Taurus Firearm Forum banner

41 - 47 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts
I think someone at History.com needs to study history. Slavery didn't divide the country, state's rights did. Lincoln himself said that if he could hold the union together and not free one slave, he'd do it. In reality, he signed the emancipation proclamation in 1863 to keep the British, who were very much anti slavery, from aiding the South. Making slavery an issue was a political move.

I see they actually did see fit to admit in passing that the civil war was not over slavery.
Slavery was the primary issue of "states rights." Southern politicians certainly made slavery the centerpiece of their speeches, as did northern politicians. If you read letters written by northern soldiers to their families, slavery was very much the sin against which they were fighting.

You're right, though, that the primary effect of the Emancipation Proclamation was to keep the British out of the war.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,435 Posts
Slavery was the primary issue of "states rights." Southern politicians certainly made slavery the centerpiece of their speeches, as did northern politicians. If you read letters written by northern soldiers to their families, slavery was very much the sin against which they were fighting.

You're right, though, that the primary effect of the Emancipation Proclamation was to keep the British out of the war.
Slavery was at the core of most issues associated with the Civil War, but it was not necessarily the cause that most Northern soldiers were fighting for, until after the Emancipation Proclamation was issued in 1863. The draft riots in New York underscore the attitude of many Northerners' attitudes toward being forced to fight a war which had been made about slavery, and just as many soldiers' letters home talked of their anger at being ordered to put their lives on the line for emancipation, up until the U.S. Colored Troops began to take the field later in 1863.

And let's not forget -- the Emancipation Proclamation did nothing for the slaves in the Union. Those people had to wait until the end of the war.

As far as abolitionists go, we romanticize their stand against the 'peculiar institution', but in truth they were less like Riverkeepers, and more like PETA in their day -- people in the North thought they were dangerous radicals and didn't like their activism, even going so far as to burn their presses and occasionally kill one.

In any event, the U.S. has had it's dark times before, but there never seemed to be the level of indifference or apathy towards government corruption, or the lack of consequences for the criminal elites who seem to flaunt their immunity as they elevate and reward themselves from the public's treasury.

Just look how long it took for congress to pass a law preventing its members from benefiting financially from stock trades made on companies that were effected by legislation that congress was voting on! Even the most elementary sense of ethics should have said it was improper, but congress fought the bill long and hard before they were basically shamed into passing it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,046 Posts
I watched "Clinton Cash" over the weekend.

That will show you a bunch of "coincidences" (between cash contributions and new regulations/laws) that have happened since the Clintons have been public servants. Talking about corrupt POShites.

You can find the movie on YouTube under Clinton Cash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rollin thunder

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,713 Posts
Documentaries are not proof of anything. In the documentary Food Inc the film makers took footage of a meat processing plants ethylene glycol powered refrigeration system and used that to infer that large meat processing plants actually soak the meat in ethylene glycol as part of the production process. Thats not how it goes at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,052 Posts
Documentaries are not proof of anything. In the documentary Food Inc the film makers took footage of a meat processing plants ethylene glycol powered refrigeration system and used that to infer that large meat processing plants actually soak the meat in ethylene glycol as part of the production process. Thats not how it goes at all.
Are you saying I shouldn't quote Michael Moore on global warming, 911, or American healthcare? Looks like everything I know is a lie. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91 whiskey

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,618 Posts
Are you saying I shouldn't quote Michael Moore on global warming, 911, or American healthcare? Looks like everything I know is a lie. :(
I read where Michael Moore said he thinks Trump is going to win the election. (no he's not voting for him, just thinks he'll win)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,042 Posts
We lost our morals when Bill Clinton looked into the face of America and said " I did not have sex with that woman".
If the POTUS can lie and cheat why can't the rest of us?
Because wrong is always wrong. It doesn't matter who is doing it. Doesn't matter how many are doing it. No matter what they use for justification. It will always be wrong. And this goes to the root of the OPs post. Things like "New Morality", "If it feels good, do it" and "God is dead" come along and people are told that what used to be wrong is now acceptable. The reality is that nothing has changed except that people are now fooling themselves into going along with conduct that they really know is wrong, but so many others are doing it that they don't want to stand out by denying it to be so. Too worried about being unfriended on Facebook.

I have always believed that everyone has a certain place within themselves where they sometimes go to have discussions with themselves. It's a place many try to avoid, and when they get there they try to hush up the voice that lives there. Because this is the place where you can not lie to yourself. This is where you get the hard answers. You may not like them, you might not follow the advice you get, but you always know that what you hear is right.
 
41 - 47 of 47 Posts
Top