RobELee1807 said:I am of the opinion that all who can should vote for the most intelligent, honest, and conscientious men eligible to office, irrespective of former party opinions, who will endeavour to make the new constitutions and the laws passed under them as beneficial as possible to the true interests, prosperity, and liberty of all classes and conditions of the people.
Well, it would be a disservice to hold him to today's standards.Maybe according to the standards...in Virginia...at the time, but.....
Or to John Brown's ear. There were people with morals back then too. They fought for abolition. Robert E Lee wasn't one of themWell, it would be a disservice to hold him to today's standards.
He did call slavery a moral evil IIRC, but there were certain qualifiers tacked on that sound horrible to the modern ear.
Well, it's kinda like me saying I'm against murder, but committing a few and defending the ability of others to do so.Well, it would be a disservice to hold him to today's standards.
He did call slavery a moral evil IIRC, but there were certain qualifiers tacked on that sound horrible to the modern ear.
Lee fought for Virginia. He didn't fight for slavery.I, for one, would pay money to **** on Robert E Lee's dead body.
Or to John Brown's ear. There were people with morals back then too. They fought for abolition. Robert E Lee wasn't one of them
That inconsistency is inherent in war, no? In order to achieve peace, we have to be violent against a significant number of people?Well, it's kinda like me saying I'm against murder, but committing a few and defending the ability of others to do so.
Mr. Blair, I look upon secession as anarchy. If I owned the four millions of slaves in the South, I would sacrifice them all to the Union; but how can I draw my sword upon Virginia, my native State?
So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I have rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be great for the interests of the south. So fully am I satisfied with this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.
Oh, so you really are a lost causer. I get it- abandon all context and the full account and everyone is equal to slavers, even the guy who freed the slaves. Everyone needs a hobby, I guess.Let's not forget that the Tyrant Lincoln only freed the slaves to preserve the union. He stated if keeping the blacks enslaved would save the union he would do so
Indeed. Lincoln said: "If I could save the union without freeing any slaves 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."Let's not forget that the Tyrant Lincoln only freed the slaves to preserve the union. He stated if keeping the blacks enslaved would save the union he would do so
Lincoln was anti-slavery personally, politically he was more flexible. He was also by today's standards very racist, and didn't want freed slaves to remain here as free men. He wanted to ship them back to Africa.Anyone who says Lincoln is a liberator, abolitionist, anti-slavery or anything close to that should be told to go back and read some more.
hahaAre we skipping the part where he...y'know...owned slaves?
Let me make my analogy obvious: "I'm against slavery, but I own some slaves and am willing to fight to preserve the right to own slaves....but I'm against slavery."
...and what are you up to here? Have you become a lost causer?
In my defense, my quote referenced Lee's thoughts on who people should vote for.This is hilarious, immediately turning into "slavery".
Are we skipping the part where he...y'know...owned slaves?