• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the south a conquered nation?

Is the south a conquered nation?

  • Total voters
    41
longview said:
Rather strange language seems to be required, "already decided after the war" past tense and future tense in the same sentence!
Click to expand...
No, that's because the time is reference to the the current day - not the war. Therefore, "already decided".

Also the nature of the law is if something is not specifically disallowed, it is allowed,
So if the contract did not include language that the individual could not leave the Union,
the seceding states, did not abridge the contract, but rather adhered to the terms.
Click to expand...
That's a good take and generally I'd agree, but the very essence of the Constitution (and Articles of Confederation) was to form a union. So I don't see the lack of an out within the body of the document deterring from the purpose of the document.
 
Fishking said:
That's pretty weak court precedence to make your stand on from an era where it was criminalized to voice anti-war opinions. Suffice to say, no constitutional opinions from that era should really be taken to have any merit.
Click to expand...
But please note unlike the other example you used, it has not been overturned or abridged.
 
Chomsky said:
No, that's because the time is reference to the the current day - not the war. Therefore, "already decided".

That's a good take and generally I'd agree, but the very essence of the Constitution (and Articles of Confederation) was to form a union. So I don't see the lack of an out within the body of the document deterring from the purpose of the document.
Click to expand...
Again our legal system is based on freedom, That which is not specifically disallowed, is by default allowed.
 
longview said:
Again our legal system is based on freedom, That which is not specifically disallowed, is by default allowed.
Click to expand...
Alright, I'm not going to beat this to death.

If you disagree with the SCOTUS, so be it.

There's a plethora of case law that's been brought through the courts, that's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Have at it.
 
Chomsky said:
Alright, I'm not going to beat this to death.

If you disagree with the SCOTUS, so be it.

There's a plethora of case law that's been brought through the courts, that's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Have at it.
Click to expand...
I am not disagreeing with the SCOTUS, I am saying that at the time the states seceded, there did not exists a legal precedence
which would have stopped them from seceding.
 
longview said:
I am not disagreeing with the SCOTUS, I am saying that at the time the states seceded, there did not exists a legal precedence
which would have stopped them from seceding.
Click to expand...
Alright, fair enough.

Do you accept the SCOTUS ruling?
 
Chomsky said:
But please note unlike the other example you used, it has not been overturned or abridged.
Click to expand...

So you have an example of another case bring brought up to challenge it?
 
Tigerace117 said:
No. They were a bunch of treasonous swine who, as I believe it was Generall Grant said, fought for one of the worst causes a people has ever fought for, but they were never actually a nation.

On a side note it'd be interesting to see who on here exactly thought the the slaveocracy counted as a country.
Click to expand...

I'm those in England thought the same of the treasonous swine who rebelled against them. The colonies were never a nation until after the successful rebellion. Here England protected those colonies against the French in the French and Indian Wars only to be rewarded by a rebellion. To the victors belong the spoils and the writing of history.

England could have also looked upon the colonies as a slaveocracy. Slavery was legal and practiced in all the 13 colonies.
 
The South lost the Civil War and anyone who thinks that it will rise again is living in a dream world.

Wait and see.
 
Chomsky said:
Alright, fair enough.

Do you accept the SCOTUS ruling?
Click to expand...
Yes, but it is irrelevant, as the issue was already decided on the battle field.
 
Perotista said:
I'm those in England thought the same of the treasonous swine who rebelled against them. The colonies were never a nation until after the successful rebellion. Here England protected those colonies against the French in the French and Indian Wars only to be rewarded by a rebellion. To the victors belong the spoils and the writing of history.

England could have also looked upon the colonies as a slaveocracy. Slavery was legal and practiced in all the 13 colonies.
Click to expand...

Ah, that's a tired old argument that gets spun out every time a Neo Nazi shows up on here. "But the victors write the history!!!!" That doesn't change the fact that some causes are objectively worse than others. Now, if we are done trying to equate the founding fathers to a bunch of slaveholding scum......
 
and people wonder why the concept of states rights has been watered down to the point of being <3.2 beer ..................
 
radcen said:
Is the south a conquered nation?

The Confederate States of America.
Click to expand...

Not really, they still suck more from the fed gov than they pay in. Generally lousy education too.
As the Baton Rouge boat guy said to me recently "you can't sit in the back, that's for nixxers"
Slave genes still rampant
 
cuban smokes said:
and people wonder why the concept of states rights has been watered down to the point of being <3.2 beer ..................
Click to expand...

Because a bunch of traitors used it as a rallying cry when they were trying to preserve their slaveocracy.
 
shrubnose said:
The South was a nation during the Civil War.

It stopped being a nation when the Union Army won the war.
Click to expand...

