Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Isaac-Saxxon
"The war was about the states' rights to choose whether or not they abolished slavery."
It was a part of the problem but only a part. I agree with Joe on this one and I have seen the black population milk this for every penny they can get. They have their freedom and look what they choose to do with it. I know some blacks that have used their rights to live the American dream but oh so many that want that public dole and the government is the enabler for such a large problem. American by birth and southern by the grace of God ! 
Isaac |
Isaac, are you saying that because the black population does not live up to your standards that they should be put back under slavery?
I was born and raised in Texas, and I completely understand the loyalty and love for your home state. The Confederacy didn't even last half a decade, and it was abolished nearly 150 years ago. The "states rights" issue did not just appear out of thin air, it was sparked by the Federal Government's attempt to abolish slavery. If you agree that slavery is wrong, then the "states rights" issue is a moot point. Furthermore, there is nothing in the Constitution or any other founding document that grants a state, or group of states, rights over the Federal government.
I understand with all of the frustration from putting up with a mentality of entitlement, but that is a separate issue altogether. It's like trying to argue that they were stupid for abolishing slavery because of all the negatives that are happening 150 year later.
The "states rights" argument was one capitalized on by John Calhoun, a politician at the time of the Civil War, believed that when the majority rule and minority rights were in conflict, that one could simply alter or abolish the government. He got that ball rolling and the secession was on.
If you want to quote famous people regarding slavery, here's a few for you:
John Locke: Second Treatise on Government
6. But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of licence; though man in that state have an uncontrollable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some nobler use than its bare preservation calls for it. The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it, which obliges every one, and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions; for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker; all the servants of one sovereign Master, sent into the world by His order and about His business; they are His property, whose workmanship they are made to last during His, not one another's pleasure. And, being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of Nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us that may authorise us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another's uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for ours. Every one as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he as much as he can to preserve the rest of mankind, and not unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.
Thomas Jefferson
“We have the wolf by the ears: and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.”
Somebody please answer me, what is it about the heritage of the Confederacy that is so important? For the most part all I've heard are arguments citing entitlement from blacks now in the 21st century, the big federal government is evil now in the 21st century, but absolutely nothing to support the idea of the Confederate heritage.