Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: John Leland 1789
The outcome of the war is not the issue, and you know it.

Oh, really? So then you don't care if we win or lose this war so long as we observe Emily Post rules of etiquitte regarding a vicious and brutal enemy?

Your comparison is apples and oranges. Lincoln was not in Ford's theater trying to win a war. It was not a battlefield.

35 posted on 05/11/2007 4:55:12 AM PDT by nonliberal (Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: nonliberal
The OUTCOMES of battles and wars or the outcomes of peoples lives (death by cancer or other dread disease, for example) do not in every case indicate the character or heart intent of the individuals involved.

I have previously posted information about a group of men who were called “The Regulators,” who took up arms in the North Carolina Piedmont, against the British militia. This was prior to our war for independence. The Regulators were whipped, but they were right. They were defending their homes, families and churches from the British militia who was detached under orders of Anglican clergymen in eastern North Carolina who detested the Baptist revival led by one Shubal Stearns. The outcome of the battle didn’t determine who was right and who was wrong.

I believe that you were trying to imply that General Robert Lee is somhow to be doubted as to his Christian leadership in time of war, and that his insistence upon his troops abiding by Christian principles (these were my points) means nothing just because he surrendered to General Grant. Well, General Grant himself knew better than that. Grant respected Lee as a Christian Gentleman and leader. Lee’s surrender never changed that.

And the defeat of the Confederacy doesn’t indicate that President Lincoln was correct in every one of his positions with regard to the Constitution or the Union, either. I and millions of others believe that he made trash of the Constitution. We, however, still believe that he was also a Christian with an upright testimony. He erred in his view of how to preserve the Union, in our opinion, but he was a fine man and a Christian in his innermost principles.

46 posted on 05/11/2007 3:41:55 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson