, "okay, goodbye." However, the North said "No, and we'll fight you to keep you in the Union." Hence, the war itself was about preserving the Union.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11330901


if the South had won
there still would have been
a Union and Davis as it's
President.
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 03:49 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
They were actually right about States Rights. Their view of the Constitution was valid.

As to your question about slavery....pure rationalization based on fear and preservation of their status quo.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13027288


The South's interpretation of the US Constitution's core objective was way off the mark. The US Constitution was a response to the entrenched privilege of class based Britain where men were unequal under the guardianship of the state. The US Constitution rejected this principle hence its equality objective and of course, it set in place, the processes of government to ensure this. The South on the other hand sought to establish its own form of Britain's agrarian inequity, this time based on skin colour, but with the same embedded privilege.

The English blue bloods must have been enjoying a quiet titter.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Simple_Man

User ID: 15977994
United States
11/15/2012 04:10 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
I'm from the south and the south was wrong ....

the Constituion and the Decleration of Independence is a federal document and these documents guarantee the right of individual freedom and liberty....therefore it's is the duty of the federal goverment to insure and enforce freedom for the citizen

Therefore the abolishing slavery was a Duty of the Federal Goverment and Lincoln being a lawyer understood that Federal law in this case superseded state law

Last Edited by Simple_Man on 11/15/2012 04:11 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
geez
some of you are disillusioned as to what
a FREE man is.

these slave traders that went to Africa did not
kidnap or steal slaves

their own families sold them into slavery
so that both parties could survive.

if your own family sells you into slavery
and that person allowed it of his own will
then the person becomes an asset, not a free man.
That was a choice they made on their own
in Africa and it has nothing to do with
where that asset shows up later on
a map.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
geez
some of you are disillusioned as to what
a FREE man is.

these slave traders that went to Africa did not
kidnap or steal slaves

their own families sold them into slavery
so that both parties could survive.

if your own family sells you into slavery
and that person allowed it of his own will
then the person becomes an asset, not a free man.
That was a choice they made on their own
in Africa and it has nothing to do with
where that asset shows up later on
a map.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


therefore the Constitution does not
apply to those who already made the
choice of his free will to be a slave.
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 04:33 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
geez
some of you are disillusioned as to what
a FREE man is.

these slave traders that went to Africa did not
kidnap or steal slaves

their own families sold them into slavery
so that both parties could survive.

if your own family sells you into slavery
and that person allowed it of his own will
then the person becomes an asset, not a free man.
That was a choice they made on their own
in Africa and it has nothing to do with
where that asset shows up later on
a map.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


The Constitution does not define freedom to exclude those who knowingly reject their freedom. Such a notion would be an absurdity in court and could result in for example, the ludicrous spectacle of a woman voluntarily agreeing to subject herself to the dominion of her man (at that time in history) and legal precedents to substantiate such absurd limitations of the Constitutions contemplation of what freedom means, of which there are none.

Legal freedom is full freedom as that is understood by the reasonable man on the Clapham omnibus and cannot be willingly given up.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
geez
some of you are disillusioned as to what
a FREE man is.

these slave traders that went to Africa did not
kidnap or steal slaves

their own families sold them into slavery
so that both parties could survive.

if your own family sells you into slavery
and that person allowed it of his own will
then the person becomes an asset, not a free man.
That was a choice they made on their own
in Africa and it has nothing to do with
where that asset shows up later on
a map.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


therefore the Constitution does not
apply to those who already made the
choice of his free will to be a slave.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


the African families accepted payment
for a resource, that makes it a
contractual agreement.

at that point they gave up their right
to be free men.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
The Constitution does not define freedom to exclude those who knowingly reject their freedom.
 Quoting: Marxist


any court in the land would honor
a contract where payment was received.

this is why slaves had bill of sales
to prove their choice to be a slave.
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 04:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
geez
some of you are disillusioned as to what
a FREE man is.

these slave traders that went to Africa did not
kidnap or steal slaves

their own families sold them into slavery
so that both parties could survive.

if your own family sells you into slavery
and that person allowed it of his own will
then the person becomes an asset, not a free man.
That was a choice they made on their own
in Africa and it has nothing to do with
where that asset shows up later on
a map.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


therefore the Constitution does not
apply to those who already made the
choice of his free will to be a slave.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


the African families accepted payment
for a resource, that makes it a
contractual agreement.

at that point they gave up their right
to be free men.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


Presumably your family can take you to Africa, naturalise you in an African country, renounce your US citizenship, and sell you with your full agreement, thereby rendering you into an asset, like a toilet roll.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
Presumably your family can take you to Africa, naturalise you in an African country, renounce your US citizenship, and sell you with your full agreement, thereby rendering you into an asset, like a toilet roll.
 Quoting: Marxist


now you are confusing the laws of the land
of Africa with the laws of the US.

the slave contract was agreed to in
the home birth country of that individual.

where that individual goes to after that
is irrelevant after the contract was
made.
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 04:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
The Constitution does not define freedom to exclude those who knowingly reject their freedom.
 Quoting: Marxist


any court in the land would honor
a contract where payment was received.

this is why slaves had bill of sales
to prove their choice to be a slave.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


This is constitutional law we are talking of, not contractual law. Constitutional law is based on crimes statues, contract is based on civil misdemeanours. You may try and enforce a contract, say selling a little girl, in court as a civil claim. Criminal law which takes precedence over civil law hence the higher standard, would overrule the civil claim.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25192764
United States
11/15/2012 04:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
The same way they justify the black on white crime epidemic now
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
This is constitutional law we are talking of, not contractual law. Constitutional law is based on crimes statues, contract is based on civil misdemeanours. You may try and enforce a contract, say selling a little girl, in court as a civil claim. Criminal law which takes precedence over civil law hence the higher standard, would overrule the civil claim.
 Quoting: Marxist


slaves are bought and sold every day
today

look at the 9 yr old girls and boys
sold into marriage.

that is the laws in their home country.

if that lil 9 yr old slave wife goes
to live in NY she is still a slave.
She doesn't become free because she
crossed a national border of another
country.
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 04:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
Presumably your family can take you to Africa, naturalise you in an African country, renounce your US citizenship, and sell you with your full agreement, thereby rendering you into an asset, like a toilet roll.
 Quoting: Marxist


now you are confusing the laws of the land
of Africa with the laws of the US.

the slave contract was agreed to in
the home birth country of that individual.

where that individual goes to after that
is irrelevant after the contract was
made.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


And you are confusing the object of constitutions. A constitution that sets up standards in one place will not countenance laws from another state that flout its objects. For example, whislst it may be acceptable to flog a shoplifter in Saudi, that rule cannot enforced by the Saudis in the US.

Simple and elementary stuff.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 04:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
This is constitutional law we are talking of, not contractual law. Constitutional law is based on crimes statues, contract is based on civil misdemeanours. You may try and enforce a contract, say selling a little girl, in court as a civil claim. Criminal law which takes precedence over civil law hence the higher standard, would overrule the civil claim.
 Quoting: Marxist


slaves are bought and sold every day
today

look at the 9 yr old girls and boys
sold into marriage.

that is the laws in their home country.

if that lil 9 yr old slave wife goes
to live in NY she is still a slave.
She doesn't become free because she
crossed a national border of another
country.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


I wish you the best of luck in trying to enforce that situation in a US court. You will quickly be locked up
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:49 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
And you are confusing the object of constitutions. A constitution that sets up standards in one place will not countenance laws from another state that flout its objects. For example, whislst it may be acceptable to flog a shoplifter in Saudi, that rule cannot enforced by the Saudis in the US.

Simple and elementary stuff.
 Quoting: Marxist


we could argue this case til the cows come home
and it wouldn't change the principles
associated with the construct.

the Constitution was not meant to change the
laws of other countries. It was only written
to change the laws in America.

what happened in Africa was a contract.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
I wish you the best of luck in trying to enforce that situation in a US court. You will quickly be locked up
 Quoting: Marxist


Islam does it every day
in America

look around
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 04:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
And you are confusing the object of constitutions. A constitution that sets up standards in one place will not countenance laws from another state that flout its objects. For example, whislst it may be acceptable to flog a shoplifter in Saudi, that rule cannot enforced by the Saudis in the US.

Simple and elementary stuff.
 Quoting: Marxist


we could argue this case til the cows come home
and it wouldn't change the principles
associated with the construct.

the Constitution was not meant to change the
laws of other countries. It was only written
to change the laws in America.

what happened in Africa was a contract.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


The Constituion is designed to maintain civilised standards in the US. Transactions under foreign laws that deviate from this constitutional objective in the US and on US soil will be struck down. I know my Anglo-Saxon law.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 04:55 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
The Constitution is designed to maintain civilised standards in the US.
 Quoting: Marxist


thank you
you just proved my point.

the point of sale of the slavery
occurred in Africa.
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 04:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
I wish you the best of luck in trying to enforce that situation in a US court. You will quickly be locked up
 Quoting: Marxist


Islam does it every day
in America

look around
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


All manner of laws are flouted daily in the US. However, when tested, the breaches fail.

The Amish for example, enjoy certain archiac standards not for being tested in the courts, but rather for not being challenged. However, when crimes are committed and reported, these practices then fall to be tested constitutionally under crimes laws which the Fed uses to ensure compliance with the constitution.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
MindShaft

User ID: 1554827
United States
11/15/2012 05:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
And ... in WHAT YEAR did Lincoln make the infamous 'Emancipation Proclamation'? Was it in ... 1863?

Two years after the start of the Civil War?

Was the war about 'slavery' (... there was an abundance of slave-owning business owners in the Northern States) ... or was it about the original 13 states/colonies "Rights to Self-Determination"?

A useful political football - nothing more, nothing less.

Last Edited by MindShaft on 11/15/2012 05:04 AM
"People have been conditioned to ridicule all that they are incapable of understanding." Goethe

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe that they are free." Goethe
Marxist

User ID: 27787865
New Zealand
11/15/2012 05:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
The Constitution is designed to maintain civilised standards in the US.
 Quoting: Marxist


thank you
you just proved my point.

the point of sale of the slavery
occurred in Africa.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


You are too emotional and normative, not objective.

Lets remember that a cannibal may happily eat his purchase in his foreign land under rules that allow the purchase and consumption of human flesh but cannot in the US due to Constitutional rules on the state of men, THE STATE OF MEN.
Workers of the World, Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27780658
United States
11/15/2012 05:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: even if the civil war was about state rights how could the south justify slavery
I wish you the best of luck in trying to enforce that situation in a US court. You will quickly be locked up
 Quoting: Marxist


Islam does it every day
in America

look around
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27780658


All manner of laws are flouted daily in the US. However, when tested, the breaches fail.

The Amish for example, enjoy certain archiac standards not for being tested in the courts, but rather for not being challenged. However, when crimes are committed and reported, these practices then fall to be tested constitutionally under crimes laws which the Fed uses to ensure compliance with the constitution.
 Quoting: Marxist


maybe you didn't get the memo:
we do not have a Constitution any more today.
That was dissolved in the Act of 1871.
We only have an ILLUSION of a Constitution
because it serves the elitists agenda.

News