Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 151 to 171 of 171

Thread: How We Know The So-Called “Civil War” Was Not Over Slavery

  1. #151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    LOL. The north wanted to destroy the south's economy by forcing it into economic growth (industrialization)? That's really about the most retarded argument on the subject I've ever read.
    They only wanted to rebuild it after they stole it, they wanted to destroy it first so it would be easier to steal.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    The whole point of the fugitive slave clause of the constitution was to undermine state sovereignty. It was a reaction to the case Somerset v Stewart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart In that case a slave escaped from Virginia to England and the slave owner wanted the slave returned by the English judge refused. A sovereign state should have the right to decide what to do with a fugitive. Any law on repatriation of fugitives is, by definition, an abrogation of state sovereignty. We wouldn't turn a missionary over to Iran to be tried for evangelism for example.

    Claim-The South was Against States Rights on the Issue of the Fugitive Slave Laws

    The States of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa, by solemn legislative enactments, have deliberately, directly or indirectly violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article of the federal constitution, and laws passed in pursuance thereof; thereby annulling a material provision of the compact, designed by its framers to perpetuate the amity between the members of the confederacy and to secure the rights of the slave-holding States in their domestic institutions They have for years past encouraged and sustained lawless organizations to steal our slaves and prevent their recapture, and have repeatedly murdered Southern citizens while lawfully seeking their rendition.”
    -Texas causes of Southern secession


    Some claim the south did not care for states rights, or only cared when slavery was involved, as they objected to northern states nullifying the federal fugitive slave laws. Therefore they say, the south cared for slavery more than states rights. This objection seems good on the surface, but stems from a misunderstanding of both the purpose of states rights, and the union that was, see

    From Union to Empire- The Political Effects of the Civil war http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-the-Civil-war

    But even if we assume they are correct for the sake of the argument, at most it would prove the south did not care for the northern states, states rights, not their own. The south clearly spoke of states rights and violations by the north and federal as a cause of secession. It could hypothetically denounce northern states rights as well when the north violated their own states rights and still secede over southern states rights. Since these rights are in place to secure its own states citizens rights and not another, this would make sense. This is also the downside of having a union of self governing states if one side does not follow the compact or contract [constitution] and also why secession is vital to liberty.

    Having said that a proper understanding of states rights is not lawlessness and states not following federal law or the constitution. In fact it is the opposite. States rights are in place to prevent the federal from violating the constitution or overstepping its bounds. In this case the northern states were violating the constitution. The southern rights were already granted within the constitution that northern states were violating. Here is the USA and CSA “supremacy clause”

    This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States [confederate version read confederate states]which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
    No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
    -Article 4 clause 3 us Constitution

    The south from the creation of the union had constitutional protection of its property that included recognized slave property. The north by violating that right [and Dread Scott supreme court ruling/ fugitive slave laws] would not allow them their property and would in essence, steal it [by not working with federal workers]by not returning slaves. The south were not second class citizens and their property was constitutionally to be treated as any other property. It would be the same as if a Vermonters horse wondered across the border to New York, only to have a resident of that state keep the horse and say we dont recognize your right to this property. That is not a protection of the individuals property as granted under the constitution and was a cause of secession.

    For more please see my thread that responds to the common objections and shows the causes of secession.
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-Cotton-States
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...he-Upper-South
    Last edited by 1stvermont; 10-23-2017 at 03:14 PM.

  4. #153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Ad hominems prove you have lost the argument. Again "Every new territory the confederacy was to acquired had to, by the confederate constitution, allow slavery."

    well sir please support your false claim. you might have missed it but i was juts using your own language against yourself thus if we use your logic, you admit you "have lost the argument" i would say the same holds true if we read history.


    Claim- Confederate Constitution Does not Allow States to Abolish Slavery

    It was clear from the actions of the Montgomery convention that the goal of the new converts to secessionist was not to establish a slaveholders reactionary utopia. What they really wanted was to create the union as it had been before the rise of the new Republican party”
    -Robert Divine T.H Bren George Fredrickson and R Williams America Past and Present


    Many say the south was not fighting for states rights but slavery because they falsely say the CSA constitution did not allow states to end slavery. However freeing slaves was a state issue in the CSA constitution. Article 1 section 9 clause 4 applies to congress, not to the sovereign states. This was in fact anticipating non slave states to join the confederacy. Article 4 section 2 clause 1 and article 4 section 3 clause 1 predicted future free states within the confederacy. As many in the confederacy including VP Stevens thought that the non slave holding upper Midwest would join the confederacy because of the tax and trade laws that would compel states connected to the Mississippi river to join the confederacy as non slave states.

    “We made ample provision in our constitution for the admission of other States; it is more guarded, and wisely so, I think, than the old constitution on the same subject, but not too guarded to receive them as fast as it may be proper. Looking to the distant future, and, perhaps, not very far distant either, it is not beyond the range of possibility, and even probability, that all the great States of the north-west will gravitate this way.”
    -Alexander Stephens "Cornerstone Address," March 21 1861

    The Confederate convention thought free states would join

    https://books.google.com/books?id=zQ...states&f=false

    During the constitutional convention Cobb of Georgia proposed that all states be required to be slave owning, yet this was rejected. The south wanted boarder states and the free midwest states to join. Senator Albert Brown of Mississippi stated in the CSA constitution “Each state is sovereign within its own limits, and that each for itself can abolish or establish slavery for itself.” So while slavery was a state option, states rights was applied in the CSA slave or free. The CSA constitution did protect slave owners individual property within the entire CSA regardless if the state was free or slave.



    For more on common false claims see here

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-Cotton-States
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...he-Upper-South
    Last edited by 1stvermont; 10-23-2017 at 02:10 PM.

  5. #154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1stvermont View Post
    well sir please support your false claim. you might have missed it but i was juts using your own language against yourself thus if we use your logic, you admit you "have lost the argument" i would say the same holds true if we read history.

    The claims are 100% true. You just lack the intellect to understand them. Once again:

    1. The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

    Look up the definition of sojourn.


    Definition of sojourn
    : a temporary stay a sojourn in the country


    So no state had the right to prevent a slave owner from bringing his slave into that state as long as the owner claimed it was just a "temporary stay." Even in 2018 with all of the technology we have, we can't prevent people from overstaying "temporary visas." So that is an override of a states sovereign right to ban slavery. By contrast states have the right to ban prostitution. Imagine if the U.S. constitution had language that said "If a person hires a hooker in a state where it's legal he has the right to 'sojourn' with her to any other state and make use of her services there." Anyone with a lick of common sense would know that meant that prostitution would be de facto legal in the entire country. But as it stands currently "What you hire in Nevada stays in Nevada." You can go to the Bunny Ranch and legally hire a prostitute and have fun with her in Nevada, but you can't pay for her in Nevada then drive her to Arizona for her services.

    You copying and pasting other people who simply agree with your flawed position does not make it correct.

    Sorry for the long delay in response. The collective stupidity I've run into on this forum just got to me and I had to take a break.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  6. #155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    They only wanted to rebuild it after they stole it, they wanted to destroy it first so it would be easier to steal.
    There really wasn't anything worth stealing prior to the civil war. The South was nothing but a slave powered agricultural colony. Without slaves, the South wasn't worth spit because without slaves the south didn't have the manpower to produce its own export which was cotton. After slavery was abolished the South was able to get involved in REAL economic expansion by joining the industrial age. That's when Birmingham became a steel powerhouse. I know because I'm from there. You should visit sometime, and go to the civil right museum. The opening exhibit talks about the economic expansion coming from the steel industry post slavery. One look at pictures from those old steel mills and you'll see why they could NOT work on slave labor. It would have been too easy for a disgruntled slave to loosen the wrong bolt and cause a catastrophe. Loosen a bolt on a farm and the worst that happen is the plow is out of commission for a day. Loosen a bolt in a steel mill and people die and the entire mill is shut down.

    Really your logic is totally assbackwards. The northern "carpetbaggers" brought in industry. The southern traitors got their plantations back after swearing an oath to the union. Nothing was stolen.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  7. #156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    The claims are 100% true. You just lack the intellect to understand them. Once again:

    1. The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

    Look up the definition of sojourn.


    Definition of sojourn
    : a temporary stay a sojourn in the country


    So no state had the right to prevent a slave owner from bringing his slave into that state as long as the owner claimed it was just a "temporary stay." Even in 2018 with all of the technology we have, we can't prevent people from overstaying "temporary visas." So that is an override of a states sovereign right to ban slavery. By contrast states have the right to ban prostitution. Imagine if the U.S. constitution had language that said "If a person hires a hooker in a state where it's legal he has the right to 'sojourn' with her to any other state and make use of her services there." Anyone with a lick of common sense would know that meant that prostitution would be de facto legal in the entire country. But as it stands currently "What you hire in Nevada stays in Nevada." You can go to the Bunny Ranch and legally hire a prostitute and have fun with her in Nevada, but you can't pay for her in Nevada then drive her to Arizona for her services.

    You copying and pasting other people who simply agree with your flawed position does not make it correct.

    Sorry for the long delay in response. The collective stupidity I've run into on this forum just got to me and I had to take a break.
    It is illegal to keep your out of state drivers license and license plates if you establish residence in a new state, the same could have been done about slaves.
    Slavery should have been abolished and I am not here to defend it but you are wrong on this point.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  8. #157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    There really wasn't anything worth stealing prior to the civil war. The South was nothing but a slave powered agricultural colony. Without slaves, the South wasn't worth spit because without slaves the south didn't have the manpower to produce its own export which was cotton. After slavery was abolished the South was able to get involved in REAL economic expansion by joining the industrial age. That's when Birmingham became a steel powerhouse. I know because I'm from there. You should visit sometime, and go to the civil right museum. The opening exhibit talks about the economic expansion coming from the steel industry post slavery. One look at pictures from those old steel mills and you'll see why they could NOT work on slave labor. It would have been too easy for a disgruntled slave to loosen the wrong bolt and cause a catastrophe. Loosen a bolt on a farm and the worst that happen is the plow is out of commission for a day. Loosen a bolt in a steel mill and people die and the entire mill is shut down.

    Really your logic is totally assbackwards. The northern "carpetbaggers" brought in industry. The southern traitors got their plantations back after swearing an oath to the union. Nothing was stolen.
    Many holdings were stolen, one of the main ways used was to claim that taxes paid to the southern states during the war didn't count and present the owners with a tremendous bill for "back taxes", confederate money was made worthless and that is what most people had so they couldn't pay and lost their land.

    Many people had everything they owned destroyed or stolen by Yankee troops and had to sell their land and share-crop, many moved west or to south-America.
    There were many other ways that land was stolen and given to Yankees but it isn't worth going into here.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  9. #158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Many holdings were stolen
    1) A holding != an "economy."

    2) The traitors got their land, which they stole from the indians worked from labor stolen from Africans, back.

    3) At the end of the day their sh*thole agriculture economy was transformed into a modern industrial economy.

    The civil war was the best thing that happened to the south and the southerners.


    one of the main ways used was to claim that taxes paid to the southern states during the war didn't count and present the owners with a tremendous bill for "back taxes", confederate money was made worthless and that is what most people had so they couldn't pay and lost their land.
    LOL. Confederate money was worthless from jump street. Fiat currency is only as good as the army that backs it up. Confederate currency was not backed by gold or any other real asset. Stupid argument.


    Many people had everything they owned destroyed or stolen by Yankee troops and had to sell their land and share-crop, many moved west or to south-America.
    There were many other ways that land was stolen and given to Yankees but it isn't worth going into here.
    The land that the traitors stole from the indians was given back to the traitors when they swore an oath to the union. Stupid argument.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  10. #159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    1) A holding != an "economy."

    2) The traitors got their land, which they stole from the indians worked from labor stolen from Africans, back.

    3) At the end of the day their sh*thole agriculture economy was transformed into a modern industrial economy.

    The civil war was the best thing that happened to the south and the southerners.




    LOL. Confederate money was worthless from jump street. Fiat currency is only as good as the army that backs it up. Confederate currency was not backed by gold or any other real asset. Stupid argument.




    The land that the traitors stole from the indians was given back to the traitors when they swore an oath to the union. Stupid argument.
    You are beyond help.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  11. #160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It is illegal to keep your out of state drivers license and license plates if you establish residence in a new state, the same could have been done about slaves.
    SMDH. That's only if:

    1) You get caught. (People go years without getting resident license plates. That's hard as hell to prove).

    2) You actually set up residence.

    Have you never hear of migrant farm labor? Let's say Mississippi abolished slavery under the confederacy but Alabama did not. A slave owner could live in Alabama then rent his slaves to "sojourn" with him to work crops in Mississippi and then "sojourn" back.

    Slavery should have been abolished and I am not here to defend it but you are wrong on this point.
    I am 100% right on this point. You simply are not even attempting to see simple logic. Again imagine if prostitution worked this way. If you could rent a prostitute in one state and use her in another then prostitution would be de facto legal in all 50 states.
    Last edited by jmdrake; 04-14-2018 at 10:38 PM.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  12. #161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You are beyond help.
    Coming from you that is a compliment as you are only trying to help people be illogical.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  13. #162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It is illegal to keep your out of state drivers license and license plates if you establish residence in a new state, the same could have been done about slaves.
    What's the penalty? Asking for a friend.
    Truth is a social construct. 👁👁

  14. #163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    What's the penalty? Asking for a friend.
    Penalty for keeping an out of state license plate? None really if you are not totally stupid. I had an uncle (now deceased) who lived in California but always had out of state license plates to avoid high California license plate fees.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  15. #164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    SMDH. That's only if:

    1) You get caught. (People go years without getting resident license plates. That's hard as hell to prove).

    2) You actually set up residence.

    Have you never hear of migrant farm labor? Let's say Mississippi abolished slavery under the confederacy but Alabama did not. A slave owner could live in Alabama then rent his slaves to "sojourn" with him to work crops in Mississippi and then "sojourn" back.



    I am 100% right on this point. You simply are not having an honest discussion.
    If someone moved to the state to run a farm with slaves it would be much easier to catch them than people with out of state DLs, likewise a state could prohibit the contracting of slave labor from an owner in another state.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  16. #165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    What's the penalty? Asking for a friend.
    It varies from state to state.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  17. #166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    If someone moved to the state to run a farm with slaves it would be much easier to catch them than people with out of state DLs, likewise a state could prohibit the contracting of slave labor from an owner in another state.
    Again HAVE YOU NOT HEARD OF MIGRANT FARM WORKERS! It's not a matter of "catching" the person doing it. It would be TOTALLY LEGAL under the CSA constitution! Migrant farm workers, by definition, "sojourn" from state to state! Come on dude. You can't be that thick.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  18. #167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Again HAVE YOU NOT HEARD OF MIGRANT FARM WORKERS! It's not a matter of "catching" the person doing it. It would be TOTALLY LEGAL under the CSA constitution! Migrant farm workers, by definition, "sojourn" from state to state! Come on dude. You can't be that thick.
    And the theoretical Free state in the CSA could outlaw the use of slave labor from other states.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  19. #168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And the theoretical Free state in the CSA could outlaw the use of slave labor from other states.
    Nope. Not the way the CSA is written. That would diminish the property interest of the slave owner and be in direct violation of the clause I quoted to you. Besides the slave owner could "pay" the slave and the confiscate the money as soon as he got back across the border. Nice try though.

    Edit: Again the quote.

    Sec. 2. (I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

    If you can't make full use of your property, your "right of property" has, by definition, been impaired.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  20. #169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Nope. Not the way the CSA is written. That would diminish the property interest of the slave owner and be in direct violation of the clause I quoted to you. Besides the slave owner could "pay" the slave and the confiscate the money as soon as he got back across the border. Nice try though.

    Edit: Again the quote.

