T
Timothysis
Guest
No one is harboring grudges; we just want the record to be set straight.
Do you feel the same when others spread false information about the Catholic Church throughout history?
- Status
Do you feel the same when others spread false information about the Catholic Church throughout history?
T
thinkandmull
Guest
Where has the Church taught that if a person doesn’t pay taxes, for example, that he can be put to death. You don’t sell all your possessions and give it to struggling people in other countries and move into a homeless shelter. Should the government put you to death for that?
T
Timothysis
Guest
I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.
T
thinkandmull
Guest
When do you believe someone can form their own government with their friends? Could they be killed for it? Isn’t that what you are saying?
I don’t follow my obligation to love others more then myself by saving people who are hungry by selling all my furniture, pictures, ect. I SHOULD, as everyone should, but I am too weak and just don’t have the love to do it, and there is nothing more I can say about it. Should I be killed for this?
I don’t follow my obligation to love others more then myself by saving people who are hungry by selling all my furniture, pictures, ect. I SHOULD, as everyone should, but I am too weak and just don’t have the love to do it, and there is nothing more I can say about it. Should I be killed for this?
A
alchemist3
Guest
I can’t even believe that we are having this discussion. Also the the colonies broke away because they had NO-ZERO representation as to the laws that were imposed upon them. The South just did not like the way the system that they had agreed to was working out due to population disparities, based upon their slave based agrarian economic system, and then wanted to back out of their deal. This is nothing like the US Revolution, the US Revolution might not have even transpired had England allowed the colonies some form of proportional representation in government. Your analogy is flawed from the start. The South was trying to preserve its economic system that was based upon human exploitation. Now was the North correct in some of its actions in the South, absolutely not, nor will I ever argue that those actions are defensible. However, that in no way suddenly makes the Southern Cause legitimate.
T
thinkandmull
Guest
Neither were those northerners right who were fighting just for the Union, thus making the South who always believed in secession into slaves as well.
A
alchemist3
Guest
If they had always believed in secession then they should have provided a legal mechanism for it in the Constitution. There is no such provision for secession.
B
Brendan
Guest
Your statement was too much of a generalization.
There were Union regiments from every southern state except for South Carolina.
Including your home state, LA fielded 2 regiments of infantry and 1 of cavalry (white troops) for the Union ( and several more of colored troops, but I don’t suppose that you count those men among the southerners that you were speaking of
)Also, there were Union Generals, like George Thomas ( aka ‘The Rock of Chickamauga’ )who held true to their oath the Union, though their home state had seceded
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
-Um yeah you did say that because you’re claiming that those evil Northern politicians deprived the poor powerless South of industry and modernization.
-Said disparity between life in the North and South- well yeah, that’s what happens when one part of the country embraces industrialization and the other part of the country says “no, thanks, we prefer our slave based agrarian economy and society.”
B
bisco
Guest
as catholics, are we not supposed to forgive?
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
Even if it was about economics, (it was not there were plenty of people who opposed slavery on moral grounds) the North still was free and that is morally better no matter how you dice it.
C
CthgeDelendaEst
Guest
There is no such provision for most of the things that occur in this country - the commerce clause is used to justify the most outrageous violations of liberty.
The argument that secession is illegal is ridiculous. Earlier in the 19th century, the New England states came very close to secession. There were debates about it, plenty of arguments for and against, and ultimately the states remained in the Union. What you won’t find in the arguments against, however, is that secession was illegal.
What Union apologists conveniently overlook about the Civil War is that it was not a crusade by a freedom loving North against the evil slave-holding South. Both were slave-holding nations. Lincoln cared not a whit for the plight of slaves, which can easily be verified by anyone who can read. Before the secession, he offered to codify slavery in the Constitution for all time if it would keep the states in the union (look it up). The Emancipation Proclamation was political expediency, nothing more.
Like most of our politicians today, Lincoln was a corporate whore. He was a lawyer for the railroads, the big industry of the day. Many Northern industrialists saw the Civil War as a money machine. Win or lose, they knew their cash boxes would be stuffed with war profits.
The atrocities to liberty Lincoln committed to make sure his industrialists got their war are truly shocking. Suspending habeas corpus. Arresting the Maryland legislature to prevent a vote on secession. Shutting down hundreds of northern newspapers critical of him. But it was all for the greater good, right?
I’m not a Southerner. I come from Pennsylvania and Wisconsin stock. Relatives of mine fought for the North. But right is right, and evil is evil. I pray for the souls of the men on both sides, for the vast majority of them were pawns at the mercy of evil chess-masters.
E
exnihilo
Guest
What is the basis for your statement? Slavery ended in Brazil and Cuba after it ended in the South. It would seem the Cubans and Brazilians were more difficult than the South.
Yes, I am unhappy the Union prevailed. The success of the Union started the American Empire. Like all empires first they conquered their neighbors, then they moved on out to the rest of the world. The success of the Union gave us the evil federal government of today and was a huge blow to liberty. Lincoln was a tyrant and a model for all future presidents. He gave life to modern democracy which is a terrible form of government.So for those who believe that the Civil War was a war of northern aggression and that the south is much aggrieved, are you unhappy that the Union was preserved? Can you honestly say that you would rather the U.S. not exist as we know it?
Because I have never come across so many staunch supporters of the south as I have on this forum. It’s a little bit scary, frankly.
I think many southerners harbor anger for the treatment of the South after the war. The continual mockery of the South and the representation of it as a land of ignorant, backward, hateful people compared to the enlightened, advanced loving rest of the country is irritating. The South may hold grudges over the war the rest of the country does as well.
If by North you mean Union then the Union had slave states as well. So your claim does not make sense. The Puritanical morality is nothing great or freeing. It is the morality that makes smoking a sin, and a crime, but sodomy a virtue and a crime to oppose.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
:hypno:
B
BackHand
Guest
I see the Neo-Confederates are out in force on this thread! The North was completely right in bringing the South back into the union, suggesting otherwise is absurd.
“** We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal**, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”
Irony overload! Please tell that to southern slaves.
“** We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal**, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”
True prior to the Civil War slavery was constitutionally legal, that being said there would’ve eventually been an amendment to the Constitution which is why the south rebelled.
Exactly the South saw the writing on the wall that sooner or later the North would have enough representatives and senators to pass an amendment abolishing slavery, the South knew this and rebelled.
B
BackHand
Guest
All legal arguments of succession aside the North acted with complete moral authority. The South had 2 and a half million slaves, who were human beings that were treated like cattle. The North only had 300,000 in its border states who were freed the same year the war ended.
Also those states while officially in the union, had many Confederate leanings but were too cowardly to rebel once they saw the poor shape of the filthy rebel army, as they were beaten back into submission by the glorious union .Further union generals had a tendency to look the other way when slaves escaped, or even joined the Union army.
Is this how a civilized and just society treats people? Like they are mere animals?
http://roebuckclasses.com/201/slavery/whippingpic.jpg
"African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro 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. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away… Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the ‘storm came and the wind blew, it fell.’"
The Cornerstone Speech, also known as the Cornerstone Address, delivered by Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens at the Athenaeum in Savannah, Georgia on March 21, 1861.
“I think then, 1st, that the only safety of the South from abolition universal is to be found in an early dissolution of the Union.” Henry L. Benning, Georgia politician and future Confederate general
“African slavery is the corner-stone of the industrial, social, and political fabric of the South; and whatever wars against it, wars against her very existence”
Lawrence Keitt: Congressman from South Carolina
“I want Cuba . . . I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican States; and I want them all for the same reason – for the planting and spreading of slavery.”
Albert Gallatin Brown, U.S. Senator from Mississippi
Personally I think we should canonize Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S Grant, and William Tecumseh Sherman for their amazing noble deeds of destroying slavery and its evils.
Long live the UNION! Down with the traitors and up with the stars!
Also those states while officially in the union, had many Confederate leanings but were too cowardly to rebel once they saw the poor shape of the filthy rebel army, as they were beaten back into submission by the glorious union .Further union generals had a tendency to look the other way when slaves escaped, or even joined the Union army.
Is this how a civilized and just society treats people? Like they are mere animals?
http://roebuckclasses.com/201/slavery/whippingpic.jpg
"African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro 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. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away… Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the ‘storm came and the wind blew, it fell.’"
The Cornerstone Speech, also known as the Cornerstone Address, delivered by Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens at the Athenaeum in Savannah, Georgia on March 21, 1861.
“I think then, 1st, that the only safety of the South from abolition universal is to be found in an early dissolution of the Union.” Henry L. Benning, Georgia politician and future Confederate general
“African slavery is the corner-stone of the industrial, social, and political fabric of the South; and whatever wars against it, wars against her very existence”
Lawrence Keitt: Congressman from South Carolina
“I want Cuba . . . I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican States; and I want them all for the same reason – for the planting and spreading of slavery.”
Albert Gallatin Brown, U.S. Senator from Mississippi
Personally I think we should canonize Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S Grant, and William Tecumseh Sherman for their amazing noble deeds of destroying slavery and its evils.
Long live the UNION! Down with the traitors and up with the stars!
E
exnihilo
Guest
And do you say the same to the Union slaves? It may seem ironic but the United States was founded with this tension. It was not the South that invented it.Irony overload! Please tell that to southern slaves.
“** We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal**, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”
Also the Union Army was filled with conscripts. There is no real difference in conscripting men and enslaving them other than masters generally tried to keep their slaves from getting killed and generals do not. The world is full of irony.
Your argument is what exactly? That a society should be judged by its excesses? Not all slaves were whipped and not all to that degree. Oh, and do you know that the Union Army whipped soldiers who violated its rules? They also executed deserters. In fact whipping as a punishment continued long after slavery ended. So if you are saying whipping is immoral and any people who do this deserve to be conquered in war, killed and derided then the same would apply to the Union.
Well it has been done by the state. They gave Lincoln a Temple of Jupiter. True it is not as good as Washington’s deification. But the secular religion has offered these ‘heroes’ adoration.
B
bisco
Guest
and forget!
B
bisco
Guest
i can only think these grudges are handed down from father to son. they prevent the unification of all brothers in Christ.
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
The fact that only the USA needed to fight a war to end slavery. It ended peacefully elsewhere.
I also find the egotism, smug sense of superiority and self-righteousness held by many Southerners irritating as well.
Yeah, states that either were too cowardly to join the CSA or stayed due to some adroit maneuvers by Lincoln who recognized their strategic potential in the war. As Lincoln said, “I would love to have God on my side, but I must have Kentucky.” A small concession to realpolitik but it ultimately upheld the noble principle of anti-slavery.
- Status