Civil War- What Would You Do?

in all the declerations of Secession, taxes is never once mentioned as a justification.

but the preservation of slavery is, time and time again.

read what the Vice-President of the Confederacy had to say:

"Our new government is founded upon exactly [this] idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth"

 

I guess it depends on who is right. For instance, If our government trashes the constitution and says that Sharia Law will be our guiding light. Then I'd say my obligation is no longer to the Federal government, and more to my State and family. The reverse is also true. Should my State essentially secede to serve Sharia Law, I'd stay with the Union and go against my State and my family if necessary. Our Nation, Constitution, and what's right, is always bigger or more important than us.

 

Why does anyone have a duty to the US Constitution unless in government?

 

wow, I didn't realize that Conservatives felt such disdain for our Founding document.

 

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/georgia_declaration.asp

First one I looked at:

"Therefore such an organization must have resulted either in utter failure or in the total overthrow of the Government. The material prosperity of the North was greatly dependent on the Federal Government; that of the South not at all. In the first years of the Republic the navigating, commercial, and manufacturing interests of the North began to seek profit and aggrandizement at the expense of the agricultural interests. Even the owners of fishing smacks sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business (which yet continue), and $500,000 is now paid them annually out of the Treasury. The navigating interests begged for protection against foreign shipbuilders and against competition in the coasting trade. Congress granted both requests, and by prohibitory acts gave an absolute monopoly of this business to each of their interests, which they enjoy without diminution to this day. Not content with these great and unjust advantages, they have sought to throw the legitimate burden of their business as much as possible upon the public; they have succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the maintenance of their seamen upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above $2,000,000 annually for the support of these objects. Theses interests, in connection with the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their business from the payment of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury under the name of postal deficiency. The manufacturing interests entered into the same struggle early, and has clamored steadily for Government bounties and special favors. This interest was confined mainly to the Eastern and Middle non-slave-holding States. Wielding these great States it held great power and influence, and its demands were in full proportion to its power. The manufacturers and miners wisely based their demands upon special facts and reasons rather than upon general principles, and thereby mollified much of the opposition of the opposing interest. They pleaded in their favor the infancy of their business in this country, the scarcity of labor and capital, the hostile legislation of other countries toward them, the great necessity of their fabrics in the time of war, and the necessity of high duties to pay the debt incurred in our war for independence. These reasons prevailed, and they received for many years enormous bounties by the general acquiescence of the whole country."

I guess we'll be waiting awhile for your correction.

 

and which state is this?

 

Abraham Lincoln said war was over taxes, not slavery

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/06/war-over-slavery_rhetoric_is_i.html

 

By Roger K. Broxton of Andalusia, president of the Confederate Heritage Fund



lol!!! find a less biased source

 

Linked in the edit... now about that correction.

 

It has become common here of late for LW posters to avoid admitting their errors by quibbling about sources, when any -opinions- contained in such sources, regardless of how the bias swings, are utterly -irrelevant- to the simple historical facts (direct quotes, written records, etc.) contained therein and what those FACTS reveal in their own plain wording. I don't imagine you lot realize how foolish you look doing that. It's why you lose and lose, keep losing.

 

The Decleration of Secession by the State of Georgia:

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slaveholding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates, after a full and calm hearing of all the facts, after a fair warning of our purpose not to submit to the rule of the authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large majority committed the Government of the United States into their hands. The people of Georgia, after an equally full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have declared with equal firmness that they shall not rule over them. A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state. The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Constitution. While the subordination and the political and social inequality of the African race was fully conceded by all, it was plainly apparent that slavery would soon disappear from what are now the non-slave-holding States of the original thirteen. The opposition to slavery was then, as now, general in those States and the Constitution was made with direct reference to that fact. But a distinct abolition party was not formed in the United States for more than half a century after the Government went into operation. The main reason was that the North, even if united, could not control both branches of the Legislature during any portion of that time.




interesting how our friend here totally ignored the first several paragraphs of the Georgia Decleration of Secession, which clearly lists the issue of slavery as the main issue.

LOL...did he think we can't read?

 

another interesting bit from the Georgia Decleration of Secession:

"The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.

With these principles on their banners and these utterances on their lips the majority of the people of the North demand that we shall receive them as our rulers.The prohibition of slavery in the Territories is the cardinal principle of this organization."

 

You claimed that taxes weren't mentioned anywhere in any of the "declerations" (sic) of secession. I proved you wrong in less than -one- minute of googling and reading. Now, as we all knew you would, you are making a joke of yourself, like you do several times daily here, with the above transparent dodge.

Remember folks, ALWAYS have a WRITTEN RECORD of ANY discussion attempted with a leftist.

 

Pretty disgusting declaration, isn't it? I can almost hear hearts breaking upon its concept. It is poignantly hideous to declare our brother our slave, and we, master, upon the very cusp and heavenly crescendo of freedom and equality. It is a boast, worthy of Gods wrath. I personally know and have met more whites than blacks who are worthy of the gristmill and the plow. So, so much for master by race.

 

From the Mississippi Decleration of Secession:

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. "

 

declaring secession, so that you can continue holding fellow human being as slaves, is disgusting and worthy of spit

 

The FACT is that your claim that taxes were not an issue was OUTRIGHT FALSE. You can try to divert all you want to other issues such as slavery, but the FACT is your message was false.

 

Umm... you and you're friends are the ones constantly calling for it...

 

i have never called for civil war, nor have my friends.

 

The best answer to the OP's question is: I will fight for the side that has the moral highground.

 

It already did happen.

 

and we will put it down again if they force us

 

Mhmmm.

https://militarybases.com/

Who's "we" exactly? I'm pretty sure that it doesn't include -you-.

 

i have some nice guns at home and would use them to fight tyranny, if the Constitution calls.

 

Yeah? Would you get in on it?