- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:02 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
So. fricking. What.
quote:
Wrong is wrong. Falling on a particular spot on our historical timeline doesn't change that.
So. fricking. What.
Slavery was legal in our country, and was a world-wide institution at that time. Our country was not the only one that allowed slavery. This was over 150 years ago. Settle down, dude. Slavery has been abolished. Sheesh.
MAGA
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:06 pm to mofungoo
quote:
was
quote:
was
Indeed.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:12 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Wrong is wrong
That's not exactly relevant. Because back then it wasn't "wrong".
This post was edited on 8/20/17 at 10:13 pm
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:14 pm to noonan
quote:
That's not exactly relevant. Because back then it wasn't "wrong".
It's always been wrong to own other people.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
It's like talking to a child
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:22 pm to Ebbandflow
quote:
Yeah and then they killed a bunch of actual Americans
Yeah, when the "actual" Americans invaded Virginia. If the Army of the Potomac doesn't cross that river, no one dies. Lincoln could have easily blockaded the Confederacy out of existence without firing a bullet.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:25 pm to noonan
quote:
It's like talking to a child
Agreed, but your parents should have taught you right and wrong, not me.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:26 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
It's always been wrong to own other people
Totally agree, but just like folks believed that smoking actually had health benefits, slavery was an institution. Here's what I don't understand. Why is it that Americans are the only folks on earth still pissed about slavery? I mean, I don't see Europeans wearing shirts that read.....kill the Romans.
This post was edited on 8/20/17 at 10:28 pm
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:36 pm to geauxbrown
Maybe because there aren't Romans rolling around Europe saying "get over it, we didn't know it was wrong to own people back then."
Or, maybe it's just been separated by enough time.
Or, maybe it's just been separated by enough time.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:39 pm to SMU Tiger Fan
My limited understanding of Gen Lee was that was the only reason he fought for the south. He actually hated the institution of slavery. People were loyal to their states before the were loyal their country.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:41 pm to SMU Tiger Fan
quote:
One of the biggest ideals was "state's rights," which is guaranteed by the constitution.
Yup defending the homeland from yankee aggression and fighting for states rights!
We waz freedom fighterz n shite!
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:44 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
It's always been wrong to own other people.
when looking at it in present context, you are completely correct. Thats why we no longer practice slavery. It was a horrible institution that needed to go, but back then it was normal practice. It is still normal practice in other parts of the world like Africa. We know it's wrong, them, not so much
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:46 pm to Seldom Seen
quote:
We waz freedom fighterz n shite!
Who had kangs working for them.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:48 pm to INFIDEL
quote:
but back then it was normal practice
Everyone is aware of this. It means very little. "It was normal back then" is a poor reason to defend those actions today.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:50 pm to SMU Tiger Fan
quote:
One of the biggest ideals was "state's rights," which is guaranteed by the constitution. This seems to have been forgotten (or never learned).
Kids in the South were issued pamphlets in the mail about "state's rights" during the re-imagining and romancticism of ante-bellum South during the late 19th century revisionist Southern writers.
And it still holds water to this day. It's the oldest fallacy in American politics.
If it was about State's rights, why did the Confedarcy ban the outlawing of slavery among all Confederate States.
Surely, they loved State's rights so much, they'd allow Virginia to ban slavery years later if they so chose? A rigth for a State to choose, right?
Nope, slavery shall be forever said the Confed Constition and no State of the Confederacy can ever ban slavery.
The Confederacy became the biggest dictatorship compared to the Union when it came to laws and toeing the line and people still talk about State's rights. :rotflmao:
This post was edited on 8/20/17 at 10:52 pm
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:50 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
It's always been wrong to own other people.
While we consider slavery immoral now, it was normal throughout antiquity and well into modern period. Our attitudes, are somewhat unique, historically.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:51 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Its not about defending them. We know it was wrong. Like child labor was wrong. Like blood sports was wrong. Like not allowing women right were wrong. But if youre going to explore history you have to interpret it by using era appropriate thinking and understanding.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:53 pm to Lima Whiskey
Of all the state governments that published “declarations of the causes of secession” like these (some published shorter “ordinances of secession”), none mentioned the ostensible injustices of America’s tariff system. None complained of high taxes, or even states’ rights in a general sense. All, however, passionately pontificated on the necessity of preserving an institution of slavery; and that no such preservation could be maintained within the Union as it was then organized. Ironically, secession, and the creation of a Confederacy was the only conceivable way of maintaining the status quo.
Posted on 8/20/17 at 10:56 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
The South’s real concern in the antebellum period was that states and territories in the North and West were passing state laws aimed at undermining the federal fugitive slave laws, and that new states would choose to join the Union as free states. Those jurisdictions wanted to retain the right to determine whether people could be slaves within their state boundaries—as opposed to the federal government making such laws.
But the South was all about State's rights!!!!! What a crock of shite.
They were about presevering slavery at all costs.
The South’s distain for states’ rights can be seen in the Constitution’s Fugitive Slave Clause (the less famous cousin to the Three-Fifths Clause, which boosted federal representation from slave states), the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and the 1850 Compromise. All were federal actions aimed at controlling northern states. The South did not return the North’s favor: before the Civil War, no attempts to ban slavery even made it to a vote on the floor of Congress.
The South was the biggest aggressor against state's rights because they knew with more states being admitted they were losing their cause and losing all their political power...over, slavery.
People who buy the State's rights argument are fricking moronic and brainwashed by revisionist grand-pappies who felt ashamed.
But the South was all about State's rights!!!!! What a crock of shite.
They were about presevering slavery at all costs.
The South’s distain for states’ rights can be seen in the Constitution’s Fugitive Slave Clause (the less famous cousin to the Three-Fifths Clause, which boosted federal representation from slave states), the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and the 1850 Compromise. All were federal actions aimed at controlling northern states. The South did not return the North’s favor: before the Civil War, no attempts to ban slavery even made it to a vote on the floor of Congress.
The South was the biggest aggressor against state's rights because they knew with more states being admitted they were losing their cause and losing all their political power...over, slavery.
People who buy the State's rights argument are fricking moronic and brainwashed by revisionist grand-pappies who felt ashamed.
This post was edited on 8/20/17 at 10:58 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News