End the lies: The Confederacy was about slavery

[Free Soviets]

Article IV, Sec. 3:

(3) ...In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government...

those all protect slavery they do not mandate it. the only one that could even be seen as a mandate would be the Article IV, Sec. 3: but i see it as a further protection if the people so desire with words like may i see no mandate and as a territory at that time as it is now is covered under federal law this is only a further protection.

wtf are you on about?

[Derscon]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

And sure, I never denied that the Confederacy fired the first shots. However, by sending warships into sovereign waters, the Union effectively trespassed while armed and clearly threatening SC. SC was simply taking measures to prevent itself after its property - its waters - had been violated.

You then blaming Lincoln for that is, apart from being preposterous by any reasoning,

If "by any reasoning" you mean "Lincoln cultists and Union worshipers," than yes.

indeed a double standard since by blaming all the "murders" on him you're excusing the confederates of wrongdoing.

Not quite. I can blame Lincoln in the same reason I can blame the government and the Federal Reserve for creating the mandates and generating the moral hazard that caused the recent financial collapse.

It's a bit like arguing that a rape victim "provoked" her attacker and then that you're not excusing the rapist. You're just saying she's guilty of provoking him. It doesn't fly. You're defending the right of the south to "murder" people by blaming every death on Lincoln.

No, actually, it's nothing like that, because the Union wasn't just an innocent victim.

[Raul Caribe]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering. You then blaming Lincoln for that is, apart from being preposterous by any reasoning, indeed a double standard since by blaming all the "murders" on him you're excusing the confederates of wrongdoing.

It's a bit like arguing that a rape victim "provoked" her attacker and then that you're not excusing the rapist. You're just saying she's guilty of provoking him. It doesn't fly. You're defending the right of the south to "murder" people by blaming every death on Lincoln.

except the only death was one confederate horse. they didn't kill any people.

http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp//battles/sc001.htm

[Sdaeriji]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

[Raul Caribe]

Article IV, Sec. 3:

(3) ...In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government...

those all protect slavery they do not mandate it. the only one that could even be seen as a mandate would be the Article IV, Sec. 3: but i see it as a further protection if the people so desire with words like may i see no mandate and as a territory at that time as it is now is covered under federal law this is only a further protection.

wtf are you on about?

all im getting to is cat is misleading people saying the south mandated slavery. read the entire conversation then you would not have had to ask.

[Derscon]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

Interesting fact (no sarcasm, srs). Wouldn't that count as an accidental death, though?

[Sdaeriji]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

Interesting fact (no sarcasm, srs). Wouldn't that count as an accidental death, though?

Certainly. But they're still the first recorded official deaths after hostilities had begun.

[Tech-gnosis]

And sure, I never denied that the Confederacy fired the first shots. However, by sending warships into sovereign waters, the Union effectively trespassed while armed and clearly threatening SC. SC was simply taking measures to prevent itself after its property - its waters - had been violated.

Oh please. By seceding SC and by extenstion the CSA provoked an attempt by the Union to restore itself.

If "by any reasoning" you mean "Lincoln cultists and Union worshipers," than yes.

Like the reasoning of the "crazy CSA cultists"?

Not quite. I can blame Lincoln in the same reason I can blame the government and the Federal Reserve for creating the mandates and generating the moral hazard that caused the recent financial collapse.

Seems to me like the CSA is to blame for any murders and property destruction.

No, actually, it's nothing like that, because the Union wasn't just an innocent victim.

And the CSA wasnt a victim at all.

[Raul Caribe]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

which source? the wiki site? or the .GOV site?

[Derscon]

Oh please. By seceding SC and by extension the CSA provoked an attempt by the Union to restore itself.

By defending oneself against a cop beating you, you provoke more beatings.

Seems to me like the CSA is to blame for any murders and property destruction.

Sherman would like to have a word with you.

And the CSA wasn't a victim at all.