    Sec. 2. (I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

    If you can't make full use of your property, your "right of property" has, by definition, been impaired.
    They could make full use of their property in their home state and wages don't turn a slave into a free man, if you are owned by someone else and can't end the relationship you are a slave, a state could forbid it's citizens from renting the services of slave labor from another state, it would be a restriction on their citizens not an impairment of the slave owners right to property.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  21. #170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    They could make full use of their property in their home state
    How can you support a constitutionalist and not understand how to read a constitution? The clause I quoted is clear. When a slave owner sojourned to any state, not just the home state, his right to his "property" could be "impaired" by the state he of his sojourn. So it would be against the CSA constitution for a state to pass a law that once a slave master "sojourned" to another state, he couldn't force his slave to do labor. In fact, that's the reason slave owners wanted to take their slaves with them on their "sojourns" so they could continue working them. They weren't taking their slaves with them for window dressing.


    and wages don't turn a slave into a free man
    My point exactly. So even if a state under the CSA abolished slavery and even if you are right, which you are not, that under the CSA a state could make it illegal for slave labor to take place in that state, the slave owner could pay the slave (no slave labor) and the confiscate the wages later. Some slave owners did actually let their slaves earn and keep wages by the way.


    if you are owned by someone else and can't end the relationship you are a slave, a state could forbid it's citizens from renting the services of slave labor from another state, it would be a restriction on their citizens not an impairment of the slave owners right to property.
    I see you simply don't understand basic property rights. *sigh* If you own a house and the government prevents you from renting it, that is an impairment on your property rights. If you own a car and the government prevents you from renting it that is an impairment on your property rights. If you own a slave and the government prevents you from renting it that is an impairment on your property rights. Your property rights is more than just your "right to own property." It's also the right you have to do what you want with your property! Under certain circumstances courts have determined that government restrictions on your use of property are so onerous that the restrictions constitute a "taking" and the government has to pay you the same as if they actually confiscated the property.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  22. #171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    How can you support a constitutionalist and not understand how to read a constitution? The clause I quoted is clear. When a slave owner sojourned to any state, not just the home state, his right to his "property" could be "impaired" by the state he of his sojourn. So it would be against the CSA constitution for a state to pass a law that once a slave master "sojourned" to another state, he couldn't force his slave to do labor. In fact, that's the reason slave owners wanted to take their slaves with them on their "sojourns" so they could continue working them. They weren't taking their slaves with them for window dressing.
    They could have their slaves do work for them during their temporary stay but the state could prohibit any of it's citizens from utilizing slave labor.




    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    My point exactly. So even if a state under the CSA abolished slavery and even if you are right, which you are not, that under the CSA a state could make it illegal for slave labor to take place in that state, the slave owner could pay the slave (no slave labor) and the confiscate the wages later. Some slave owners did actually let their slaves earn and keep wages by the way.
    The laborers would still be slaves and the law would prohibit the states citizens from renting them.




    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    I see you simply don't understand basic property rights. *sigh* If you own a house and the government prevents you from renting it, that is an impairment on your property rights. If you own a car and the government prevents you from renting it that is an impairment on your property rights. If you own a slave and the government prevents you from renting it that is an impairment on your property rights. Your property rights is more than just your "right to own property." It's also the right you have to do what you want with your property! Under certain circumstances courts have determined that government restrictions on your use of property are so onerous that the restrictions constitute a "taking" and the government has to pay you the same as if they actually confiscated the property.
    That is a gray area of property rights, a Free state prohibiting it's citizens from renting the labor of those held to involuntary servitude by citizens of Slave states would be an entirely reasonable prohibition that wouldn't impair the slavers' right of property, if the Confederacy ruled otherwise the Free state would have been allowed to secede.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456





Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 09-21-2013, 07:52 PM
  2. Other: For the newbies - Ron Paul on the Civil War and slavery
    By slamhead in forum Ron Paul: On the Issues
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-11-2013, 08:24 PM
  3. Replies: 182
    Last Post: 08-07-2011, 09:04 PM
  4. The Civil War Wasn't About Slavery- Walter Williams
    By noztnac in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 07-19-2011, 08:39 AM
  5. How long would slavery have lasted without the civil war?
    By keh10 in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-07-2010, 06:18 PM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •