Southern/Retarded

dodges don't equal rebuttals

 

Not dodging anything...just saying if you think the war was about slavery...you don't know history well enough to debate this issue with. The fights over westward expansion were all about representation. There were constant fights over representation after the Constitution. None, or very little of it was "noble and good"...hell the North (the kind and generous love all people region, remember) argued that "blacks" were not men and like animals, shouldn't be counted as a person for population-based representation.

 

Yeah, they wanted Cali as a slave state because Alabama wanted someone to sit with during recenss. That's exactly it. History books are just biased.

 

Thanks for telling me.

 

Which would seem to indicate pretty strongly that the keeping the Union together was his primary goal. The only one he wouldn't compromise on.

The legislatures voted to secceed. They represent the people.

Funny how you want states' rights for a territory.

 

Union staying together does not equal "didn't care about slavery". It did have political positives, and negatives, but you don't run a campaign for President that includes "slavery is wrong" and not mean it.

They represented the slave owning aristocracy. Common people had nothing to gain and no voice. That's not democracy.

woosh

States rights don't matter to me. It mattered to California, and supposedly mattered to the south, until it was time to try to force another state to agree with them.

 

Where did I say he didn't care about slavery? But it's pretty hard to justify that something is the reason for a war if you are willing to give that up as part of the peace.

If the South had agreed to give up slavery, but stay secceeded, Lincoln would have said no. If they South had agreed to come back into the Union and been allowed to keep slavery, Lincoln would have said yes.

We are not and never have been a democracy. Neither have the states. But it is funny how you don't mind the non slaving owning aristocracy to speak for everyone in their states.

But you were talking about prior to them being a state. Until the join the union, there can be no states' rights.

 

None of it matters without a full and stable United States. Yes, that's the end goal. That doesn't rescind the ideals and facts of what caused the war and what was decided from the war.

They weren't trying to secede, so yeah. I do think that special interests shouldn't drive a state or country.

basically the same thing. They had an organization to have had a constitution, their views on slavery were stated plainly and clearly. They'd chosen, but the southern states wanted to choose for them. Sorry, word games don't make that right, and trying to push it off on "state's rights" as a defense doesn't wash.

 

damn this is a long thread I haven't read.

Is it worth my time reading 400+ posts about how retarded Southern Yankee is?

 

It's good for a laugh, some history, and a little mac and cheese.