Modern conservatives sympathizing with The Confederacy... Is this a thing now?

[Syriusly]

Southerners......

Known best for segregation, Jim Crowe, the KKK, and now, Republicans, Tea Partiers, and evangelicals

Your hero Lincoln is known for rape,

Who did Lincoln rape? What was his or her name?

Lincoln's soldiers, with his express permission, raped thousands of Southern women, especially black female slaves.

Oh I am curious now- where and when did Lincoln give that express permission?

Link please.

Oh puhleeze. You have to be retarded to believe that Sherman didn't deliberate turn a blind eye to it, and that Lincoln knew about it.

So in other words you just made it up.

'express permission' would mean you know- actually 'express' not just something in your imagination.

 

[NYcarbineer]

4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.


Thread killer

Not really. The drive to make this centered around slavery is just to ignore the overriding fact that those supporting succession do so because they believe in the sovereignty and right of states to do so.

You can support the right without supporting the reasons behind it.

I do assume that you actually support freedom of speech, correct? I would also assume you support the freedom for WBC to go out and say the horrific crap they say under that right, correct? Most here understand that they have that right even if virtually no one here stands by the asinine way they use it. That is the very nature of rights - sometimes they are not used ion the manner that you would like them to be.

They believed in the rights of the states to put others into bondage

It's the same claim of states rights that opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. A state's right to segregate.

 

[kaz]

You dont have a right to secede first ....Second If you are a supporter of confederates you support slavery since that was what they were about....I know you like to believe they were for states rights but the only right they cared about was the one that wrongly said they could own people.

Sorry, my friend, but I can say, "The South had the right to secede" without it in any way meaning "Slavery, YAY!"

So you only believe the south had the right to secede? You don't support the Confederacy's cause over the Union's cause?

Because the Confederacy's cause was based in large part on slavery. I'm gonna assume you support the Union over the Confederacy.. unless you actually don't have a problem with slavery..


The two are forever intertwined.

Yes, dipshit. I'm not a liberal or a leftist, so I'm perfectly capable of defending someone's right to do something without in any way feeling required to endorse, agree with, or approve the action itself.

True believers in freedom are funny that way.

Just trying to separate the sane from the insane.

Bripat was recently quoted saying that there is "nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for".

Considering the Confederacy 'fought for' the right to own people, you can see why I questioned your judgement when you said you couldn't be bothered to look facts up and would just trust his judgement

Then Bripat should stop waving the American Flag around, and move out of our country

I'm not an anarchist, so I don't agree with him on everything. But wow, this is the typical liberal response when you are getting your ass handed to you like he's doing

 

[Kondor3]

I've seen at least three conservatives on this site talk about how Lincoln and the Union were wrong, and that the Confederacy should have been allowed to secede the way they did, and were on the right side of history..

Is this a popular stance among conservatives of today? Are they really pro-Confederacy when they look back on the Civil War? Or are there just a couple crazies here and there?

(This thread may also help the 'Gay Marriage' thread from being further derailed with Civil War arguments. Figured it was worth a shot haha)

Provocative Straw-Man thread.

 

[kaz]

4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.


Thread killer

Not really. The drive to make this centered around slavery is just to ignore the overriding fact that those supporting succession do so because they believe in the sovereignty and right of states to do so.

You can support the right without supporting the reasons behind it.

I do assume that you actually support freedom of speech, correct? I would also assume you support the freedom for WBC to go out and say the horrific crap they say under that right, correct? Most here understand that they have that right even if virtually no one here stands by the asinine way they use it. That is the very nature of rights - sometimes they are not used ion the manner that you would like them to be.

They believed in the rights of the states to put others into bondage

It's the same claim of states rights that opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. A state's right to segregate.

Strawman, answer to RW's strawman. Once again, you are arguing the lie that the support is for slavery when it's for the right to secede. You are not a bright man. It's impressive that you and RW actually can amplify the stupid when you get together though

 

[-S-]

You said that you aren't saying only that which you support is allowed, then you repeated that only that which is supported is allowed.

As for your view that intelligence means you turn your manhood over to government and I'm not intelligent because I don't believe that, let's just say I don't agree with what you view as intelligent...

Once again, you read but you do not comprehend..

It isn't allowed because I support it. I support it because it's allowed. I don't make the standard. I'm just smart enough to follow it.

Since your 'manhood government overtake' hyperbole is tiresome and has no bearing on the topic at hand, if you would like another chance to post a real response, I'll wait.

 

[kaz]

Discussion are like this because tards have confused cause and effect.

The cause was the preservation of slavery. The seceding states said so quite plainly.

It's not that simple.

It's a deflection since it's irrelevant to the discussion. e

Actually it is pretty much that simple.

If people would stop arguing that the preserving slavery was not one of the reasons, if not the primary reason the Confederacy formed and states seceded, we wouldn't be pointing out that the States very clearly identified slavery as that proximate reason.

No one said it wasn't, Syriously Stupid. The discussion is about support for THE RIGHT of secession, the slavery crap is all coming from you idiot liberals

 

[kaz]

You said that you aren't saying only that which you support is allowed, then you repeated that only that which is supported is allowed.

As for your view that intelligence means you turn your manhood over to government and I'm not intelligent because I don't believe that, let's just say I don't agree with what you view as intelligent...

Once again, you read but you do not comprehend..

It isn't allowed because I support it. I support it because it's allowed. I don't make the standard. I'm just smart enough to follow it.

I've explained this to you several times. You keep saying that if WE support the right to secession, then WE support why the confederacy wanted to secede. That is a non-sequitur. I can't help you if you can't read a simple sentence and process it.

Since your 'manhood government overtake' hyperbole is tiresome and has no bearing on the topic at hand, if you would like another chance to post a real response, I'll wait.

You brought it up, poindexter. I just replied to you

 

[-S-]

No one said it wasn't, Syriously Stupid. The discussion is about support for THE RIGHT of secession, the slavery crap is all coming from you idiot liberals

Actually, Bripat can be quoted as saying there is nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for.

Since the Confederacy fought for the right to own people, i.e. slavery, you understand why it's part of the conversation.

 

[bripat9643]

Your hero Lincoln is known for rape,

Who did Lincoln rape? What was his or her name?

Lincoln's soldiers, with his express permission, raped thousands of Southern women, especially black female slaves.

Oh I am curious now- where and when did Lincoln give that express permission?

Link please.

Oh puhleeze. You have to be retarded to believe that Sherman didn't deliberate turn a blind eye to it, and that Lincoln knew about it.

Wonderful! yet another Bripat 'fact' that was discovered to just be assumption.

Don't feel too down, Bripat. Cecille still hangs on your every word.
Lucky for you, she's too stupid/lazy/willfully ignorant to fact check


Dixiecrats..

What part of this didn't you understand:

As horrific as the burning of the Shenandoah Valley was, Grimsley concluded that it was actually "one of the more controlled acts of destruction during the war’s final year." After it was all over Lincoln personally conveyed to Sheridan "the thanks of the Nation."

Lincoln personally thanked Sheridan for murdering, looting and raping in the Shenandoah Valley.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I've seen at least three conservatives on this site talk about how Lincoln and the Union were wrong, and that the Confederacy should have been allowed to secede the way they did, and were on the right side of history..

Is this a popular stance among conservatives of today? Are they really pro-Confederacy when they look back on the Civil War? Or are there just a couple crazies here and there?

(This thread may also help the 'Gay Marriage' thread from being further derailed with Civil War arguments. Figured it was worth a shot haha)

follow this link:

Error US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[bripat9643]

No one said it wasn't, Syriously Stupid. The discussion is about support for THE RIGHT of secession, the slavery crap is all coming from you idiot liberals

Actually, Bripat can be quoted as saying there is nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for.

Since the Confederacy fought for the right to own people, i.e. slavery, you understand why it's part of the conversation.

They fought for the right to self-determination. Union troops, on the other hand, fought for hegemony and imperialism. They fought for the right of Northern crony capitalist to impose crushing tariffs on Southern states. The fought to end the voluntary union of the states and the end of states rights. They fought for the draft. They fought for tyranny.

 

[-S-]

..You keep saying that if WE support the right to secession, then WE support why the confederacy wanted to secede...

Can you, honestly, quote me on that? Because I think you have me confused with someone else. All I've ever said is that slavery and the Confederacy are ingrained into each other. I don't believe I ever said anything about a person who supports the right to secede also supports slavery.

 

[-S-]

No one said it wasn't, Syriously Stupid. The discussion is about support for THE RIGHT of secession, the slavery crap is all coming from you idiot liberals

Actually, Bripat can be quoted as saying there is nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for.

Since the Confederacy fought for the right to own people, i.e. slavery, you understand why it's part of the conversation.

They fought for the right to self-determination. Union troops, on the other hand, fought for hegemony and imperialism. They fought for the right of Northern crony capitalist to impose crushing tariffs on Southern states. The fought to end the voluntary union of the states and the end of states rights. They fought for the draft. They fought for tyranny.

.... Don't forget slavery. They definitely fought for that.

 

[bripat9643]

Southerners......

Known best for segregation, Jim Crowe, the KKK, and now, Republicans, Tea Partiers, and evangelicals

That list can just be called 'Social Conservatism' for short

South Carolina was not part of the United States after it seceded. It also didn't attack the United States. It kicked some trespassers out of its territory.

You keep regurgitating the same old horseshit. You're obviously incapable of rational thought.

Of course they were
The traitors also attacked their own country

Got what they deserved

Hey kiddo, the Union was saved, but far more yankees were killed during the war than Confederates, and after the war supposedly ended many more yankees , black and white were killed than Confederates. I'm not grieving for the Confederate States Of America, that's settled, but what it proved was that the United States Of America is an Empire, held together by force, same as the Soviet Union, and the present day Russian Confederacy.

Name me one country that is not held together by force? Name me one country that has EVER won an armed conflict that can't be characterized as an "empire"?

1. The American Revolution
2. Battle of the Teutoburg Forest - The Germans defeated the Roman General Varus on the German side of the Rhine river.
   
3. Israel's numerous victories over its Arab enemies.
4. The Greek victories over the Persians at Thermopolae, Salamis and elsewhere.
5. The Visigoths sack Rome.
6. The Mujahadeem in Afghanistan defeats the Soviet Union.

I could go on and one, but that's enough to show that it does occur. However, the other way around happens much more often.

Are you saying those countries are not empires? Or those countries are not held together by force?

Was America an Empire prior to winning the Revolution? How about the Germanic tribes who beat general Varus? The Greek city states? The Visigoths? The Mujahadeem? Is Israel an empire?

 

[bripat9643]

No one said it wasn't, Syriously Stupid. The discussion is about support for THE RIGHT of secession, the slavery crap is all coming from you idiot liberals

Actually, Bripat can be quoted as saying there is nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for.

Since the Confederacy fought for the right to own people, i.e. slavery, you understand why it's part of the conversation.

They fought for the right to self-determination. Union troops, on the other hand, fought for hegemony and imperialism. They fought for the right of Northern crony capitalist to impose crushing tariffs on Southern states. The fought to end the voluntary union of the states and the end of states rights. They fought for the draft. They fought for tyranny.

.... Don't forget slavery. They definitely fought for that.

No, not really. Most of them just fought Yankees carpetbaggers who were invading their homeland.

 

[bripat9643]

Who did Lincoln rape? What was his or her name?

Lincoln's soldiers, with his express permission, raped thousands of Southern women, especially black female slaves.

Oh I am curious now- where and when did Lincoln give that express permission?

Link please.

Oh puhleeze. You have to be retarded to believe that Sherman didn't deliberate turn a blind eye to it, and that Lincoln knew about it.

Oh, Sherman was an animal. He was a big believer in making war so ugly and nasty for one's opponents that surrender would be appealing.

Admittedly, he had a point, as far as that went.

The more southerners that were raped, killed, robbed, and otherwise demoralized, out of supporting the continued unlawfull seizure of US territiory by slave owners...the better. The fact that Republican bible thumpers from the south are still around means Sherman left too many of them alive

You're a goose-stepping moron who condones the mass murder of American citizens.

 

[bripat9643]

Discussion are like this because tards have confused cause and effect.

The cause was the preservation of slavery. The seceding states said so quite plainly.

4 of them said so. The rest didn't comment.

The rest had slaves and wanted to keep them. That is a historical fact that you cannot dispute.

So you presume to tell us why the seceded even though you haven't got a shred of actual evidence?

 

[-S-]

No one said it wasn't, Syriously Stupid. The discussion is about support for THE RIGHT of secession, the slavery crap is all coming from you idiot liberals

Actually, Bripat can be quoted as saying there is nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for.

Since the Confederacy fought for the right to own people, i.e. slavery, you understand why it's part of the conversation.

They fought for the right to self-determination. Union troops, on the other hand, fought for hegemony and imperialism. They fought for the right of Northern crony capitalist to impose crushing tariffs on Southern states. The fought to end the voluntary union of the states and the end of states rights. They fought for the draft. They fought for tyranny.

.... Don't forget slavery. They definitely fought for that.

No, not really. Most of them just fought Yankees carpetbaggers who were invading their homeland.

What I said is fact. What you said is opinion.

 

[rightwinger]

Hard to believe today's conservatives support slavery

Excuse me....A STATES right to have slavery