Victim? Nah. States are never victims. :3

[Derscon]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

Interesting fact (no sarcasm, srs). Wouldn't that count as an accidental death, though?

Certainly. But they're still the first recorded official deaths after hostilities had begun.

[Sdaeriji]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

which source? the wiki site? or the .GOV site?

The source is my brain, but I guess I can dig up a link if it's really an issue.

[The Cat-Tribe]

Article IV, Sec. 3:

(3) ...In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government...

those all protect slavery they do not mandate it. the only one that could even be seen as a mandate would be the Article IV, Sec. 3: but i see it as a further protection if the people so desire with words like may i see no mandate and as a territory at that time as it is now is covered under federal law this is only a further protection.

wtf are you on about?

all im getting to is cat is misleading people saying the south mandated slavery. read the entire conversation then you would not have had to ask.

Jumping Jesus on a pogo-stick!

You are overreacting to a misreading of a flippant bit of hyperbole in the OP. What I said was:

2. Constitution of the Confederate States of America

The CSA Constitution is nearly identitical to that of the the U.S. Constitution at the time of secession. Curiously, however, you will search in vain for any significant increase in the rights of states or individuals under the CSA Constitution. Four very, very minor differences are made regarding the powers of states -- the power to enter into treaties with other states to regulate waterways, the power to tax foreign and domestic ships that use their waterways, the power to impeach federally-appointed state officials, and the power to distribute "bills of credit." These are hardly major victories for state's rights. Furthermore, nothing in the CSA makes any provision for secession.

On the other hand, sweeping new powers are granted to the CSA federal government. Foremost, is that states are REQUIRED to allow slavery. And any new state joining the Confederacy is to be a SLAVE state. So much for state's rights on that issue. Four different clauses stop just short of making owning slaves mandatory.

(bold at end added)

I thought I was clearly joking regarding the CSA requiring individuals to own slaves (and I did say "stop just short of"). The point, which you appear to have misssed, is that the CSA required all member states to allow slavery and required that any new states be slave states. Thus, no reasonable person can argue that the CSA was formed to protect the rights of states to decided whether or not to allow slavery. Duh.

[Derscon]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

which source? the wiki site? or the .GOV site?

The source is my brain, but I guess I can dig up a link if it's really an issue.

Liberal bias -_-

[Phenia]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

And sure, I never denied that the Confederacy fired the first shots. However, by sending warships into sovereign waters, the Union effectively trespassed while armed and clearly threatening SC. SC was simply taking measures to prevent itself after its property - its waters - had been violated.

Hypothetically I declare my garage to be its own country. Now if the police come they are INVADING and I have a right to kill anyone in the US to protect my sovereignty. Every murder will be on.... uhm, the US government's hands, not mine.
You are fine with all of this and the reasoning for it?

You then blaming Lincoln for that is, apart from being preposterous by any reasoning,

If "by any reasoning" you mean "Lincoln cultists and Union worshipers," than yes.

I meant any reasoning, including your own adorably progressive and retroactively-applied morality "war is murders" argument.

indeed a double standard since by blaming all the "murders" on him you're excusing the confederates of wrongdoing.

Not quite. I can blame Lincoln in the same reason I can blame the government and the Federal Reserve for creating the mandates and generating the moral hazard that caused the recent financial collapse.

What reason? All you're telling me is you're just as wrong with your economic position as you are with your position on Lincoln. Murder is not the same thing as a financial collapse.

It's a bit like arguing that a rape victim "provoked" her attacker and then that you're not excusing the rapist. You're just saying she's guilty of provoking him. It doesn't fly. You're defending the right of the south to "murder" people by blaming every death on Lincoln.

No, actually, it's nothing like that, because the Union wasn't just an innocent victim.

Oh, it's not like blaming the victim because you think the victim deserves blame? Fascinating rebuttal man!

[Caninope]

Those power increases of the State's were pretty significant at the time.

[Sdaeriji]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

which source? the wiki site? or the .GOV site?

The source is my brain, but I guess I can dig up a link if it's really an issue.

Liberal bias -_-

inorite

http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp//battles/sc001.htm

During the formal surrender of Fort Sumter Private Daniel Hough dies when the cannon he was loading (for the Union's 100-gun salute to the U.S. flag) discharges prematurely. He is the first man to die in the Civil War. A second man is mortally wounded.

http://blueandgraytrail.com/date/April_14

I can't believe I was actually asked to source something so utterly trivial. Literally. It was just a point of trivia.

[Tech-gnosis]

By defending oneself against a cop beating you, you provoke more beatings.

If you punch a police officer and then resist arrest then don't expect to get off without any injuries.

Sherman would like to have a word with you.

I'd like to have a word with him.

Victim? Nah. States are never victims. :3

I know of no Slave states that provoked civil wars who are victims.

[Derscon]

Hypothetically I declare my garage to be its own country. Now if the police come they are INVADING and I have a right to kill anyone in the US to protect my sovereignty. Every murder will be on.... uhm, the US government's hands, not mine.
You are fine with all of this and the reasoning for it?

I'm not fine with it because you want to kill anyone in the US to protect your sovereignty. Obviously, defending your property from the invasion of an aggressive armed force though, is perfectly legitimate.

What reason? All you're telling me is you're just as wrong with your economic position as you are with your position on Lincoln. Murder is not the same thing as a financial collapse.

But the mandates and moral hazard is the same situation. Since this thread isn't about the economic collapse, I won't get into it. I'll take it you've never heard of the term "moral hazard?"

Oh, it's not like blaming the victim because you think the victim deserves blame? Fascinating rebuttal man!

Oh yeah, because the Union was obviously perfect in morality and Lincoln was a wonderful angel. Those evil, dirty southerners were the only thing wrong with the case.

No person who has even the feintest idea of that time period actually believes that shit. It's not a rape analogy at all.

[Tech-gnosis]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

which source? the wiki site? or the .GOV site?

The source is my brain, but I guess I can dig up a link if it's really an issue.

Liberal bias -_-

Just like reality

[Derscon]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

which source? the wiki site? or the .GOV site?

The source is my brain, but I guess I can dig up a link if it's really an issue.

Liberal bias -_-

inorite

http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp//battles/sc001.htm

During the formal surrender of Fort Sumter Private Daniel Hough dies when the cannon he was loading (for the Union's 100-gun salute to the U.S. flag) discharges prematurely. He is the first man to die in the Civil War. A second man is mortally wounded.

http://blueandgraytrail.com/date/April_14

I can't believe I was actually asked to source something so utterly trivial. Literally. It was just a point of trivia.

I lol'd a bit.

[Maurepas]

If war is murder, then by shooting and killing people at Fort Sumter, the Confederacy was the first to start murdering.

I actually don't think anyone died.

Two Union soldiers died due to an explosion set off from a spark from the changing of the flag ceremony after the fort surrendered. They were the first official casualties of the Civil War.

which source? the wiki site? or the .GOV site?

The source is my brain, but I guess I can dig up a link if it's really an issue.

Liberal bias -_-

Just like reality

Wait a minute....

[Derscon]

If you punch a police officer and then resist arrest then don't expect to get off without any injuries.

Hey, when the cop is pushing you into a corner and shoving you against a wall, what are you gonna do, just sit and take it?

I'd like to have a word with him.

I hear he's coming in for coffee Next Thursday.

I know of no Slave states that provoked civil wars who are victims.

I was more making a commentary that governments are immoral by nature, but okay.

[Derscon]

Wait a minute....

Don't worry about it. He's too busy being an Internet Tough Guy to realize I wasn't serious.

[Maurepas]

Wait a minute....

Don't worry about it. He's too busy being an Internet Tough Guy to realize I wasn't serious.

I was making a joke about applying a liberal/conservative bias to this at all,