Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

States rights

109 posts in this topic

Posted

to own people.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/12/civil-war-still-divides-americans/?hpt=C1

In the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll released Tuesday, roughly one in four Americans said they sympathize more with the Confederacy than the Union, a figure that rises to nearly four in ten among white Southerners.

When asked the reason behind the Civil War, whether it was fought over slavery or states' rights, 52 percent of all Americans said the leaders of the Confederacy seceded to keep slavery legal in their state, but a sizeable 42 percent minority said slavery was not the main reason why those states seceded.

hmm

the new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions-African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the ***** in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically.

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the ***** is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. [Applause.] This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

~vice president of the confederacy

http://civilwarwiki.net/wiki/Alexander_H._Stephens%27_Cornerstone_Address

then there's this comparison of the constitution and the confederate constitution: http://www.filibustercartoons.com/CSA.htm

Overall, the CSA constitution does not radically alter the federal system that was set up under the United States constitution. It is thus very debatable as to whether the CSA was a significantly more pro-"states' rights" country (as supporters claim) in any meaningful sense. At least three states rights are explicitly taken away- the freedom of states to grant voting rights to non-citizens, the freedom of states to outlaw slavery within their borders, and the freedom of states to trade freely with each other.

States only gain four minor rights under the Confederate system- the power to enter into treaties with other states to regulate waterways, the power to tax foreign and domestic ships that use their waterways, the power to impeach federally-appointed state officials, and the power to distribute "bills of credit." When people champion the cause of reclaiming state power from the feds, are matters like these at the tops of their lists of priorities?

As previously noted, the CSA constitution does not modify many of the most controversial (from a states' rights perspective) clauses of the American constitution, including the "Supremacy" clause (6-1-3), the "Commerce" clause (1-8-3) and the "Necessary and Proper" clause (1-8-18). Nor does the CSA take away the federal government's right to suspend habeus corpus or "suppress insurrections."

As far as slave-owning rights go, however, the document is much more effective. Indeed, CSA constitution seems to barely stop short of making owning slaves mandatory. Four different clauses entrench the legality of slavery in a number of different ways, and together they virtually guarantee that any sort of future anti-slave law or policy will be unconstitutional. People can claim the Civil War was "not about slavery" until the cows come home, but the fact remains that anyone who fought for the Confederacy was fighting for a country in which a universal right to own slaves was one of the most entrenched laws of the land.

are you one of the 25% of americans, or 40% of white southerners, who sympathize with the confederacy? one of the 42% who believes that slavery was not the main reason for secession? what say you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why?.... Why did you have to bring up "Lost Cause" poo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why?.... Why did you have to bring up "Lost Cause" poo?

He can't help it... he'd rather stir the sh*t and make it stink than do something useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Slavery was the primary cause of the War of Northern aggression. Anybody that doubts it needs to read up a bit.

That being said, it was not the primary reason the soldiers themselves fought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Northerners cared so much about slavery that 365,000 Union troops died to end it. But didn't care enough to give freed slaves a place to live.

.....and Iraq was about WMD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Is that why rednecks give me the stink eye when I wear my Yankees hat? Because we freed their slaves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Northerners cared so much about slavery that 365,000 Union troops died to end it. But didn't care enough to give freed slaves a place to live.

.....and Iraq was about WMD.

the majority of northerners didn't care about slaves at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This is ridiculous.

Was slavery a component of why the civil war was fought? Absolutely. Anyone who denies it would be just wrong. Was it the only reason? Absolutely not. Anyone who denies it would be just wrong.

Lot of tensions were there prior (see Bushwackers/Jayhawkers).

I see no problem in remembering WHAT happened. Using it to make political points nowadays? I don't see why or the point. Southerners aren't guilty by birth location as racists that simply want to whip black people nor should they deny what happened (regardless of how few did it - it was wrong...period). Northerners aren't innocent by birth location from having ancestry that may/may not have benefited from the use of slaves. Once everyone realizes that we'll all be better off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Is that why rednecks give me the stink eye when I wear my Yankees hat? Because we freed their slaves?

No it's because the Yankees SUCK

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Is that why rednecks give me the stink eye when I wear my Yankees hat? Because we freed their slaves?

A-rod freed a lot of slaves I've heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Slavery was a states' rights issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

1) States rights is awesome.

2) Rich southerners started the war to protect their wealth. But that is nothing new.

3) Most southerners fought for their state and not for slavery.

4) I love the New York Yankees. Wanted to grow up to be Reggie Jackson.

5) the battle flag is the most beautiful flag in the history of the world. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites