OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 30, 2014, 05:52:34 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 150 years: 1st Minn. Vols at Gettysburg  (Read 2391 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« on: July 04, 2013, 07:08:38 PM »

 First Minnesota Volunteers at Gettysburg 150 years.

A Gap had formed in the Union line, which was simultaneously notice by both sides. The rebels saw their chance to split the Federal Army in half and win the battle. They quickly sent nearly 1200 troops forward.
General Hancock came galloping up to the lone Regiment in the gap ( approx 290 Men).

“What’s your name Colonel?”

“ Covill Sir”

"What Regiment is this?" he asked.

 “We are the First Minnesota sir."

“Colonel, do you see those flags coming this way?".....

“Yes Sir"....."

“Take them ! "
 
The regiment fixed bayonets and moved forward at double time. Then they were  ordered to “Charge Bayonets”..  Leveled their rifles and hurled themselves into the enemy line.

The Confederates later reported that they were hit so hard they thought they were being repulsed by a much larger force and began to fall back. But they rallied and began to pour a withering fire into the Minnesotans who were caught flat in a gully and nearly wiped them out.
The time saved by their charge bought enough time for General Hancock to move up troops and fill the gap, saving the battle. The casualty rate was 83% which to this day remains the highest of any surviving American unit .

The next day the 47 men still fit were put into line to repel Pickett.

There is a story told by veterans that even after the devastating losses of the day before and in the face of an impending frontal assault by the whole of the Rebel Army, the First Sargent scolded the men at morning inspection for not having their brass (belt buckles and small breast plate) properly polished and had them quickly shine them up..” like proper soldiers”. 

It was necessary to again charge into the advancing Confederates. One man, Private Marshal Sherman captured the battle flag of the 28th Virginia Infantry and was later awarded the Medal of Honor.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,743



« Reply #1 on: July 04, 2013, 09:57:20 PM »

I remember my history teacher having us high schoolers reinact this battle slightly outside back in the day

(I am from minnesota)

Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2013, 10:07:04 PM »

I remember my history teacher having us high schoolers reinact this battle slightly outside back in the day

(I am from minnesota)



Yes, my understanding is that school children in Minnesota are still taught about the charge of the 1st.Minn. Vols



« Last Edit: July 04, 2013, 10:10:15 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Dionysii
Banned
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Old Rite Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Metr. Kornilii of Russia
Posts: 642



« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2013, 10:35:28 PM »

'John Brown's Body'
Pete Seeger
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jso1YRQnpCI

The Battle Hymn of the Republic is perhaps appropriate for both the Civil War and July 4th (although I make no claim as to its theology).
Logged
KBN1
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: EO
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 888



« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2013, 11:56:32 PM »

I'm also from MN.  We were certainly taught about the 1st.
Logged
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 2,923


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2013, 05:42:29 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Thanks for this.  Smiley
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2013, 06:05:59 AM »

It is a fascinating and at the same time dreadful topic, made more immediate in that we have photographs of the troops of both sides.
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 8,740



« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2013, 08:02:05 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.
Logged

On a OC.net diet.

"Chi son?  Sono un poeta. Che cosa faccio? Scrivo. E come vivo?  Vivo."
-Giacomo Puccini
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,361


« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2013, 08:17:56 AM »

[edit]
« Last Edit: July 05, 2013, 08:25:57 AM by Asteriktos » Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2013, 08:26:11 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.

It was anything but silly. As in all civil wars brother turned on brother, neighbour against neighbour, and a federal state threatened to unravel. It was in many ways a precursor to modern warfare, with its methods and casualty rates. No, not silly but tragic.
Logged
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 2,923


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #10 on: July 05, 2013, 09:42:32 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.

While the war was indeed terrible, both in it's nature and concerning the loss of human lives, I find the social, economic and cultural aspects of the war interesting. The conflict between the industrialised North and the agricultural South played a big part in the conflict.

Plus, the issue of slavery is also interesting to read about. I once borrowed a book, that contained biographies from black slaves. It was very exciting to read.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,115



« Reply #11 on: July 05, 2013, 10:51:49 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.
I'm not sure a battle with 50,000 casualties can be considered a petty skirmish.
Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL ORTHODOX CHURCH
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2013, 10:28:45 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.
I'm not sure a battle with 50,000 casualties can be considered a petty skirmish.

The causality rate for all of the Vietnam War was around 53,000. Towards the end, we were losing 10,000 men per month during the Civil War. In a single day of fighting at Sharpsburg there were around 23,000 casualties. At Gettysburg over several days the total was around 50,000. For comparison sake, the Battle of Waterloo also added up to around 50,000 for both sides combined.

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #13 on: July 06, 2013, 11:14:36 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.
I'm not sure a battle with 50,000 casualties can be considered a petty skirmish.
Nor should a war with over 620,000 casualties be called "silly."
« Last Edit: July 06, 2013, 11:14:51 AM by pmpn8rGPT » Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #14 on: July 06, 2013, 11:49:05 AM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.

Not a big student of US History I see.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #15 on: July 06, 2013, 03:46:00 PM »

I think Cyrillic is just pulling our chains. Or perhaps he's thinking of our war of independence, which really wasn't that big a deal.

The civil war was pretty important though. I think Karl Marx said it was the most important thing of the time, alongside the abolition of serfdom in Russia. As that master orator Joe Biden would say, "This is a big ... deal."
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,983


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #16 on: July 10, 2013, 08:54:02 AM »

It is a fascinating and at the same time dreadful topic, made more immediate in that we have photographs of the troops of both sides.

 It was a tragic war because it was an attack on liberty.  I have blood kin who fought valiantly for the South, none of whom owned slaves.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #17 on: July 10, 2013, 08:57:54 AM »

It is a fascinating and at the same time dreadful topic, made more immediate in that we have photographs of the troops of both sides.

 It was a tragic war because it was an attack on liberty.  I have blood kin who fought valiantly for the South, none of whom owned slaves.

They were fighting for the "liberty" of others to own slaves.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #18 on: July 10, 2013, 10:07:51 AM »

It is a fascinating and at the same time dreadful topic, made more immediate in that we have photographs of the troops of both sides.

 It was a tragic war because it was an attack on liberty.  I have blood kin who fought valiantly for the South, none of whom owned slaves.

There is nothing noble or worthy of respect about slavery. Absolutely nothing.

There is also nothing worthy of respect about succession from the United States not even to mention trying to make common cause with the British after the struggle to get rid of them.. Not a thing.

Nothing about the Confederate cause had anything to do with Liberty.

I remember being in a Reenactment * years ago in Southern Virginia. After a couple of days the finale was to be in an open field where spectators could come and watch.

First the Rebels showed up and the crowd cheered and cheered.

Then we came up on to the field. At the head of the column was the National Colors, You know, the flag of the United States of America.

You could see the confusion on the faces of the spectators. Do you boo the American Flag? Do your root against it? Do you fire on it?

I have seen this reaction a few times. It is one of the great educational aspects of Re-enacting. Would be Confederate sympathizers who are often very Conservative politically, can finally realize the treason inherent in the Southern Cause. Treason. Nothing less, there is nothing about it that should be excused.

* Some events are called "Tactical s" and are not re enactments of actual battles but rather troops running around for a few days to get practice maneuvering..





« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 10:08:53 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #19 on: July 10, 2013, 10:25:35 AM »

Forgive my ignorance as an Irishman, whose forbears may have fought on both sides, but were not the individual states Sovereign States and as such entitled to secede from the Union should they so wish?
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #20 on: July 10, 2013, 11:27:23 AM »

Forgive my ignorance as an Irishman, whose forbears may have fought on both sides, but were not the individual states Sovereign States and as such entitled to secede from the Union should they so wish?

That is the question that the war answered.  Many believed that this was their right.  The Declaration of Independence states:

Quote
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

It boils down to The Right of Succession vs The Natural Right of Revolution.  Obviously, since a war was fought there was not a universal acceptance of a State's right to secede from the Union.  Thus, the Confederate States turned to The Natural Right of Revolution.  The thing with the right of revolution is that it requires a fait accompli for it to actually take effect.  If the South had won, then obviously they had the right to do so!  Since they did not, it was the natural right of the victors to impose any condition they chose to upon the vanquished.  In the 1869 court case of Texas vs White the Supreme Court threw their sword on to the scales, enshrining this in law.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 11:28:21 AM by vamrat » Logged
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,983


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #21 on: July 10, 2013, 11:29:48 AM »

Forgive my ignorance as an Irishman, whose forbears may have fought on both sides, but were not the individual states Sovereign States and as such entitled to secede from the Union should they so wish?

 The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery.  In fact, before the attack on sovereign Southern state, the South was home to an increasingly abolitionist outlook with just as many abolitionists, if not more, than their Northern counterparts.  

 Had the South been left alone. Like Great Britain, the 'peculiar institute' would have soon fallen out of favor as many realized it's unsustainability.  Not to mention over 600,000 Americans would not have had to die.  The war was not initially about slavery.  When Lincoln realized he could get more Northern support (remember, not all Northerners were convinced of the validity of his war- look up Copperheads') he eventually made it exclusively about slavery to further cripple Southern society.  At first he said that if he could keep the Union together without freeing a single slave, he would be happy to do so.  

 Here's are some African-Americans and some Northern re-enactors explaining that the war was not about slavery.  http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YF-QIJyLhKQ
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #22 on: July 10, 2013, 12:05:58 PM »

Thank you both for interesting replies. Somewhere along the line - stimulated hereabouts by the film Lincoln - I read that a resident of Birmingham, UK, influenced Lincoln to include slavery in his speeches. Cannot pin it down but have definitely got an impression that views on slavery were not simply divided upon whether you lived in the North or the South.

As for the morality of one side versus the other, it appears that despite a Northern victory the position of folks of colour appeared a very rocky path. So was it really about slavery or something else?
Logged
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 2,923


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #23 on: July 10, 2013, 12:10:44 PM »

Thank you both for interesting replies. Somewhere along the line - stimulated hereabouts by the film Lincoln - I read that a resident of Birmingham, UK, influenced Lincoln to include slavery in his speeches. Cannot pin it down but have definitely got an impression that views on slavery were not simply divided upon whether you lived in the North or the South.

As for the morality of one side versus the other, it appears that despite a Northern victory the position of folks of colour appeared a very rocky path. So was it really about slavery or something else?

It was about a lot of things. Slavery was one of the issues, but far from the biggest.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #24 on: July 10, 2013, 01:07:55 PM »

Forgive my ignorance as an Irishman, whose forbears may have fought on both sides, but were not the individual states Sovereign States and as such entitled to secede from the Union should they so wish?

 The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery.  In fact, before the attack on sovereign Southern state, the South was home to an increasingly abolitionist outlook with just as many abolitionists, if not more, than their Northern counterparts.  

 Had the South been left alone. Like Great Britain, the 'peculiar institute' would have soon fallen out of favor as many realized it's unsustainability.  Not to mention over 600,000 Americans would not have had to die.  The war was not initially about slavery.  When Lincoln realized he could get more Northern support (remember, not all Northerners were convinced of the validity of his war- look up Copperheads') he eventually made it exclusively about slavery to further cripple Southern society.  At first he said that if he could keep the Union together without freeing a single slave, he would be happy to do so.  

 Here's are some African-Americans and some Northern re-enactors explaining that the war was not about slavery.  http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YF-QIJyLhKQ

The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery. 

Irrelevant.. They fought for a cause that wanted to maintain slavery and expand it.

The cause of the War was slavery. Modern Americans who try to apologize for the South try to dodge around this.

They tried to succeed because Lincoln was opposed to expansion of slavery to the West. Even that relatively mild objection was enough to cause them to start a War. Not only did they want to expand slavery Westward, but had they won they had plans to invade Central America, enslave the Indians there and set up gigantic plantations.... 

No slavery, no Civil War.. Period.

 How Lincoln moved along to the point of freeing the slaves is just the path ending slavery took, nothing more.
No slavery, no Civil War.

If someone fought for the Rebel cause, they are culpable, It matters not one whit if they were slave owners themselves.

People sometimes get confused between how bravely the Confederates fought and the worthiness of what they were fighting for.





Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #25 on: July 10, 2013, 01:17:52 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 
Logged
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,983


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #26 on: July 10, 2013, 01:28:32 PM »

Pretty pictures, Marc.  I hope your next post will include facts as well.  You might begin addressing the video I linked to: African-Americans as well as Northern re-enactors of the war, present an opposing, factual POV.  Plus the fact that there were many Black confederates as well as Black slave owners should alert folks that the story is not as cut-and-dry as some would have us believe.  
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2013, 01:43:48 PM »

Forgive my ignorance as an Irishman, whose forbears may have fought on both sides, but were not the individual states Sovereign States and as such entitled to secede from the Union should they so wish?

 The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery.  In fact, before the attack on sovereign Southern state, the South was home to an increasingly abolitionist outlook with just as many abolitionists, if not more, than their Northern counterparts.  

 Had the South been left alone. Like Great Britain, the 'peculiar institute' would have soon fallen out of favor as many realized it's unsustainability.  Not to mention over 600,000 Americans would not have had to die.  The war was not initially about slavery.  When Lincoln realized he could get more Northern support (remember, not all Northerners were convinced of the validity of his war- look up Copperheads') he eventually made it exclusively about slavery to further cripple Southern society.  At first he said that if he could keep the Union together without freeing a single slave, he would be happy to do so.  

 Here's are some African-Americans and some Northern re-enactors explaining that the war was not about slavery.  http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YF-QIJyLhKQ

The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery.  

Irrelevant.. They fought for a cause that wanted to maintain slavery and expand it.

The cause of the War was slavery. Modern Americans who try to apologize for the South try to dodge around this.

They tried to succeed because Lincoln was opposed to expansion of slavery to the West. Even that relatively mild objection was enough to cause them to start a War. Not only did they want to expand slavery Westward, but had they won they had plans to invade Central America, enslave the Indians there and set up gigantic plantations....  

No slavery, no Civil War.. Period.

 How Lincoln moved along to the point of freeing the slaves is just the path ending slavery took, nothing more.
No slavery, no Civil War.

If someone fought for the Rebel cause, they are culpable, It matters not one whit if they were slave owners themselves.

People sometimes get confused between how bravely the Confederates fought and the worthiness of what they were fighting for.






Hmmm, where to begin...

Explaining that the civil war had anything to do with slavery before "honest" abe made it about slavery, believing that the majority of Southerners believed in slavery, believing that there would have been no civil war had there been no slavery, believing that starting a war which killed 620,000+ Americans was the only way to stop slavery, believing that the majority of confederates (as in, more than 5%) wanted to expand the slave trade to the west, forgetting that enslaving native Americans was already tried (and ended very badly), and, last but not least, misspelling "secede."

For a minute, I thought you were being serious.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 01:44:17 PM by pmpn8rGPT » Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2013, 01:45:12 PM »

Forgive my ignorance as an Irishman, whose forbears may have fought on both sides, but were not the individual states Sovereign States and as such entitled to secede from the Union should they so wish?

 The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery.  In fact, before the attack on sovereign Southern state, the South was home to an increasingly abolitionist outlook with just as many abolitionists, if not more, than their Northern counterparts.  

 Had the South been left alone. Like Great Britain, the 'peculiar institute' would have soon fallen out of favor as many realized it's unsustainability.  Not to mention over 600,000 Americans would not have had to die.  The war was not initially about slavery.  When Lincoln realized he could get more Northern support (remember, not all Northerners were convinced of the validity of his war- look up Copperheads') he eventually made it exclusively about slavery to further cripple Southern society.  At first he said that if he could keep the Union together without freeing a single slave, he would be happy to do so.  

 Here's are some African-Americans and some Northern re-enactors explaining that the war was not about slavery.  http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YF-QIJyLhKQ
+1
Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 736



« Reply #29 on: July 10, 2013, 01:50:26 PM »

Please, the word is "secede", not "succeed".  Although I wish the CSA's secession had been a success.  But they shouldn't have fired on Ft. Sumter.  That gave Lincoln the excuse to launch his ultimately successful invasion of the Southern states.  Both sides were eager to start a war but ill-prepared to conduct it.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #30 on: July 10, 2013, 02:01:59 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #31 on: July 10, 2013, 02:03:23 PM »

Please, the word is "secede", not "succeed".  Although I wish the CSA's secession had been a success.  But they shouldn't have fired on Ft. Sumter.  That gave Lincoln the excuse to launch his ultimately successful invasion of the Southern states.  Both sides were eager to start a war but ill-prepared to conduct it.

How was the North eger to start a war?.. Never heard that one before.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #32 on: July 10, 2013, 02:06:27 PM »

So it had nothing to do with tariffs that meant Southern cotton growers had no option but to sell to Northern mills at an artificially low price? Because that would have really hurt a section of society heavily dependent on their cotton crop sales.

I ask because civil wars tend to have complex causes and clashes of vested interests surely? The notion of goodies on one side and baddies on the other might serve Hollywood misrepresentations of history, but are not serious history.

The institution of chattel slavery was and is truly repellent, and its heritage has blighted relations between communities right up to the present.

Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #33 on: July 10, 2013, 02:11:37 PM »

So it had nothing to do with tariffs that meant Southern cotton growers had no option but to sell to Northern mills at an artificially low price? Because that would have really hurt a section of society heavily dependent on their cotton crop sales.

I ask because civil wars tend to have complex causes and clashes of vested interests surely? The notion of goodies on one side and baddies on the other might serve Hollywood misrepresentations of history, but are not serious history.

The institution of chattel slavery was and is truly repellent, and its heritage has blighted relations between communities right up to the present.



ah ..Yeah..The Civil War and it's 620,000 casualties was not fought over Terrifs.

Several issues were settled by the outcome including idea's about States Rights and some other issues, none of them rise to the level of starting a War except Slavery... The only reason the South took up arms is because a President got elected who was against the expansion of slavery...
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #34 on: July 10, 2013, 02:20:24 PM »

I have always been fascinated by the american civil war.

Why? It was a silly war with a few petty skirmishes.

I think a war that had roughly 600,000 casualties in all is more than a "few petty skirmishes."
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #35 on: July 10, 2013, 02:20:38 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.
Logged
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #36 on: July 10, 2013, 02:22:18 PM »

So it had nothing to do with tariffs that meant Southern cotton growers had no option but to sell to Northern mills at an artificially low price? Because that would have really hurt a section of society heavily dependent on their cotton crop sales.

I ask because civil wars tend to have complex causes and clashes of vested interests surely? The notion of goodies on one side and baddies on the other might serve Hollywood misrepresentations of history, but are not serious history.

The institution of chattel slavery was and is truly repellent, and its heritage has blighted relations between communities right up to the present.



ah ..Yeah..The Civil War and it's 620,000 casualties was not fought over Terrifs.

Several issues were settled by the outcome including idea's about States Rights and some other issues, none of them rise to the level of starting a War except Slavery... The only reason the South took up arms is because a President got elected who was against the expansion of slavery...
ah ..Yeah..The Civil War and it's 620,000 casualties was not fought over Terrifs.

Several issues were settled by the outcome including idea's about States Rights and some other issues, none of them rise to the level of starting a War except Slavery... The only reason the South took up arms is because a President got elected who was against the expansion of slavery...
ah ..Yeah..The Civil War and it's 620,000 casualties was not fought over Terrifs.
Terrifs
You're better than this.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 02:24:34 PM by pmpn8rGPT » Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #37 on: July 10, 2013, 02:22:59 PM »

So it had nothing to do with tariffs that meant Southern cotton growers had no option but to sell to Northern mills at an artificially low price? Because that would have really hurt a section of society heavily dependent on their cotton crop sales.

I ask because civil wars tend to have complex causes and clashes of vested interests surely? The notion of goodies on one side and baddies on the other might serve Hollywood misrepresentations of history, but are not serious history.

The institution of chattel slavery was and is truly repellent, and its heritage has blighted relations between communities right up to the present.



ah ..Yeah..The Civil War and it's 620,000 casualties was not fought over Terrifs.

Several issues were settled by the outcome including idea's about States Rights and some other issues, none of them rise to the level of starting a War except Slavery... The only reason the South took up arms is because a President got elected who was against the expansion of slavery...

It seems like he is following the money.  Not a bad practice.  Much better than relying on emotional biases that sugarcoat the victor's purposes.
Logged
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #38 on: July 10, 2013, 02:26:48 PM »

idea's
An idea cannot own something.

I mean, sorry for ripping apart all of your posts, but some of these are even below what I would expect of JamesR.
Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #39 on: July 10, 2013, 02:30:24 PM »

Forgive my ignorance as an Irishman, whose forbears may have fought on both sides, but were not the individual states Sovereign States and as such entitled to secede from the Union should they so wish?

 The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery.  In fact, before the attack on sovereign Southern state, the South was home to an increasingly abolitionist outlook with just as many abolitionists, if not more, than their Northern counterparts.  

 Had the South been left alone. Like Great Britain, the 'peculiar institute' would have soon fallen out of favor as many realized it's unsustainability.  Not to mention over 600,000 Americans would not have had to die.  The war was not initially about slavery.  When Lincoln realized he could get more Northern support (remember, not all Northerners were convinced of the validity of his war- look up Copperheads') he eventually made it exclusively about slavery to further cripple Southern society.  At first he said that if he could keep the Union together without freeing a single slave, he would be happy to do so.  

 Here's are some African-Americans and some Northern re-enactors explaining that the war was not about slavery.  http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YF-QIJyLhKQ

The vast majority of Southerners neither belonged to the plantation society nor owned slaves nor even benefitted from the horrible institution of slavery.  

Irrelevant.. They fought for a cause that wanted to maintain slavery and expand it.

The cause of the War was slavery. Modern Americans who try to apologize for the South try to dodge around this.

They tried to succeed because Lincoln was opposed to expansion of slavery to the West. Even that relatively mild objection was enough to cause them to start a War. Not only did they want to expand slavery Westward, but had they won they had plans to invade Central America, enslave the Indians there and set up gigantic plantations....  

No slavery, no Civil War.. Period.

 How Lincoln moved along to the point of freeing the slaves is just the path ending slavery took, nothing more.
No slavery, no Civil War.

If someone fought for the Rebel cause, they are culpable, It matters not one whit if they were slave owners themselves.

People sometimes get confused between how bravely the Confederates fought and the worthiness of what they were fighting for.






Hmmm, where to begin...

Explaining that the civil war had anything to do with slavery before "honest" abe made it about slavery, believing that the majority of Southerners believed in slavery, believing that there would have been no civil war had there been no slavery, believing that starting a war which killed 620,000+ Americans was the only way to stop slavery, believing that the majority of confederates (as in, more than 5%) wanted to expand the slave trade to the west, forgetting that enslaving native Americans was already tried (and ended very badly), and, last but not least, misspelling "secede."

For a minute, I thought you were being serious.
I forgot to mention that the result of the collapse of slavery is sharecropping, which is a much more horrible institution.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 02:31:03 PM by pmpn8rGPT » Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 736



« Reply #40 on: July 10, 2013, 02:34:07 PM »

Please, the word is "secede", not "succeed".  Although I wish the CSA's secession had been a success.  But they shouldn't have fired on Ft. Sumter.  That gave Lincoln the excuse to launch his ultimately successful invasion of the Southern states.  Both sides were eager to start a war but ill-prepared to conduct it.

How was the North eger to start a war?.. Never heard that one before.

Keeping the US army at Ft. Sumter was deliberately provocative.  Lincoln could have withdrawn the garrison and let the South go.  But he was determined to preserve the Union come what may.  He had plenty of northern support for this, although it was by no means unanimous.  The North was overly confident that they could defeat the South rapidly.  Of course, that didn't happen.

Lincoln initially made the war about preserving the Union and not about ending slavery, in large part because a war to end slavery would have been very unpopular with many northerners.  He was only able to add slavery to the mix after Sharpsburg, when Lee had to pull back from his first invasion of the North.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #41 on: July 10, 2013, 02:37:14 PM »

I think both sides were stupid if you ask me. The South was idiotic for ever expecting to win when the Union army outnumbered them something like 1 to 5 I think (although admittedly, many Union soldiers in places like California had little to no training) and they could never expect to live up to the Union's manufacturing capabilities. Plus, firing on Fort Sumter sent off a horrible message for the South. It says that you don't peacefully want to secede, but that you are using force to do so, and thus, the Union is going to respond back with force.

The Union is stupid for going along with a war that ended up killing 600,000 people and absolutely jeopardizing the South, that led to more people suffering, and then having to waste millions of dollars to repair it when the war was over. If it were up to me, I'd just take a Marshall Plan approach to the issue of slavery, giving economic aid and benefits to States that join the Union and abolish slavery, while refusing to trade with Confederate states, and allow any escaped slaves that make it to a Union state to keep their freedom. There are better ways to resolve your problems without bloodshed.

Anyhow, the Civil War is responsible for the estrangement that Yankee and Dixie America has with each other. Ironically, instead of uniting us, it only divided us more. There is always going to be that "us/them" mentality now because of the war.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #42 on: July 10, 2013, 02:44:59 PM »

Keeping the US army at Ft. Sumter was deliberately provocative.  Lincoln could have withdrawn the garrison and let the South go.

I think it was understandable though. What if the South had tried to expand northward? We had no way of knowing. Keeping the Army at Fort Sumter was sort of the silent way of saying "don't **** with us," just as we have embassies and garrisons in foreign countries even to this day. The South had every right to try to fight it if they wanted to (and that is what they did), but, it was a pretty idiotic idea because instead of just seceding, they were taking up arms and starting a war. That's good and all if you can win, but I don't think the South ever had a chance to win, they lost fair and square because they screwed up and made a bad decision.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #43 on: July 10, 2013, 03:00:14 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #44 on: July 10, 2013, 03:04:53 PM »

Please, the word is "secede", not "succeed".  Although I wish the CSA's secession had been a success.  But they shouldn't have fired on Ft. Sumter.  That gave Lincoln the excuse to launch his ultimately successful invasion of the Southern states.  Both sides were eager to start a war but ill-prepared to conduct it.

How was the North eger to start a war?.. Never heard that one before.

Keeping the US army at Ft. Sumter was deliberately provocative.  Lincoln could have withdrawn the garrison and let the South go.  But he was determined to preserve the Union come what may.  He had plenty of northern support for this, although it was by no means unanimous.  The North was overly confident that they could defeat the South rapidly.  Of course, that didn't happen.

Lincoln initially made the war about preserving the Union and not about ending slavery, in large part because a war to end slavery would have been very unpopular with many northerners.  He was only able to add slavery to the mix after Sharpsburg, when Lee had to pull back from his first invasion of the North.

There is a big difference between being "eager" to go to War and being willing.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #45 on: July 10, 2013, 03:15:08 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #46 on: July 10, 2013, 03:23:27 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

It was about state rights to practice slavery, as much as the South will deny it...Whether or not it was right, the South started the war by firing on Fort Sumter and thus shouldn't have been surprised to see the Union go to war with them.

Quote
Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.

Treaty of Tripoli states we aren't
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,361


« Reply #47 on: July 10, 2013, 03:27:47 PM »

I want to know why no one ever champions the north rising again...?
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #48 on: July 10, 2013, 03:31:52 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

It was about state rights to practice slavery, as much as the South will deny it...Whether or not it was right, the South started the war by firing on Fort Sumter and thus shouldn't have been surprised to see the Union go to war with them.

and on and on it goes...

Quote
Quote
Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.

Treaty of Tripoli states we aren't

And the US has NEVER stated an untruth in a treaty  Roll Eyes

Although, I do agree that we are not. I got in big trouble in my Christian high school when I told them that I thought the whole Christian nation teaching was nonsense.  I believe I got a talking to by the principal for being "disruptive".
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #49 on: July 10, 2013, 03:37:34 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
The majority of the American forefathers were Deists.
Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #50 on: July 10, 2013, 03:41:16 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
The majority of the American forefathers were Deists.
A point of clarification, I don't have any desire to have that conversation although it is fun to get people riled up on the topic regardless of what side of the fence they are on.  I was merely stating it is another one of those topics that often get very heated without either side ever willing to listen to the other side's perspective on it.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #51 on: July 10, 2013, 03:49:43 PM »

I won't even think of considering America a Christian nation until it stops supporting rebels and terrorists that murder and oppress Orthodox Christians.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 736



« Reply #52 on: July 10, 2013, 03:57:52 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

Be careful about slinging charges of "treason".  Treason was by no means a clear-cut matter in the case of the War between the States.  Keep in mind that Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia all existed as political entities (colonies, then states) for a very long time before the Constitution was written.  Loyalty to one's state can legitimately take precedence over loyalty to one's (former) country.  The South wasn't trying to overthrow the government in DC.  It was trying to go its own way after decades of frustration with northern political domination.
Logged
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #53 on: July 10, 2013, 04:03:05 PM »

Yes, thank God the North won so we could live happily in our NSA police state. Liberty, privacy and freedom are overrated anyway.

Slavery may have been the moral cause that Lincoln wrapped his war of aggression in but he sure as heck didn't want to let the South go away and lose that tariff money that was being sent North. Funny how he is often depicted as the great emancipator when he himself said that "If I could preserve the Union by freeing all the slaves, I would. If I could preserve the Union by freeing none of the slaves, I would do that too."

Anybody interested in reading the none sugarcoated, victor's version of Lincoln should read The Real Lincoln by Thomas DiLorenzo

And no, I'm not a Southerner. My great-great grandfather fought and was severely wounded fighting for the Union.
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #54 on: July 10, 2013, 04:06:03 PM »

The South wasn't trying to overthrow the government in DC.  It was trying to go its own way after decades of frustration with northern political domination

...it's own way to practice slavery and expand the practice westward and eventually into Latin America.

We don't allow any other nation to build up an empire on our hemisphere, what makes you think the US should have made any exception for the Confederacy? No one is saying that the South couldn't have seceded--they are perfectly free to. But, they shouldn't expect for it to be peaceful and for the North to just accept it. You seceded and fired upon a federal army at Fort. Sumter, you started a war and took up arms. Don't expect sympathy because you got your behinds handed to you on a platter.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #55 on: July 10, 2013, 04:12:19 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.

That's really pretty easy to understand. Would there have been a War if the thing that divided the nation was merelyr States Rights vs a strong federal government... It isnt even close. No one would have shed blood over States Rights. It's a background issue.

The country was founded upon the idea of religious freedom. Christian principles informed the founders. For example we don't cut off someones hand for stealing like a nation informed by Islam.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #56 on: July 10, 2013, 04:14:54 PM »

Yes, thank God the North won so we could live happily in our NSA police state. Liberty, privacy and freedom are overrated anyway.

Slavery may have been the moral cause that Lincoln wrapped his war of aggression in but he sure as heck didn't want to let the South go away and lose that tariff money that was being sent North. Funny how he is often depicted as the great emancipator when he himself said that "If I could preserve the Union by freeing all the slaves, I would. If I could preserve the Union by freeing none of the slaves, I would do that too."

Anybody interested in reading the none sugarcoated, victor's version of Lincoln should read The Real Lincoln by Thomas DiLorenzo

And no, I'm not a Southerner. My great-great grandfather fought and was severely wounded fighting for the Union.

Yes, thank God the North won so we could live happily in our NSA police state.

I think they call that a "First World" complaint. Your sense of proportion is a little out of whack..IMHO
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #57 on: July 10, 2013, 04:16:16 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

There are many ways that tyranny can be rationalized.  It's like how the heretics within Christianity argue from scripture... Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let our rightful King maintain dominion over us.  The subjection of the people to a government they did not concede to has been a tragedy on the immense scale.  The World would have been a far different place, much better by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of the Native Americans already subjected to genocide and the future treaties the Federals eventually did break.

So fighting against evil is always a good thing.

Even if you lose.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #58 on: July 10, 2013, 04:17:19 PM »

Yes, thank God the North won so we could live happily in our NSA police state.

Do you really think this nation would be any better off or freer if the South had won? At the very best, things would be just the same. More than likely what'd happen though is that Civil Rights, social liberties, and progress would be delayed by an extra 100 years.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 04:17:40 PM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #59 on: July 10, 2013, 04:17:39 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.

That's really pretty easy to understand. Would there have been a War if the thing that divided the nation was merelyr States Rights vs a strong federal government... It isnt even close. No one would have shed blood over States Rights. It's a background issue.

The country was founded upon the idea of religious freedom. Christian principles informed the founders. For example we don't cut off someones hand for stealing like a nation informed by Islam.

Yet you contend that a bunch of dirt poor farm boys who didn't own slaves shed their blood and died to maintain that very institution. That doesn't make sense.

I remember hearing a certain anecdote regarding the typical southern soldier's reason for fighting. A Union officer asked a southern prisoner why he was fighting this war. The Southern soldier, a bit mystified at being asked, calmly replied: "Because you're down here!"
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #60 on: July 10, 2013, 04:18:35 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

There are many ways that tyranny can be rationalized.  It's like how the heretics within Christianity argue from scripture... Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let our rightful King maintain dominion over us.  The subjection of the people to a government they did not concede to has been a tragedy on the immense scale.  The World would have been a far different place, much better by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of the Native Americans already subjected to genocide and the future treaties the Federals eventually did break.

So fighting against evil is always a good thing.

Even if you lose.

What does one do when both sides are evil? That's how I feel about the Civil War.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #61 on: July 10, 2013, 04:18:52 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

There are many ways that tyranny can be rationalized.  It's like how the heretics within Christianity argue from scripture... Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let our rightful King maintain dominion over us.  The subjection of the people to a government they did not concede to has been a tragedy on the immense scale.  The World would have been a far different place, much better by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of the Native Americans already subjected to genocide and the future treaties the Federals eventually did break.

So fighting against evil is always a good thing.

Even if you lose.

Its amazing how people who are  purportedly "Conservatives" dislike the United States and wish it had collapsed long ago.

I rest my case

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #62 on: July 10, 2013, 04:19:47 PM »

I'm just going to point out that revolution and uprising is condemned by St. Paul in Romans 13 and un-Christian...
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #63 on: July 10, 2013, 04:54:14 PM »

The world is bigger, much bigger than any one nation, including the USA, China or any other. Conservatives may found anywhere on the planet and their attitude to any one power does not bely their conservatism. However I find innate anti-Americanism too often confuses a dislike of one administration's policies with an irrational dislike of a big, complex society and its many and varied people.

I for one would hate for the USA to wane, and would not stay silent if I became aware of any attempt to attack it, or its population. You can argue, fall out or withdraw from a friend but a friend remains a friend nevertheless. And that is how I regard America and its people.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 04:55:59 PM by Santagranddad » Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #64 on: July 10, 2013, 05:14:07 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

There are many ways that tyranny can be rationalized.  It's like how the heretics within Christianity argue from scripture... Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let our rightful King maintain dominion over us.  The subjection of the people to a government they did not concede to has been a tragedy on the immense scale.  The World would have been a far different place, much better by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of the Native Americans already subjected to genocide and the future treaties the Federals eventually did break.

So fighting against evil is always a good thing.

Even if you lose.

Its amazing how people who are  purportedly "Conservatives" dislike the United States and wish it had collapsed long ago.

I rest my case



The war was fought over the ideals of the nation.  If the government was not going to rule by the consent of the people then it had already died.  If the North had been conciliatory to the South perhaps both the Union and the ideal of the nation could have been salvaged.  When Lincoln sent military forces to invade the Southern states, it was assured that one of the two would die.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #65 on: July 10, 2013, 05:20:58 PM »


Yet you contend that a bunch of dirt poor farm boys who didn't own slaves shed their blood and died to maintain that very institution. That doesn't make sense.


Dirt poor farm boys don't decide matters of War and Peace. The are not the "Deciders" as a great man once said.

The ordinary soldier is fodder. Why they enlist is not all that important unless they refuse to enlist. Then they have a draft.

What is important was why the Southern Oligarchy chose for War. They wanted to maintain the institution of Slavery. They didnt chose War because of high tariffs. They didnt chose War because they had a philosophic difference over the sovereignty of States. They chose War because their wealth and their economy ran on slave labor....

Oligarch:



Cannon fodder:

« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 05:24:18 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #66 on: July 10, 2013, 05:23:07 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

There are many ways that tyranny can be rationalized.  It's like how the heretics within Christianity argue from scripture... Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let our rightful King maintain dominion over us.  The subjection of the people to a government they did not concede to has been a tragedy on the immense scale.  The World would have been a far different place, much better by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of the Native Americans already subjected to genocide and the future treaties the Federals eventually did break.

So fighting against evil is always a good thing.

Even if you lose.

Its amazing how people who are  purportedly "Conservatives" dislike the United States and wish it had collapsed long ago.

I rest my case



You got me. Can't argue with logic like that. Roll Eyes
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,377



« Reply #67 on: July 10, 2013, 06:46:58 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
The majority of the American forefathers were Deists.

You are absolutely wrong to repeat this old secularist canard.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #68 on: July 10, 2013, 06:55:38 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

There are many ways that tyranny can be rationalized.  It's like how the heretics within Christianity argue from scripture... Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let our rightful King maintain dominion over us.  The subjection of the people to a government they did not concede to has been a tragedy on the immense scale.  The World would have been a far different place, much better by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of the Native Americans already subjected to genocide and the future treaties the Federals eventually did break.

So fighting against evil is always a good thing.

Even if you lose.

Its amazing how people who are  purportedly "Conservatives" dislike the United States and wish it had collapsed long ago.

I rest my case



The war was fought over the ideals of the nation.  If the government was not going to rule by the consent of the people then it had already died.  If the North had been conciliatory to the South perhaps both the Union and the ideal of the nation could have been salvaged.  When Lincoln sent military forces to invade the Southern states, it was assured that one of the two would die.

You may need to look at a timeline.. Virginia seceded in April 1861. The Battle of Sharpsburg was fought in July of 1861.

State    Date of Secession
South Carolina    December 20, 1860
Mississippi    January 9, 1861
Florida    January 10, 1861
Alabama    January 11, 1861
Georgia    January 19, 1861
Louisiana    January 26, 1861
Texas    February 1, 1861
Virginia    April 17, 1861
Arkansas    May 6, 1861
North Carolina    May 20, 1861
Tennessee      June 8, 1861

http://americanhistory.about.com/od/civilwarmenu/a/secession_order.htm
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #69 on: July 10, 2013, 09:47:33 PM »

Some people get confused with the Northern victory and mistake it for the righteousness of their intentions. 

Yes, if you base your historical perspective on what individual soldiers have in their heads that motivate them

But on a lager scale, the South started the War when a President got elected who was against expanding slavery West.. That's what did it.

There were also Southern Political idea's about States Rights but that did not start the War nor was it the actual cause. Slavery was.

The funny thing is that their idea's about States Rights greatly contributed to their defeat. It turned out to be a Cluster ... The States, being "Sovereign" wouldn't cooperate with each other...So you ended up with bare foot soldiers in rags while NC had warehouses full of shoes that they were saving for their "own" soldiers...


In other words, you are saying that the South, believing that the government was instituted by the consent of those governed to secure their rights, decided to abolish it and institute a new government as the Union became destructive towards the ends of securing their rights?

I think you are right in that this was the primary causus belli.

I understand the many ways Treason can be rationalized. It's like how heretics within Christianity argue from scripture.. Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let  other Nations get set up in the entire hemisphere much less within our boarders. The Balkanization of the United States would have been a tragedy on an immense scale. The World would be a far different place, much worse by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of all the enslaved peoples and the new slaves the Confederates coveted..

So defeating evil is always a good thing. Paperwork to follow.

There are many ways that tyranny can be rationalized.  It's like how the heretics within Christianity argue from scripture... Just because it can be done, doesn't make it right.

Heck, we wouldn't even let our rightful King maintain dominion over us.  The subjection of the people to a government they did not concede to has been a tragedy on the immense scale.  The World would have been a far different place, much better by far IMHO.

That isn't even to mention the suffering of the Native Americans already subjected to genocide and the future treaties the Federals eventually did break.

So fighting against evil is always a good thing.

Even if you lose.

Its amazing how people who are  purportedly "Conservatives" dislike the United States and wish it had collapsed long ago.

I rest my case



The war was fought over the ideals of the nation.  If the government was not going to rule by the consent of the people then it had already died.  If the North had been conciliatory to the South perhaps both the Union and the ideal of the nation could have been salvaged.  When Lincoln sent military forces to invade the Southern states, it was assured that one of the two would die.

You may need to look at a timeline.. Virginia seceded in April 1861. The Battle of Sharpsburg was fought in July of 1861.

State    Date of Secession
South Carolina    December 20, 1860
Mississippi    January 9, 1861
Florida    January 10, 1861
Alabama    January 11, 1861
Georgia    January 19, 1861
Louisiana    January 26, 1861
Texas    February 1, 1861
Virginia    April 17, 1861
Arkansas    May 6, 1861
North Carolina    May 20, 1861
Tennessee      June 8, 1861

http://americanhistory.about.com/od/civilwarmenu/a/secession_order.htm

Oops..not Sharpsburg...Bull Run was the first major battle, fought after every Confederate State had seceded.

After a while the name of one hellish slaughter blends into the next
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #70 on: July 10, 2013, 10:45:20 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
The majority of the American forefathers were Deists.

You are absolutely wrong to repeat this old secularist canard.

Can you offer proof for an opposition to the "old secularist canard" theory?
Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,377



« Reply #71 on: July 10, 2013, 11:25:54 PM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
The majority of the American forefathers were Deists.

You are absolutely wrong to repeat this old secularist canard.

Can you offer proof for an opposition to the "old secularist canard" theory?

Hey, it's your claim: you list them all. If you can't provide a list, you're already in the wrong for claiming something you don't really know is true. And if you provide a list, I can well nigh guarantee that the evidence for the ones most likely to be named is speculative if not outright false. As far as I am aware, the only FF who claimed to be a deist was Tom Paine.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #72 on: July 10, 2013, 11:28:23 PM »

Didn't Abraham Lincoln as a teenager write an essay explaining why he believed the thought of the Christian God was stupid and illogical?
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #73 on: July 11, 2013, 08:15:03 AM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
The majority of the American forefathers were Deists.

You are absolutely wrong to repeat this old secularist canard.

Can you offer proof for an opposition to the "old secularist canard" theory?

Hey, it's your claim: you list them all. If you can't provide a list, you're already in the wrong for claiming something you don't really know is true. And if you provide a list, I can well nigh guarantee that the evidence for the ones most likely to be named is speculative if not outright false. As far as I am aware, the only FF who claimed to be a deist was Tom Paine.


See?  I knew that one would provoke debate.  It is like throwing a goat to a pack of lions. They just can't help themselves.  Cheesy
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #74 on: July 11, 2013, 09:31:51 AM »

Ahh, the endless American pastime... arguing whether the Civil War was over states rights or slavery.

Next topic: arguing whether the US was founded as a Christian nation.
The majority of the American forefathers were Deists.

You are absolutely wrong to repeat this old secularist canard.

Can you offer proof for an opposition to the "old secularist canard" theory?

Hey, it's your claim: you list them all. If you can't provide a list, you're already in the wrong for claiming something you don't really know is true. And if you provide a list, I can well nigh guarantee that the evidence for the ones most likely to be named is speculative if not outright false. As far as I am aware, the only FF who claimed to be a deist was Tom Paine.


See?  I knew that one would provoke debate.  It is like throwing a goat to a pack of lions. They just can't help themselves.  Cheesy

LOLOLOL!!  You're right, they can't help themselves!  Great stuff! 
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #75 on: July 11, 2013, 10:37:54 AM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #76 on: July 11, 2013, 10:47:47 AM »

Didn't Abraham Lincoln as a teenager write an essay explaining why he believed the thought of the Christian God was stupid and illogical?
I think most teens go through such a stage.  Lincoln was no different.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #77 on: July 11, 2013, 10:55:31 AM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Too bad he ignored the rest of the paragraph where all men are created equal can be found. 

So, did he do anything to free Irish wage slaves from the Northern companies?  Living on company land, buying at company stores.  Perhaps the Southerners should have wizened up and given their slaves wages minus deductions for living arrangements, food, and clothing.  If they wanted to go to another plantation they could have just beat them to death or have shot them.

At least he was consistent in shooting down recommendations that the draft be used, as that would be coercing men to fight against their will, much like slavery forced them to work.  Oh wait, he didn't. 

Lincoln was a tyrant and a bloody-handed hypocrite. 
Logged
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #78 on: July 11, 2013, 11:12:55 AM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Too bad he ignored the rest of the paragraph where all men are created equal can be found. 

So, did he do anything to free Irish wage slaves from the Northern companies?  Living on company land, buying at company stores.  Perhaps the Southerners should have wizened up and given their slaves wages minus deductions for living arrangements, food, and clothing.  If they wanted to go to another plantation they could have just beat them to death or have shot them.

At least he was consistent in shooting down recommendations that the draft be used, as that would be coercing men to fight against their will, much like slavery forced them to work.  Oh wait, he didn't. 

Lincoln was a tyrant and a bloody-handed hypocrite. 

Truer words were rarely, if ever spoken.

I believe it was Wendell Phillips who referred to Lincoln as a: "First rate, second rate man."
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #79 on: July 11, 2013, 11:26:57 AM »

If he was a bloody-handed, hypocritical, second-rate tyrant, then that's what it took to get done what needed to get done. God bless General Sherman too.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #80 on: July 11, 2013, 11:28:49 AM »

If he was a bloody-handed, hypocritical, second-rate tyrant, then that's what it took to get done what needed to get done. God bless General Sherman too.

Aren't most (all?) tyrants bloody-handed, hypocritical, and second rate?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #81 on: July 11, 2013, 11:50:03 AM »

If he was a bloody-handed, hypocritical, second-rate tyrant, then that's what it took to get done what needed to get done. God bless General Sherman too.

Waging war on the civilian population without mercy is not the act of an honorable man. I honestly cannot understand how anybody could think that what Sherman did could be justified.

I suppose to yankees, the end justifies the means.
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #82 on: July 11, 2013, 12:09:18 PM »

If he was a bloody-handed, hypocritical, second-rate tyrant, then that's what it took to get done what needed to get done. God bless General Sherman too.

Waging war on the civilian population without mercy is not the act of an honorable man.

Thankfully, Gen. Sherman showed considerable mercy and restraint. Compare to the US war on Native Americans, or, say, Batu Khan's invasion of Rus'.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 12:12:00 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #83 on: July 11, 2013, 02:00:26 PM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Too bad he ignored the rest of the paragraph where all men are created equal can be found. 

So, did he do anything to free Irish wage slaves from the Northern companies?  Living on company land, buying at company stores.  Perhaps the Southerners should have wizened up and given their slaves wages minus deductions for living arrangements, food, and clothing.  If they wanted to go to another plantation they could have just beat them to death or have shot them.

At least he was consistent in shooting down recommendations that the draft be used, as that would be coercing men to fight against their will, much like slavery forced them to work.  Oh wait, he didn't. 

Lincoln was a tyrant and a bloody-handed hypocrite. 

 

LOL..One specious argument after another.

It's a real stretch to compare Chattel Slavery with "Wage Slavery"... As bad as factory conditions were in the 1860's and other labor no one could sell your children or your wife...Grow up
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #84 on: July 11, 2013, 02:05:32 PM »

If he was a bloody-handed, hypocritical, second-rate tyrant, then that's what it took to get done what needed to get done. God bless General Sherman too.

Waging war on the civilian population without mercy is not the act of an honorable man.

Thankfully, Gen. Sherman showed considerable mercy and restraint. Compare to the US war on Native Americans, or, say, Batu Khan's invasion of Rus'.

When Sherman got to Savannah Georgia, the Mayor rode out and asked for mercy and begged for him to spare the city. Savannah went untouched.

Modern Warfare, which Sherman understood better than most, means cutting off  an insurgency from the population that feeds and clothes and arms them. 
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #85 on: July 11, 2013, 02:55:17 PM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Too bad he ignored the rest of the paragraph where all men are created equal can be found. 

So, did he do anything to free Irish wage slaves from the Northern companies?  Living on company land, buying at company stores.  Perhaps the Southerners should have wizened up and given their slaves wages minus deductions for living arrangements, food, and clothing.  If they wanted to go to another plantation they could have just beat them to death or have shot them.

At least he was consistent in shooting down recommendations that the draft be used, as that would be coercing men to fight against their will, much like slavery forced them to work.  Oh wait, he didn't. 

Lincoln was a tyrant and a bloody-handed hypocrite. 

 

LOL..One specious argument after another.

It's a real stretch to compare Chattel Slavery with "Wage Slavery"... As bad as factory conditions were in the 1860's and other labor no one could sell your children or your wife...Grow up

Well, that's one way of looking at it.  Factory slave or plantation slave, either one beats the hell out of what the bluebellies would do to you if you were an Indian. 

How about forcing someone to fight?  Forcing someone to take a minie ball to the gut is pretty immoral.  Especially when it is not a matter of defense but rather to subjugate another people.  And then hanging them if they leave or resist. 
Logged
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #86 on: July 11, 2013, 03:08:59 PM »

So, how was your day today honey?

Well, I argued about a war that has been over for about 150 years.  I think I'm winning!!!

That's nice dear.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #87 on: July 11, 2013, 03:12:18 PM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Too bad he ignored the rest of the paragraph where all men are created equal can be found.  

So, did he do anything to free Irish wage slaves from the Northern companies?  Living on company land, buying at company stores.  Perhaps the Southerners should have wizened up and given their slaves wages minus deductions for living arrangements, food, and clothing.  If they wanted to go to another plantation they could have just beat them to death or have shot them.

At least he was consistent in shooting down recommendations that the draft be used, as that would be coercing men to fight against their will, much like slavery forced them to work.  Oh wait, he didn't.  

Lincoln was a tyrant and a bloody-handed hypocrite.

 

LOL..One specious argument after another.

It's a real stretch to compare Chattel Slavery with "Wage Slavery"... As bad as factory conditions were in the 1860's and other labor no one could sell your children or your wife...Grow up

Well, that's one way of looking at it.  Factory slave or plantation slave, either one beats the hell out of what the bluebellies would do to you if you were an Indian.  

How about forcing someone to fight?  Forcing someone to take a minie ball to the gut is pretty immoral.  Especially when it is not a matter of defense but rather to subjugate another people.  And then hanging them if they leave or resist.  

You're all over the map..That is because it's really hard to defend slavery. Your comparisons fall very short. IMHO

My my aren't we politically correct all of a sudden. The Indians did their fair share of butchery too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_War_of_1862

 On August 17, 1862, one young Dakota with a hunting party of three others killed five settlers while on a hunting expedition. That night a council of Dakota decided to attack settlements throughout the Minnesota River valley to try to drive whites out of the area. There has never been an official report on the number of settlers killed, although figures as high as 800 have been cited.

Over the next several months, continued battles pitting the Dakota against settlers and later, the United States Army, ended with the surrender of most of the Dakota bands.[4] By late December 1862, soldiers had taken captive more than a thousand Dakota, who were interned in jails in Minnesota. After trials and sentencing, 38 Dakota were hanged on December 26, 1862, in the largest one-day execution in American history. In April 1863, the rest of the Dakota were expelled from Minnesota to Nebraska and South Dakota. The United States Congress abolished their reservations.

« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:12:48 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #88 on: July 11, 2013, 03:13:13 PM »

So, how was your day today honey?

Well, I argued about a war that has been over for about 150 years.  I think I'm winning!!!

That's nice dear.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #89 on: July 11, 2013, 03:22:24 PM »

I suppose to yankees, the end justifies the means.

If it meant the South expanding slavery into Latin America, leaving a trail of destruction in their path, tearing the nation apart and delaying Civil Rights and liberties by at least 100 years, I'd genocide them and feel no remorse.

I'm not saying the Union was perfect either, but they were sure of a heck a lot better than the South. I mean, hey, it's either us or them.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:24:28 PM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #90 on: July 11, 2013, 03:26:59 PM »

So, how was your day today honey?

Well, I argued about a war that has been over for about 150 years.  I think I'm winning!!!

That's nice dear.

One thing that always impresses me is how recent the Civil War actually was. I can still remember when there were living veterans. The media used to keep count. Thirty were left then ten then three hung in there for a long time. Then two then one guy from Texas who had been a drummer boy. It was on TV when he passed.

Shelby Foote used tell the story of when he visited Nathan Bedford Forrest's grand daughter.  She got out the General's sword and allowed him to swing it over his head.

There is still plenty of shot and ball stuck in the sides of brick houses around here.

When Iraq War One happened I got out a napkin and  drew out my predictions of what General Powell and Schwartzkoff were likely to do to my office buddies. I had a real good idea because they made no secret of their close study of the Civil War and in particular the tactics of Stonewall Jackson.. I was spot on.. Had the Genreal commanding the Iraqi Army been at all familiar with our Civil War they could have done better.

The crews of both the Hunley and the Monitor were recently buried.. Not more than a couple of years ago.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:27:51 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #91 on: July 11, 2013, 03:36:03 PM »

I suppose to yankees, the end justifies the means.

If it meant the South expanding slavery into Latin America, leaving a trail of destruction in their path, tearing the nation apart and delaying Civil Rights and liberties by at least 100 years, I'd genocide them and feel no remorse.

I'm not saying the Union was perfect either, but they were sure of a heck a lot better than the South. I mean, hey, it's either us or them.

You do know there were still slaves in the North throughout the CW, right? New Jersey freed its last slave after the War ended. This idea that the Northern people/soldiers were these righteous warriors fighting to free slaves is revisionist nonsense. You tell your average yankee soldier that he was spending years away from home to go bleed out on some battlefield in Virgina to free african slaves and he would have thrown down his weapon and gone home. Slavery would have died a natural death before long. It didn't need a 4 year war that cost 600,000+ American lives to end it.

As for your genocide comment, I'll chalk that up to youthful exuberance/ignorance.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:44:02 PM by #1Sinner » Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #92 on: July 11, 2013, 03:40:16 PM »

So, how was your day today honey?

Well, I argued about a war that has been over for about 150 years.  I think I'm winning!!!

That's nice dear.

One thing that always impresses me is how recent the Civil War actually was. I can still remember when there were living veterans. The media used to keep count. Thirty were left then ten then three hung in there for a long time. Then two then one guy from Texas who had been a drummer boy. It was on TV when he passed.

Shelby Foote used tell the story of when he visited Nathan Bedford Forrest's grand daughter.  She got out the General's sword and allowed him to swing it over his head.

There is still plenty of shot and ball stuck in the sides of brick houses around here.

When Iraq War One happened I got out a napkin and  drew out my predictions of what General Powell and Schwartzkoff were likely to do to my office buddies. I had a real good idea because they made no secret of their close study of the Civil War and in particular the tactics of Stonewall Jackson.. I was spot on.. Had the Genreal commanding the Iraqi Army been at all familiar with our Civil War they could have done better.

The crews of both the Hunley and the Monitor were recently buried.. Not more than a couple of years ago.


Are you aware that there are still 2 children of Civil War veterans still receiving pensions from the government? I read a story in late 2012 that they were both Confederate children, one from Tennessee and the other North Carolina.

I also saw a story yesterday about a British man who is the oldest in the country. He was born in July of 1903. That means he was about 6 months old when Lt. General James Longstreet passed away. I thought that was interesting to consider.
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #93 on: July 11, 2013, 03:43:51 PM »

I suppose to yankees, the end justifies the means.

If it meant the South expanding slavery into Latin America, leaving a trail of destruction in their path, tearing the nation apart and delaying Civil Rights and liberties by at least 100 years, I'd genocide them and feel no remorse.

I'm not saying the Union was perfect either, but they were sure of a heck a lot better than the South. I mean, hey, it's either us or them.

You do know there were still slaves in the North throughout the CW, right? New Jersey freed its last slave after the War ended. This idea that the Northern people/soldiers were these righteous warriors fighting to free slaves is revisionist nonsense. You tell your average yankee soldier that he was spending years away from home to go bleed out on some battlefield in Virgina to free african slaves and he would have thrown down his weapon and gone home.

As for your genocide comment, I'll chalk that up to youthful exuberance/ignorance.

The economy of the South was totally dependent upon slave labor. Nothing close to that situation existed in the North.. Feudalism had it's day, time to move on.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #94 on: July 11, 2013, 03:46:53 PM »

I suppose to yankees, the end justifies the means.

If it meant the South expanding slavery into Latin America, leaving a trail of destruction in their path, tearing the nation apart and delaying Civil Rights and liberties by at least 100 years, I'd genocide them and feel no remorse.

I'm not saying the Union was perfect either, but they were sure of a heck a lot better than the South. I mean, hey, it's either us or them.



You do know there were still slaves in the North throughout the CW, right? New Jersey freed its last slave after the War ended. This idea that the Northern people/soldiers were these righteous warriors fighting to free slaves is revisionist nonsense. You tell your average yankee soldier that he was spending years away from home to go bleed out on some battlefield in Virgina to free african slaves and he would have thrown down his weapon and gone home.

As for your genocide comment, I'll chalk that up to youthful exuberance/ignorance.

The economy of the South was totally dependent upon slave labor. Nothing close to that situation existed in the North.. Feudalism had it's day, time to move on.

It no longer existed in the North because of Industrialization, not because your average Northerner was any less racist then your average southerner.

I am a native northerner who now lives in the south. I can tell you for certain that even today there seems to be more racism up North then down here. Some of the jokes and slurs that were regular fare back home are nowhere to be heard here.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:47:48 PM by #1Sinner » Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #95 on: July 11, 2013, 03:49:44 PM »

You do know there were still slaves in the North throughout the CW, right? New Jersey freed its last slave after the War ended.

Yup. Only difference is, the North didn't plan on expanding it to the level that the South wanted to. The North didn't have plans to make incursions into Latin America and enslave an potentially an entire continent. Rather, they just exploited poor immigrants in factories and plants. Both sides were clearly evil, but if it is a matter of choosing the lesser evil, I'd definitely choose the North over the South.

Quote
This idea that the Northern people/soldiers were these righteous warriors fighting to free slaves is revisionist nonsense.

I never said they were. Some may have been, I'm sure most of them were just fighting because there was a war that needed fighting. What matters is the end though. I can't even fathom how screwed up this hemisphere would be if the South had won.

Likewise, the idea that the South was just a group of peaceful farmer folks who were fighting solely for state rights with only a tiny percentage of their population owning slaves is revisionist nonsense too. The South wanted to expand it and even made it a clause in their Constitution that they had the right to imperialistically expand into Central and South America to spread the practice.

Quote
You tell your average yankee soldier that he was spending years away from home to go bleed out on some battlefield in Virgina to free african slaves and he would have thrown down his weapon and gone home.

Yet most of them didn't.

Quote
As for your genocide comment, I'll chalk that up to youthful exuberance/ignorance.

I'll chalk it up as common sense and self defense. I'd much rather the South go then my ancestors go.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #96 on: July 11, 2013, 03:53:34 PM »

So, how was your day today honey?

Well, I argued about a war that has been over for about 150 years.  I think I'm winning!!!

That's nice dear.

Yeah right.  I don't need arguments at home too!  That's why I come here, since I don't often argue with the GF (who says God doesn't do miracles in the modern age!) I need to do it somewhere!

 Cheesy


Actually, last weekend I had a debate with one of my mom's friends about the evils of the bloody handed tyrant and the GF jumped in just to aggravate me. 
Logged
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #97 on: July 11, 2013, 03:57:23 PM »

Quote
I never said they were. Some may have been, I'm sure most of them were just fighting because there was a war that needed fighting. What matters is the end though. I can't even fathom how screwed up this hemisphere would be if the South had won.
Quote



Yes. Our huge Industrial/Military Complex, surveillance state that is beholden to trans-national corporations, starts wars for profit and oil and who has legalized infanticide is so much better then whatever the alternative would have been.

Well I screwed this formatting up.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:59:17 PM by #1Sinner » Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #98 on: July 11, 2013, 04:05:22 PM »

Yes. Our huge Industrial/Military Complex, surveillance state that is beholden to trans-national corporations, starts wars for profit and oil and who has legalized infanticide is so much better then whatever the alternative would have been.

Actually, yes, it would have been. You were going to start wars for profit in Latin America to expand slavery. The South is in no position to complain about abortion when your own sex-ed system is the screwiest in the country, with Southern states having the highest teen pregnancy rates.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 04:05:51 PM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #99 on: July 11, 2013, 04:05:36 PM »

oops.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 04:05:53 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #100 on: July 11, 2013, 04:07:18 PM »

Quote
I never said they were. Some may have been, I'm sure most of them were just fighting because there was a war that needed fighting. What matters is the end though. I can't even fathom how screwed up this hemisphere would be if the South had won.
Quote



Yes. Our huge Industrial/Military Complex, surveillance state that is beholden to trans-national corporations, starts wars for profit and oil and who has legalized infanticide is so much better then whatever the alternative would have been.

Well I screwed this formatting up.


Damn yankee!  Grin
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #101 on: July 11, 2013, 04:08:32 PM »

Well I screwed this formatting up.

Then it's a great thing you Dixies didn't get to run the country; you'd screw that up too.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #102 on: July 11, 2013, 04:09:02 PM »

Yes. Our huge Industrial/Military Complex, surveillance state that is beholden to trans-national corporations, starts wars for profit and oil and who has legalized infanticide is so much better then whatever the alternative would have been.

Actually, yes, it would have been. You were going to start wars for profit in Latin America to expand slavery. The South is in no position to complain about abortion when your own sex-ed system is the screwiest in the country, with Southern states having the highest teen pregnancy rates.

Well I suppose we aren't going to see eye to eye on this so I wish you adieu, sir.
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #103 on: July 11, 2013, 04:09:45 PM »

Well I screwed this formatting up.

Then it's a great thing you Dixies didn't get to run the country; you'd screw that up too.

I'm actually a carpetbagger from up North, but thanks.
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #104 on: July 11, 2013, 04:12:55 PM »

And I'll just leave this here for you peaceful Dixies:

Quote
...growth was certainly on the post-war agenda. Confederate president Jefferson Davis made sure the Confederate constitution included the right to expand, and he filled his cabinet with men who thought similarly. He even hinted that the slave trade could be revived in "new acquisitions to be made south of the Rio Grande." During the Civil War, Confederate agents attempted to destabilize Mexico so that its territories would be easy to snatch up after the war. One rebel emissary to Mexico City, John T. Pickett, secretly fomented rebellion in several Mexican provinces with an eye to "the permanent possession of that beautiful country."
-Source

And you criticize the Union for "starting wars over profit"?
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 04:13:43 PM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #105 on: July 11, 2013, 04:13:23 PM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Too bad he ignored the rest of the paragraph where all men are created equal can be found.  

So, did he do anything to free Irish wage slaves from the Northern companies?  Living on company land, buying at company stores.  Perhaps the Southerners should have wizened up and given their slaves wages minus deductions for living arrangements, food, and clothing.  If they wanted to go to another plantation they could have just beat them to death or have shot them.

At least he was consistent in shooting down recommendations that the draft be used, as that would be coercing men to fight against their will, much like slavery forced them to work.  Oh wait, he didn't.  

Lincoln was a tyrant and a bloody-handed hypocrite.

 

LOL..One specious argument after another.

It's a real stretch to compare Chattel Slavery with "Wage Slavery"... As bad as factory conditions were in the 1860's and other labor no one could sell your children or your wife...Grow up

Well, that's one way of looking at it.  Factory slave or plantation slave, either one beats the hell out of what the bluebellies would do to you if you were an Indian.  

How about forcing someone to fight?  Forcing someone to take a minie ball to the gut is pretty immoral.  Especially when it is not a matter of defense but rather to subjugate another people.  And then hanging them if they leave or resist.  

You're all over the map..That is because it's really hard to defend slavery. Your comparisons fall very short. IMHO

My my aren't we politically correct all of a sudden. The Indians did their fair share of butchery too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_War_of_1862

 On August 17, 1862, one young Dakota with a hunting party of three others killed five settlers while on a hunting expedition. That night a council of Dakota decided to attack settlements throughout the Minnesota River valley to try to drive whites out of the area. There has never been an official report on the number of settlers killed, although figures as high as 800 have been cited.

Over the next several months, continued battles pitting the Dakota against settlers and later, the United States Army, ended with the surrender of most of the Dakota bands.[4] By late December 1862, soldiers had taken captive more than a thousand Dakota, who were interned in jails in Minnesota. After trials and sentencing, 38 Dakota were hanged on December 26, 1862, in the largest one-day execution in American history. In April 1863, the rest of the Dakota were expelled from Minnesota to Nebraska and South Dakota. The United States Congress abolished their reservations.



I'm not defending slavery.  I am defending the ideals of a government ruling with the consent of the people.  Slavery would likely have died a natural death.  Remember that Slavery in the Western Hemisphere did not end at Appomattox.  Slavery lasted in Brazil until 1888.  Remember that 38.5% of slaves were bound for Portuguese America while only 6.45% were destined for British North America (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#New_World_destinations).  So this was not some drop in the bucket that can be easily dismissed.  

The difference between the South winning vs the North is that the affects of slavery were going to be with us regardless, but at least it would have died out naturally without 600,000 deaths on account of it.  I see no reason to believe that slavery would not have died out.  With the North winning, the only ultimate check against the government ruling against without the consent of the people was removed.  We are still suffering from the consequences of this today.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,284


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #106 on: July 11, 2013, 04:21:37 PM »

...I see no reason to believe that slavery would not have died out.

Well what about the fact that the South was going to expand the practice provided they won? If the South didn't plan on expanding it, I'd probably be more supportive of them. As it is though, I'm not convinced that slavery would have died out if the Confederacy won, at least not for much longer.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #107 on: July 11, 2013, 04:29:01 PM »

...I see no reason to believe that slavery would not have died out.

Well what about the fact that the South was going to expand the practice provided they won? If the South didn't plan on expanding it, I'd probably be more supportive of them. As it is though, I'm not convinced that slavery would have died out if the Confederacy won, at least not for much longer.

"Fact"??  According to the source you quote above, a "hint" and a "could" hardly constitute a viable plan agreed upon by a body powerful enough to actually implement it.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,483



« Reply #108 on: July 11, 2013, 04:44:14 PM »

...I see no reason to believe that slavery would not have died out.

Well what about the fact that the South was going to expand the practice provided they won? If the South didn't plan on expanding it, I'd probably be more supportive of them. As it is though, I'm not convinced that slavery would have died out if the Confederacy won, at least not for much longer.

"Fact"??  According to the source you quote above, a "hint" and a "could" hardly constitute a viable plan agreed upon by a body powerful enough to actually implement it.

Exactly.  It is a fact that Brazil ended slavery in 1888.  It is unlikely that the South would have retained slavery, especially if they desired continued trade with Great Britain. 

More than likely, if Lincoln had been conciliatory rather than signing the death sentences of 600,000 men, the South would have begged to be re-admitted to the Union after Great Britain got cotton production up and going in Egypt and India.  After enough men died I don't think there was any going back.  But if the deep south had broken off, they would have stagnated or come back.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #109 on: July 11, 2013, 06:11:51 PM »

I suppose to yankees, the end justifies the means.

If it meant the South expanding slavery into Latin America, leaving a trail of destruction in their path, tearing the nation apart and delaying Civil Rights and liberties by at least 100 years, I'd genocide them and feel no remorse.

I'm not saying the Union was perfect either, but they were sure of a heck a lot better than the South. I mean, hey, it's either us or them.



You do know there were still slaves in the North throughout the CW, right? New Jersey freed its last slave after the War ended. This idea that the Northern people/soldiers were these righteous warriors fighting to free slaves is revisionist nonsense. You tell your average yankee soldier that he was spending years away from home to go bleed out on some battlefield in Virgina to free african slaves and he would have thrown down his weapon and gone home.

As for your genocide comment, I'll chalk that up to youthful exuberance/ignorance.

The economy of the South was totally dependent upon slave labor. Nothing close to that situation existed in the North.. Feudalism had it's day, time to move on.

It no longer existed in the North because of Industrialization, not because your average Northerner was any less racist then your average southerner.

I am a native northerner who now lives in the south. I can tell you for certain that even today there seems to be more racism up North then down here. Some of the jokes and slurs that were regular fare back home are nowhere to be heard here.

And ??

The North had moved into the modern age. The South was stuck in feudalism.

It was also clear the even during the Revolution 80 years before while the North was still very agrarian, they had a better vision of the future and knew slavery was inconsistent with our founding ideals. They deliberately put aside freeing the slaves knowing they would lose the Southern colonies and were determined to stay focused and get rid of the British.   

The South was happy to try and get the British to come back and help them... Their Treason couldn't be more clear. 
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #110 on: July 11, 2013, 06:14:58 PM »

...I see no reason to believe that slavery would not have died out.

Well what about the fact that the South was going to expand the practice provided they won? If the South didn't plan on expanding it, I'd probably be more supportive of them. As it is though, I'm not convinced that slavery would have died out if the Confederacy won, at least not for much longer.

"Fact"??  According to the source you quote above, a "hint" and a "could" hardly constitute a viable plan agreed upon by a body powerful enough to actually implement it.

Exactly.  It is a fact that Brazil ended slavery in 1888.  It is unlikely that the South would have retained slavery, especially if they desired continued trade with Great Britain. 

More than likely, if Lincoln had been conciliatory rather than signing the death sentences of 600,000 men, the South would have begged to be re-admitted to the Union after Great Britain got cotton production up and going in Egypt and India.  After enough men died I don't think there was any going back.  But if the deep south had broken off, they would have stagnated or come back.

But if the deep south had broken off, they would have stagnated or come back.

Speculation. Not admissible



Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #111 on: July 11, 2013, 07:23:05 PM »

...I see no reason to believe that slavery would not have died out.

Well what about the fact that the South was going to expand the practice provided they won? If the South didn't plan on expanding it, I'd probably be more supportive of them. As it is though, I'm not convinced that slavery would have died out if the Confederacy won, at least not for much longer.

"Fact"??  According to the source you quote above, a "hint" and a "could" hardly constitute a viable plan agreed upon by a body powerful enough to actually implement it.

You should know that the South wanted to expand slavery into the Western Territories. The question of expansion was the very issue that started the War.. You can look it up
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,728


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #112 on: July 11, 2013, 07:33:18 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #113 on: July 12, 2013, 09:06:03 AM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,983


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #114 on: July 14, 2013, 08:49:48 AM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Self-righteous induced vomit after her twinkie binge.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,983


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #115 on: July 14, 2013, 09:13:16 AM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Quotes, eh?  Here's one that shows the liar favored secession until he wanted re-election:

"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and to form one that suits them better. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may make their own of such territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority intermingling with or near them who oppose their movement." 

Lincoln on the floor of Congress, 13 January 1848
Congressional Globe, Appendix
1st Session 30th Congress, page 94

Here's another showing what he thought of slavery:

From Lincoln’s Published Response to Horace Greeley, 1862
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."

The War Between the States was NOT about slavery, but money and power.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #116 on: July 14, 2013, 09:47:08 AM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Quotes, eh?  Here's one that shows the liar favored secession until he wanted re-election:

"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and to form one that suits them better. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may make their own of such territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority intermingling with or near them who oppose their movement." 

Lincoln on the floor of Congress, 13 January 1848
Congressional Globe, Appendix
1st Session 30th Congress, page 94

Here's another showing what he thought of slavery:

From Lincoln’s Published Response to Horace Greeley, 1862
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."

The War Between the States was NOT about slavery, but money and power.

Thank you, this rather confirms my suspicion that the Civil War's causation lay not in simplistic and dishonest contrasts between abolitionists and anti-abolitionists, neatly falling either side of the Mason-Dixon Line. In this forum as might be natural given the Civil War's is recent history and the painful aftermath that it is understandable that passions are raised.

I also note in reflecting on Lincoln's words and considering the earlier struggle for American Independence that why was one struggle legitimate and another a heinous crime.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #117 on: July 14, 2013, 01:33:59 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,983


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #118 on: July 14, 2013, 02:10:29 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

  1. No one (except the Klan) has accepted that storyline in decades.  2. Northerners enjoyed that movie just as much as Southerners.  In fact, the Klan's ranks swelled in the North after the release of that movie.  In Nebraska, they lynched Malcolm X's father.  In Indiana, by 1925 over half the elected members of the Indiana General Assembly, the Governor of Indiana, and many other high-ranking officials in local and state government were members of the Klan.  There goes your "exhibit", Mr. Man.  Kiss
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #119 on: July 14, 2013, 06:57:58 PM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Quotes, eh?  Here's one that shows the liar favored secession until he wanted re-election:

"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and to form one that suits them better. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may make their own of such territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority intermingling with or near them who oppose their movement." 

Lincoln on the floor of Congress, 13 January 1848
Congressional Globe, Appendix
1st Session 30th Congress, page 94

Here's another showing what he thought of slavery:

From Lincoln’s Published Response to Horace Greeley, 1862
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."

The War Between the States was NOT about slavery, but money and power.

Check the date, it's 1848 so what you mean by "Re Election" is re election to congress not the Presidency.

Lincoln was a politician.. You can look it up
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #120 on: July 14, 2013, 07:14:40 PM »

"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for SOME men to enslave OTHERS is a "sacred right of self-government." These principles can not stand together. They are as opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, must despise the other."

A. Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854

Quotes, eh?  Here's one that shows the liar favored secession until he wanted re-election:

"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and to form one that suits them better. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may make their own of such territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority intermingling with or near them who oppose their movement."  

Lincoln on the floor of Congress, 13 January 1848
Congressional Globe, Appendix
1st Session 30th Congress, page 94

Here's another showing what he thought of slavery:

From Lincoln’s Published Response to Horace Greeley, 1862
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."

The War Between the States was NOT about slavery, but money and power.

Thank you, this rather confirms my suspicion that the Civil War's causation lay not in simplistic and dishonest contrasts between abolitionists and anti-abolitionists, neatly falling either side of the Mason-Dixon Line. In this forum as might be natural given the Civil War's is recent history and the painful aftermath that it is understandable that passions are raised.

I also note in reflecting on Lincoln's words and considering the earlier struggle for American Independence that why was one struggle legitimate and another a heinous crime.

Bourgeoisie written history loves to have people think events are about the personality of the Leader. I suggest these huge events are much more about the objective conditions then personality traits or prejudices or political machinations of the Leader.

The Civil War was about completing the American Revolution and moving past feudalism where it still existed and ending chattel slavery. It  set the stage for further industrialization and all that comes with the modern age. The old system got swept into the dustbin of history..

« Last Edit: July 14, 2013, 07:15:36 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #121 on: July 14, 2013, 11:02:26 PM »

Although I am a Southerner, I greatly respect the bravery and accomplishments of the 1st Minnesota that day even if my ancestors' side lost the battle and eventually the war. There were a lot of brave and good men on both sides.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #122 on: July 15, 2013, 09:49:27 AM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

Sorry, can't view youtube on this computer  Sad.  I still don't understand what the phrase "rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans" means.  And, why is it rabid?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #123 on: July 15, 2013, 10:22:19 AM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

Sorry, can't view youtube on this computer  Sad.  I still don't understand what the phrase "rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans" means.  And, why is it rabid?
I don't know what it means either, but it sure sounds important!
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,531


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #124 on: July 15, 2013, 10:27:49 AM »

Although I am a Southerner, I greatly respect the bravery and accomplishments of the 1st Minnesota that day even if my ancestors' side lost the battle and eventually the war. There were a lot of brave and good men on both sides.

Ditto.. As a Northerner I greatly respect the bravery and endurance of the Confederate soldier and also the great skill of their officer corp.

While re enacting seems silly sometimes, it does give you a good idea of what the ordinary soldier went through. even if it is just a small peek.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #125 on: July 15, 2013, 01:42:54 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

  1. No one (except the Klan) has accepted that storyline in decades.

The Klan was and is inseparable from the general trend of romanticizing the antebellum South. For obvious reasons, in recent decades, many Confederate revivalists want to distance themselves from the Klan. Overt racism is no longer fashionable. They even invent fables about Confederate abolitionists, as if, if the Confederacy had won, slavery would have been abolished soon after. Thankfully, all this nonsense will come to naught- just more whimpering from the dustbin.

Quote
2. Northerners enjoyed that movie just as much as Southerners.  In fact, the Klan's ranks swelled in the North after the release of that movie.  In Nebraska, they lynched Malcolm X's father.  In Indiana, by 1925 over half the elected members of the Indiana General Assembly, the Governor of Indiana, and many other high-ranking officials in local and state government were members of the Klan.  There goes your "exhibit", Mr. Man.  Kiss

I am well aware of the existence of Northern Klansmen. I live in Pennsylvania, mind you. If you polled those Northern Klansmen as to how many of them would have supported the Confederacy, you would get a result somewhere in the vicinity of 100%. Nice try though.

Something else I've noticed is an attempt to divert attention from Confederate racism by pointing out the failings of Lincoln, as if this were relevant. Yes, Lincoln was a politician, with all the opportunism and hypocrisy that might entail. Likewise, Cyrus the Great had his own reasons for "liberating" Israel, yet Isaiah hails him as an instrument of God (and even calls him "messiah").
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 01:45:04 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 988



« Reply #126 on: July 15, 2013, 03:10:47 PM »

Confederate 'racism' as an outsider sounds a little like an avoidance of an uncomfortable reality, the wider prejudice against people of colour which continued well beyond the American Civil War. As I have previously commented the notion of them baddies, us goodies is a little too simplistic for me to buy. Example, institutional discrimination in the US Forces right up to World War ll. Criticising the Confederacy is perhaps a cop out and diversion away from a wider American issue of wide spread racial discrimination? A scapegoat.

Sadly, such issues have and do dog us on the other side of the pond too.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #127 on: July 15, 2013, 03:15:54 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

Sorry, can't view youtube on this computer  Sad.  I still don't understand what the phrase "rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans" means.  And, why is it rabid?
I don't know what it means either, but it sure sounds important!

Yes, it does.  Very much so.  To sound important is of the essence here.  Even more so, if possible, in "Politics". 
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 03:18:54 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #128 on: July 15, 2013, 03:19:28 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

Sorry, can't view youtube on this computer  Sad.  I still don't understand what the phrase "rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans" means.  And, why is it rabid?
I don't know what it means either, but it sure sounds important!

Yes, it does.  Very much so.  To sound important is of the essence here.

Personally, I believe that the expropriation of cultural reproduction is homologous with the invention of the teleological narrative.

Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #129 on: July 15, 2013, 03:22:28 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

Sorry, can't view youtube on this computer  Sad.  I still don't understand what the phrase "rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans" means.  And, why is it rabid?
I don't know what it means either, but it sure sounds important!

Yes, it does.  Very much so.  To sound important is of the essence here.

Personally, I believe that the expropriation of cultural reproduction is homologous with the invention of the teleological narrative.



Well, done, Grasshopper!!  The import of what you understate so glibly and eloquently is without parallel.  Verily, those are words that come from the keyboard of one whose importance is mystagogically underrated.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 03:24:09 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,178



« Reply #130 on: July 15, 2013, 03:34:10 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

Sorry, can't view youtube on this computer  Sad.  I still don't understand what the phrase "rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans" means.  And, why is it rabid?
I don't know what it means either, but it sure sounds important!

Yes, it does.  Very much so.  To sound important is of the essence here.

Personally, I believe that the expropriation of cultural reproduction is homologous with the invention of the teleological narrative.



Well, done, Grasshopper!!  The import of what you understate so glibly and eloquently is without parallel.  Verily, those are words that come from the keyboard of one whose importance is mystagogically underrated.
I suspected you would state as much. Unfortunately, the wide-ranging study of the relationship between the linguistic construction of the specular economy and the assertion of the 'mystagogically underrated' may seem impressive to the uninitiated. I would state rather the formation of the hidden rehearses the conceptual logic of narrative authenticity.

Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #131 on: July 15, 2013, 03:46:33 PM »

Of course. But God forbid you actually deny the rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans.  Roll Eyes

 Huh

Exhibit A

Sorry, can't view youtube on this computer  Sad.  I still don't understand what the phrase "rabid self-hagiography of the Southern partisans" means.  And, why is it rabid?
I don't know what it means either, but it sure sounds important!

Yes, it does.  Very much so.  To sound important is of the essence here.

Personally, I believe that the expropriation of cultural reproduction is homologous with the invention of the teleological narrative.



Well, done, Grasshopper!!  The import of what you understate so glibly and eloquently is without parallel.  Verily, those are words that come from the keyboard of one whose importance is mystagogically underrated.
I suspected you would state as much. Unfortunately, the wide-ranging study of the relationship between the linguistic construction of the specular economy and the assertion of the 'mystagogically underrated' may seem impressive to the uninitiated. I would state rather the formation of the hidden rehearses the conceptual logic of narrative authenticity.



If only you would have substituted the word "unimportant" for "uninitiated" above, you would have demonstrated attainment of true mastery of the matter at hand.  Then you will have achieved true importance.  When you achieve that state, all else will be vanity of vanities.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.433 seconds with 158 queries.