Ah, good old slavery days (misty eyes)
No good lynchings these days
 
Perotista said:
I'm those in England thought the same of the treasonous swine who rebelled against them. The colonies were never a nation until after the successful rebellion. Here England protected those colonies against the French in the French and Indian Wars only to be rewarded by a rebellion. To the victors belong the spoils and the writing of history.

England could have also looked upon the colonies as a slaveocracy. Slavery was legal and practiced in all the 13 colonies.
Click to expand...

And originally controlled by the royals. Business guys sued them for "preventing free trade" they were much better at it. Something like 800 Brit families owned slaves. All got paid off.
Their gov was smart enough to get out early. Remnants still here
 
YorkshirePete said:
And originally controlled by the royals. Business guys sued them for "preventing free trade" they were much better at it. Something like 800 Brit families owned slaves. All got paid off.
Their gov was smart enough to get out early. Remnants still here
Click to expand...
Victors and spoils - tell that to the Mexicans. They must regard the wall as ironic
 
Chomsky said:
Alright, I'm not going to beat this to death.

If you disagree with the SCOTUS, so be it.

There's a plethora of case law that's been brought through the courts, that's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Have at it.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a measure we should hang our hat on. An SC decison just means we have to live with it. It doens't necessraily mean it was correct, let alone Constitutionally correct.

I would submit civil asset forfeiture (CAF) as a prime example. The SC says CAF laws get around the 5th Amendment by charging the property, per old English common law, not the individual. Yet, property is owned by somebody and the 5th Amendment very clearly says a person cannot be deprived of their property without due process.

Text of the 5th Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Click to expand...

I don't see this as an interpretation. I see this as the SC being flat-out wrong. But, they represent the government, and the government has the firepower to back it up, so we must live with it until such a time that we can convince legislators to dial it back.
 
shrubnose said:
The Black slaves in the South were liberated and the Confederate Army was defeated in the Civil War.
Click to expand...

Liberation is bloody work.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Ah, that's a tired old argument that gets spun out every time a Neo Nazi shows up on here. "But the victors write the history!!!!" That doesn't change the fact that some causes are objectively worse than others. Now, if we are done trying to equate the founding fathers to a bunch of slaveholding scum......
Click to expand...

Hmm, did you know of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 49% owned slaves. Including delegates from Delaware, Connecticut,, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania?

The slave owners were:

Richard Bassett (DE)
Jacob Broom (DE)
John Dickinson (DE)
George Read (DE)
William Houstoun (GA)
William Few (GA)
William Samuel Johnson (CT)
Daniel Carroll (MD)
Luther Martin (MD)
John Francis Mercer (MD)
Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer (MD)
William Livingston (NJ)
William Blount (NC)
William Richardson Davie (NC)
Alexander Martin (NC)
Richard Dobbs Spaight (NC)
Pierce Butler (SC)
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (SC)
Charles Pinckney (SC)
John Rutledge (SC)
John Blair (VA)
James Madison (VA)
George Mason (VA)
Edmund Randolph (VA)
George Washington (VA)
George Wythe (VA)
Robert Morris (PA)





How many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence owned slaves? 41, they were:


Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward
Thomas Lynch, Jr
Arthur Middleton
John Hancock
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
George Taylor
Caesar Rodney
George Read
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Stephen Hopkins
Oliver Wolcott
 
Last edited:
radcen said:
Is the south a conquered nation?

The Confederate States of America.
Click to expand...
Apparently not, since the central idea of the CSA was the subjugation of Blacks, and everyone knows where high levels of racism still are expressed.
 
Perotista said:
Hmm, did you know of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 49% owned slaves. Including delegates from Delaware, Connecticut,, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania?

The slave owners were:

Richard Bassett (DE)
Jacob Broom (DE)
John Dickinson (DE)
George Read (DE)
William Houstoun (GA)
William Few (GA)
William Samuel Johnson (CT)
Daniel Carroll (MD)
Luther Martin (MD)
John Francis Mercer (MD)
Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer (MD)
William Livingston (NJ)
William Blount (NC)
William Richardson Davie (NC)
Alexander Martin (NC)
Richard Dobbs Spaight (NC)
Pierce Butler (SC)
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (SC)
Charles Pinckney (SC)
John Rutledge (SC)
John Blair (VA)
James Madison (VA)
George Mason (VA)
Edmund Randolph (VA)
George Washington (VA)
George Wythe (VA)
Robert Morris (PA)





How many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence owned slaves? 41, they were:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward
Thomas Lynch, Jr
Arthur Middleton
John Hancock
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
George Taylor
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Stephen Hopkins
Oliver Wolcott
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
Matthew Thornton
Click to expand...

Hmm, did you know that outside of the south slavery was gone by 1804?

Hmm, did you know that even the slaveholding founders looked down upon the institution and despised it as something which could easily tear the country apart?

Hmm, did you know that in most of the British Empire slavery was still legal until 1833?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom