Ex-Slaves and Origins of Memorial Day

[Contumacious]

The south didn't fire on Fort Sumter until the north was resupplying the fort with provisions after they were told to leave.

Thomas DiLorenzo: The South did not "embark on a shooting war'" Lincoln did. The states were sovereign, and therefore had a right to secede, as they do today. Article 7 of the Constitution proves this by stating that the Constitution is to be ratified by political conventions of the states. No human being was harmed, let alone killed during the bombing of Fort Sumter. South Carolinians considered the fort to be their property, paid for with their tax dollars, and erected for their protection. Lincoln responded to Fort Sumter with a full-scale invasion of all the Southern states that ended up killing some 350,000 Southerners. For this he is hailed as "a great statesman" by our court historians.

.

[Terry K]

And now we're rallying behind a candidate that actively spent years trying to convert Christians and who, unlike JFK and other oft~criticized Roman Catholics, has always vetted his political positions with his religious leaders and served in such capacity as a member of the clergy himself.

Very ironic.

You are not rallying, you are not on topic and obviously you have prejudices!

[Terry K]

What large populations of British civilians in America were there?

It was Matt who questioned the feelings of the Brits regarding the Revolutionary War/War of 1812?

One hundred sixty years later, and we are still fighting the Civil War/War between the States/War of Northern Aggression on this board.

Are the Brits still sore about the Revolutionary War/War of 1812?

In my view, the situations are not analogous as there were no comparable populations of British civilians living in the US nor were the opponents engaging in total warfare against civilian populations.

Thanks for illustrating the difference and the fact that the wars, and associated feelings, are not comparable ....you are not as confused as you initially thought!

[Dryfire]

Thomas DiLorenzo: The South did not "embark on a shooting war'" Lincoln did. The states were sovereign, and therefore had a right to secede, as they do today. Article 7 of the Constitution proves this by stating that the Constitution is to be ratified by political conventions of the states. No human being was harmed, let alone killed during the bombing of Fort Sumter. South Carolinians considered the fort to be their property, paid for with their tax dollars, and erected for their protection. Lincoln responded to Fort Sumter with a full-scale invasion of all the Southern states that ended up killing some 350,000 Southerners. For this he is hailed as "a great statesman" by our court historians..

So Abe either invaded and attacked a sovereign country without a declaration of war ratified by congress or he cut his troops lose to shoot and kill U.S. citizens. Nice guy

[bullmikey]

As much as I'd like to hang around and refight the Civil War with you guys...

...again?

[Contumacious]

So Abe either invaded and attacked a sovereign country without a declaration of war ratified by congress or he cut his troops lose to shoot and kill U.S. citizens. Nice guy

The motherflocker should have been shot in the face and his body dumped in Lake Michigan.

.

[octoburn]

You are not rallying, you are not on topic and obviously you have prejudices!

I was responding to Matthew and that is where the topic took us, had you read it. And the "We" I used referred to the Republican Party, not my personal choice in this election. I voted for Huntsman in the Maryland primary, and he also happened to be a Mormon.

But rather than complain, you could always point out where you think what I said was wrong and join the discussion here.

[temptationwalk]

You are not rallying, you are not on topic and obviously you have prejudices!

Are you still searching for the BC ?

[bmore_ken]

So Abe either invaded and attacked a sovereign country without a declaration of war ratified by congress or he cut his troops lose to shoot and kill U.S. citizens. Nice guy

The best team won. All's well that ends well

[Smokey 1]

Yep, the biggest mistake in this country's beginnings was when the British allowed the first slave to set foot here in the colonies.

[Terry K]

Yep, the biggest mistake in this country's beginnings was when the British allowed the first slave to set foot here in the colonies.

Actually, the first slaves to enter the Colonies were Indentured Sevants brought in by the Dutch. After completing their indenture, they were free to establish their own way

Chattel Slavery was introduced to the colonies in the mid 1600's, when Anthony Johson petitioned the Courts for perpetual ownership of his indentured servant, John Cassor. It is alleged Cassor lost his papers indicating he was free.

Ironically, Anthony Johnson was not a Brit, or a Confederate but rather a free Black.

"Anthony Johnson had acquired close to a thousand acres of land by the middle of the 17th century and was among the first generation of free blacks whose relative affluence have forced scholars of the Colonial south to revise their original views on the origins of American slavery and the fine line between this "peculiar" institution and indentured servitude."

"What makes Anthony Johnson a central figure in the debate is an utterly bizarre and "politically incorrect" twist of fate. From evidence found in the earliest legal documents extant, it is Anthony Johnson who we now must recognize as the nation's first slaveholder."

SOURCE
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...s/johnson.html

[Dryfire]

The best team won. All's well that ends well

My comment has nothing to do with who one or lost. It had to do with a tyrant who trampled on our constitution and laws.

[TheResearcher]

Read a book. One that has facts in it.

http://www.amazon.com/Politically-In.../dp/1596985496
(Oooo! Look, girls!! A "real link"!)
The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War
"The politically correct history that dominates our schools and universities insists that Jefferson Davis was another Hitler, Robert E. Lee was the equivalent of Rommel, and the Confederate States of America was our own little version of the Third Reich--a blot on American history. But reality, as always, was different: the Old South, as H. W. Crocker III explains in The Politically Incorrect GuideTM to the Civil War, had immense charm, grace, and merit--and a very strong Constitutional case. This book is a joyful, myth-busting, rebel yell that shatters today's Leftist and demeaning stereotypes about the South and the Civil War--and shows why, in the words of G. K. Chesterton, "America and the whole world is crying out for the spirit of the Old South.""

[bmore_ken]

Yep, the biggest mistake in this country's beginnings was when the British allowed the first slave to set foot here in the colonies.

Believe it or not, I agree with that. But that was sort of an impossibility with the way the country was constructed. One John Rolfe started cultivating and exporting tobacco, the extra labor was needed.

[bmore_ken]

My comment has nothing to do with who one or lost. It had to do with a tyrant who trampled on our constitution and laws.

I could care less. It all ended well. The country was reunited and my ancestors were freed(sort of).

[Smokey 1]

Believe it or not, I agree with that. But that was sort of an impossibility with the way the country was constructed. One John Rolfe started cultivating and exporting tobacco, the extra labor was needed.

Why wouldn't I believe it? I would think any rational person would agree. Slavery was an abomination that should have never been allowed on these shores.

[ms maggie]

Actually, Memorial Day was started by the Ladies of the South decorating Confederate graves before the end of the War between the States.

http://www.usmemorialday.org/backgrnd.html

"There is also evidence that organized women's groups in the South were decorating graves before the end of the Civil War: a hymn published in 1867, "Kneel Where Our Loves are Sleeping" by Nella L. Sweet carried the dedication "To The Ladies of the South who are Decorating the Graves of the Confederate Dead" (Source: Duke University's Historic American Sheet Music, 1850-1920)"

The premise that the Civil War was a moral battle to free black Americans from slavery is ludicrous. The war was fought solely to preserve the Union as Lincoln repeatedly stated.
"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." (Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862).

If you read your link, the origins are unclear. Probably started in many different places.

As to Lincoln, he became increasingly convinced of the need to abolish slavery and of its inherent evil. See 2nd inaugural address.

[ms maggie]

Read a book. One that has facts in it.

http://www.amazon.com/Politically-In.../dp/1596985496
(Oooo! Look, girls!! A "real link"!)
The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War
"The politically correct history that dominates our schools and universities insists that Jefferson Davis was another Hitler, Robert E. Lee was the equivalent of Rommel, and the Confederate States of America was our own little version of the Third Reich--a blot on American history. But reality, as always, was different: the Old South, as H. W. Crocker III explains in The Politically Incorrect GuideTM to the Civil War, had immense charm, grace, and merit--and a very strong Constitutional case. This book is a joyful, myth-busting, rebel yell that shatters today's Leftist and demeaning stereotypes about the South and the Civil War--and shows why, in the words of G. K. Chesterton, "America and the whole world is crying out for the spirit of the Old South.""

Well what do you call someone who takes up arms against their own country?

And when I think of charm and grace, I always think of slavery, selling human beings, pulling families apart. Just goes together like a moon pie and an rc cola.

You realize Gone With the Wind was fiction, right?

[Smokey 1]

Well what do you call someone who takes up arms against their own country?

Taking up arms against their own country?

Who invaded who? The seceded states didn't want to fight, they just wanted their rightful independence and to be left alone. It was Lincoln who took up arms against his former countrymen.

[Terry K]

Well what do you call someone who takes up arms against their own country?

And when I think of charm and grace, I always think of slavery, selling human beings, pulling families apart. Just goes together like a moon pie and an rc cola.

You realize Gone With the Wind was fiction, right?

In the 1st American Revolution, we called them Patriots

In the 2nd American Revolution, aka the Great Unpleasantness, I call them patriotic citizens exercising their sovereign rights under the Constitution.

As to slavery, we all can agree that we are glad it no longer exists, at least not in the US.

Yes, the book GWTW was a fictional account but then again so was Roots...At least GWTW wasn't plagerized