The Confederacy represents racism

Except their not.

 

Cornerstone Speech makes it clear as day.

they wanted to preserve slavery and white supremacy, because God told them "black people are naturally inferior"

 

You’re welcome to answer as well.


If you and I enter into an agreement and we both willfully sign a contract that defines our rights and responsibilities under said agreement.

Years later I come back and say, “You know I never liked this part of our agreement because I consider it to be immoral. As such I’m no longer going to uphold that portion of our contract whether you like it or not.” You respond and say, “That’s fine. If you want to unilaterally alter our agreement without my consent then I want out of our partnership.”

Who is the traitor? You or I?

If I then come back and say, “No you’re not leaving our partnership and if I have to murder your men, women and children to stop you then that’s what I’m going to do.”

Who is in right and who is in the wrong? Furthermore if placed in that position would you not fight back?

 

The Confederates, according to the Confederates, primarily rebelled against our country in order to preserve and expand slavery. If people want to leave our country in order to preserve and expand slavery (which, according to the conceding states, is what they were doing), then yeah, they are traitors. And, no, there was no mass targeting of Confederate non-combatants by the United States.

No, I would not kill US citizens in order to preserve slavery. Why would you?

 

I just provided you a source where Stephens himself states he was misquoted.

 

False. Which I will address momentarily.
But first how about you answer the questions posed to you.

Who is at fault? The one who violates the agreement or the one who wants out of the agreement because the other side won’t stop violating it?

 

The sources from the time period repeatedly state that the primary motivation was slavery. I don't claim that. They do. Please read.

 

every state decleration of Secession cited slavery as their primary reason.

deal with it

 

No. They do not. Which... again... I will address when you answer the questions posed to you

 

Who is this 'we' you're talking about? You got a mouse in your pocket??

 

No they did not. They cited the violation of the constitution as their cause. To provide EVIDENCE of that claim they then reference slavery.

 

You've shown nothing false about anything I've said. They rebelled over slavery. They explicitly said so. No, I wouldn't rebel against the United States in order to preserve slavery. Why are you defending doing so?

 

Not going to answer are you lol I didn’t think so

 

Their "examples" were speicifically with regard to slavery. Slavery was their primary concern. They ****ing said so.

 

no, they cited the preservation of slavery.

ive read most of the declerations of secession.

 

Silly me, relying on history. Everyone, especially @TheImmortal , knows that historical facts don't matter! Why should I address history when discussing history? That's just silly!

Not going to address history when supposedly discussing history, are you? Lol, didn't think so.

 

That’s patently false. Only ONE cites slavery as a primary cause. And even then they go on to explain that their constitutional rights were being violated

 

you've never read the many declerations of Secession.

I have

 

That is a patent admission that you haven't even tried to read the relevant historical sources. Big surprise.

 

That’s not the question. The issue is were the southerners traitors. Emphatically the answer is no.
If you’d like to discuss the slavery aspect I’ll be happy to do so. But that wasn’t the topic at hand.

 

Yes I most certainly have. Fine. Since you’re running away from the questions posed to you then I’ll address your absurd position.

The south had no NEED to go to war to preserve slavery. The North had already capitulated and offered the Corwin amendment. An amendment which would have ended secession and guaranteed slavery as an inalienable constitutional right. An amendment which had already passed Congress, had full support from Lincoln and had already been ratified by multiple union states. All the south had to do to keep slavery and preserve it as an inalienable constitutional right was ratify.


So why didn’t they? Why would ANYONE choose to risk EVERYTHING they have , including their wealth, lands, possessions, position, power, the lives of their friends and family and even their own lives in a war which they KNEW they had little to no chance of winning in order to accomplish the EXACT same goal of the preservation of slavery that they could have accomplished with zero risk and a 100% guarantee of success simply by signing a piece of paper?

Don’t worry. I’ll wait.

 

The southern traitors were primarily seceding over slavery. They said so. If the motivations of the south are topical, then slavery is topical. Your attempts to run away from the topic just because you can't address it will not work. If you want to avoid "the slavery aspect" then you are admitting to being unwilling to discuss the motives of the Confederacy. Will you pivot and return to an honest discussion on the subject, or will you refuse to discuss the truth?

 

It's time to put an end to this bullshit right now. First off, slavery was legal in the USA according to the Dred Scott case that your beloved Supreme Court had ruled just a few years prior to the Civil War. You know, the same Scotus that is never wrong...especially when it comes to abortions and other lefty **** not in the Constitution. What WAS in the Constitution was the 10th Amendment. The Civil War was all about State's Rights. Furthermore, Lincoln only emancipated the slaves in the South....the Northern slaves weren't freed. Furthermore, Lincoln wanted to ship all the blacks out if he could to South America and Liberia.....which was founded just for that purpose.

I'd rather listen to a Civil War veteran talk about the reasons why than your gibberish. Minute mark 14:30 to 16:30

 

what is it the right says.... "Mary and Joseph did it"

but I agree... I also would not elect a man that talks about dating his daughter

 

I haven’t run away from anything. I don’t need to.