Posted on 08/18/2019 2:09:16 PM PDT by SleeperCatcher
“The facts are that as a man of his time, Lincoln was not seeking social equality for the black people, but he was fighting to end chattel slavery as abhorrent to society . . .”
That is an interesting comment - “he was fighting to end chattel slavery.”
If true, Lincoln was fighting an unnecessary and illegal war. Slavery was legal according to the United States Constitution. Lincoln’s war against the states, purportedly to overthrow slavery, would have been a war to overthrow the pro-slavery United States Constitution.
Lincoln should have used the legal, peaceful constitutional amendment process to end slavery - and prevented the deaths of 600,000 - 800,000 people.
What the United States is known for (racially) is being the first country in the world to fight a war that ENDED ALL SLAVERY WITHOUT OUR COUNTY.
Dean Baquete is playing the black pity-party card... against a really decent country. Shame on him. What a disgusting man. Arthur Ochs Sulzberger needs to man up and stop this crap.
“What the United States is known for (racially) is being the first country in the world to fight a war that ENDED ALL SLAVERY WITHOUT OUR COUNTY.”
That is an interesting comment.
A war to abolish slavery was totally unnecessary. Abolition could have been done peacefully using the amendment process of the United States Constitution.
I just saw this. They are including infamous, internet re-historian Kevin Kuse. He famously trolls Dinesh D’sousa propagating the “switched sides” protection racket for the racist democrat party. He is apparently the intellectual heft to the affirmative action writers they have assembled to whine out loud.
I don’t believe the South would have gone along with that... Can YOU name a country that OUTLAWED slavery BEFORE the United States?
“I don’t believe the South would have gone along with that... Can YOU name a country that OUTLAWED slavery BEFORE the United States?”
England. Start with that.
Lots of fits and starts ending the horror... Totally outlawed is still debatable...
1102 Flag of Basse-Normandie.svg Norman England The Council of London bans the slave trade.
1569 England An English court case involving Cartwright, who had brought a slave from Russia, is said—on the basis of a summary written more than a century later—to have ruled slavery illegal in England, but appears to have been more about the nature of legally acceptable punishment than slavery per se, and certainly did not soon become a recognized precedent for outlawing slavery as slaves continued to be bought and sold in Liverpool and London markets without legal hindrance into the 18th century. See the article “Slavery at common law”.
1706 England In Smith v. Browne & Cooper, Sir John Holt, Lord Chief Justice of England, rules that “as soon as a Negro comes into England, he becomes free. One may be a villein in England, but not a slave.”[39][40]
1772 England Somersett’s case rules that no slave can be forcibly removed from England.ng the conditions on British slave ships enacted.
1788 Great Britain Sir William Dolben’s Act regulating the conditions on British slave ships enacted.
1805 United Kingdom A bill for abolition passes in House of Commons but is rejected in the House of Lords.
United Kingdom Slave trading made a felony punishable by transportation for both British subjects and foreigners.
1823 United Kingdom The Anti-Slavery Society is founded.
1834 United Kingdom The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 comes into force, abolishing slavery throughout most of the British Empire but on a gradual basis over the next six years.[85] Legally frees 700,000 in the West Indies, 20,000 in Mauritius, and 40,000 in South Africa. The exceptions are the territories controlled by the East India Company and Ceylon.[86]
“I don’t believe the South would have gone along with that (abolishing slavery peacefully using constitutional methods)…”
Even if the South had not voted to amend the United States Constitution the way others wanted, that would not legally justify President Lincoln taking up arms, “fighting to free the slaves”, and violently overthrowing the pro-slavery U.S. Constitution.
This is still relevant today as progressives begin to talk about the need to use force to confiscate firearms because they do not have the votes to peacefully abolish the Second Amendment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.