[wagglebee]

I think I made myself clear in the remainder of my post where I explained that it is certainly within the rights of a president to openly disagree with court rulings that he sees as unconstitutional.

I see a very clear distinction between “upholding” the law and “supporting” that same law. While a president must uphold the law, he need not support it.

[pgyanke]

I posted that it was an ignorant retort because your comment makes it appear that Lincoln was a one-man show running roughshod over the Constitution to outlaw slavery. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Continental Congress tried to outlaw slavery at the outset... but the Southern states would have then refused to ratify the Consitution. As time went on, the Southern states were more and more marginalized as the anti-slavery voting block in Congress grew... aided by outlawing slavery in territories which would eventually become voting states. Congress prepared the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery in the United States and Lincoln was a great supporter. Although anti-slavery, Lincoln had never advocated emancipation of the slaves... until he did in the Gettysburg Address.

He worked within the system, not around it. Relevance? If liberals actually used the systems in place to change laws, we wouldn't be in the boat we're in.