[Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!

Stephen A. Frye s.frye at verizon.net
Sun Jun 16 15:52:04 MDT 2013


Some things are just plain wrong.  Abortion and slavery come to mind.
Whether it is now, back then, or looked back upon 100 years from now.  Legal
doesn't make it right - then or now.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:31 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!

 

Be realistic. How can one who grew up in the 20th century possibly
understand the mores of those that grew up in the 18th century?

On 6/14/2013 6:31 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

 

 

 

Semantics. The Constitutional crisis was about state rights. Namely
property. That the property was human beings is really irrelevant. The
northern states also refused to return livestock that accompanied the
slaves. Surely you would agree that much is indeed theft. You cannot hold
19th century morals to 21st century standards.

 

Yes we can - and should.  Are we going to be satisfied 100 years from now
looking back and saying - well, abortion was legal, so it was OK?  I don't
think so.  Slavery is wrong.  Period.  Always was, is, and always will be.
Legal doesn't make it right or moral.



On 6/14/2013 11:31 AM, Tom Matiska wrote:


Add that to my point.  The whole of the "State's rights'" debate was
centered on the wrongs of slavery.

Tom

--- On Fri, 6/14/13, Dennis Putnam  <mailto:dap1 at bellsouth.net>
<dap1 at bellsouth.net> wrote:





From: Dennis Putnam  <mailto:dap1 at bellsouth.net> <dap1 at bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Date: Friday, June 14, 2013, 8:25 AM

Not quite. Slaves were considered property. When slaves escaped to the north
the owners demanded return of their property and some refused. That was the
trigger point at which time the southern states demanded their rights as
states. There was nothing in the Constitution that granted the federal
government the power to regulate private property between states, nor does
such exist today. The federal authorities refused to facilitate the return
of property so the south decided to secede. If the war was strictly about
slavery, why did it takes 2 years of war before Lincoln issued the
Emancipation Proclamation?

On 6/14/2013 5:55 AM, Tom Matiska wrote:




--- On Thu, 6/13/13, John A. Quayle <blueoval57 at verizon.net> wrote:




 

        Actually, Tom......it was about State's Rights, not slavery! 

The right of states to allow slavery,  the right to expand slavery westward
to new states, , and the right of states to secede over slavery pretty much
covers all the state's rights discussions of the era.

Tom






_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk







_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 






_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20130616/30fa1578/attachment.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list