Posted on 06/04/2011 12:34:35 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
You were there? You know that for a fact?
You really can't view history accurately from the perspective of one's own armchair, y'know.
If Roger Sherman, et al shared your view, there would be no union today.
Keep reading. You can thank that “hypocrite” as you so hypocritically put it, for your Constitutional rights.
I particularly like the part about not allowing access to political power to this or that group of people, based upon his own version of political correctness.
The indoctrination just runs too deep sometimes, even on FR. It’s been a very disappointing evening.
Good night.
Good night.
If only the right people had been in charge at the right moment, history would've turned out so much better. All the mistakes could've been avoided and the worrld would be perfect.
And a Good Night to you, too...
A real sacrifice on their part, no doubt. Rather like England abolishing slavery domestically.
Well, no, Massachusetts would be more like England, since Boston rivalled Charleston as a slave port at one point in the colonial era, but they didn't keep many there, just profited from the sale of them, sent them south and bought the goods produced by the labor of the slaves they'd sold.
Yes, 'twas very brave. Pure as the driven snow, too.
Sorry, it was RegulatorCountry’s link about George Mason that described all of the problems created by slaves, how it corrupted men, and how it would ultimately lead to ruin. But you were mentioning George Mason, so you might find it useful.
Stupidity on your part, sheer stupidity, you standing in judgment of not just George Mason but all the Founders. All history and all the world should’ve turned on a dime after some single, particular flashpoint, according to you. It’s all symbolic, everybody “should’ve known” and hindsight makes perfect, according to you.
You began this exchange with the claim that our Founders “lacked the balls” or some such inanity, and rather than admit you didn’t have the first clue, you launch into some campaign using words that clearly demonstrate that they did not evade the issue at all, in fact knew it would lead to precisely that which occurred, war.
And yet, our nation was established and the best form of government ever created by man was born anyway. Nevermind, says you, they were hypocrites and had no balls, pledging their lives and fortunes and sacred honor, the hypocrites. According to you.
You disdain our Founders and our founding document. Don’t expect a round of applause. You might get a pat on the back or two in leftist quarters but not from me.
I’m done here. You should hang your head in shame, but you won’t.
Ignoring the thread hi-jacking and with an attempt at getting back to Star's point, I think 2012 'looks like' 1860 with Lincoln rejecting submitting slavery to the vote. In 2012, the winning Party will be the one that rejects putting abortion to a vote. As Ronald Maximus put it ....
Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation [By President Ronald Reagan, 1983]
Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should therefore be slaves. Likewise, we cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning.
the more unconventional ... dont have a chance (per the pundits) ... with limited (or none) previous experience in national office ...
p.s. always good stuff at DakotaVoice.
Nonsense. At least a large number of people living at the time viewed human bondage as an abject horror, and became quite belligerent in activity to rid this country of the practice. It was a contemporary struggle, obviously, and it should be clear to any thoughtful person that the Southern leadership were very aware of the evil nature of the system they fought to maintain. Your argument is akin to defending Bernie Madoff as being just ignorant of the evil he was doing for lucre. I project, quite reasonably, that at least educated people of the time were informed and understood what they were doing when holding slaves, but they got a lot of money for doing it - and didn't want to give it up.
You engage in anachronism in order to condemn people who participated in a legal practice that had existed, in sundry forms, for all recorded history
Denied. My analysis is current, and correct. The people of regard condemned themselves, in their own time. Would you join me in the condemnation of Islamic Honor killing? Or would you perhaps excuse it as "it's just their way!"
We do not reject our forbears on the basis of modern sensibility that other, more recent arrivals seem to believe to encompass the entirety of our history. Recent arrivals who brought communism with them. Your people, I suspect.
Sorry bud, wrong again, my history traces back to a signer of the Declaration of Independence.
Go right ahead and sit smugly on your perch in their unknown future and bloviate away.
Hey, watch that rough stuff. I, like you, enjoy bloviating!
I thought Star’s column made some right-on points. That would really be something to see abortion put on the national ballot!
I’m hoping that we will be able to choose our own GOP nominee. The wicked media is pushing for that RINO freak Romney. Please let us knock Romney out of the running!
Dakota Voice is a good site, isn’t it? :-)
Yes, genocide was a over the top. Let me apologize for the hyperbole. Genocide can never be justified. It was a shameful thing to suggest.
Very “bad”.
Not that this presented any great difficulty at the time; as Vice President, "sitting" was about all he had to do.
The US is a Constitutional republic where government power is limited. The operative word is Constitutional!
North Korea, Syria and some of the most oppressive places on earth are technically 'republics' meaning they do not have a monarchy and that they pretend to have representation of the people.
There is nothing magic about the word republic. It is a well written and well observed constitution to limit government power and insure individual liberty that makes the difference.
Are you going to tell us how swell it was?
I argue that the U.S. is a republic and NOT a democracy..
Although a very unique republic at that..
A Banana republic is in fact a democracy(central government)..
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.