150year anniversary of the South's declaration of secession

[SpeedRacer 1]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/opinion/19Ball.html?emc=eta1 Yes it was about slavery.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[futuredivot 0]

You did notice the really big "Opinion Pages" header on the source, right?

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

You did notice the really big "Opinion Pages" header on the source, right?

That was the War of Northern Agression, right?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[futuredivot 0]

It WAS way more complicated-but hey, the winner writes the history.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[SpeedRacer 1]

The article contains a link to a transcript of the Declaration of Causes from Dec 24, 1860: They are concerned with protecting the right to own slaves.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

The article contains a link to a transcript of the Declaration of Causes from Dec 24, 1860: They are concerned with protecting the right to own slaves.

Yup, you can read the Declaration yourself here:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp

All about slavery.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[quade 4]

Here's the clip you want to see;

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-9-2010/the-south-s-secession-commemoration

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,009]

Slavery was just one part of the war. It was a good rallying point though.

[quade 4]

Quote

Slavery was just one part of the war. It was a good rallying point though.

Flour is "just one part of" bread. It is, however, the biggest part.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

The article contains a link to a transcript of the Declaration of Causes from Dec 24, 1860: They are concerned with protecting the right to own slaves.

So simple, eh?
Wrong.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

Slavery was just one part of the war. It was a good rallying point though.

Flour is "just one part of" bread. It is, however, the biggest part.

Yep. Th g'ment tells them, "Make bread but no longer use flour even though the agreement we bought into with you to start with says you can use flour."

Baker says. "Wait a minute. We got an agreement!"

G'ment says, "Well we're changing it whether you like it or not"

So, the reply the g'ment got was, "Fuck you. You make your own bread. We're gonna continue to make ours.

"Oh NO! Use no flour or we'll kick your ass." says the g/ment.

"Oh yeah? Well, here's the first haymaker asshole."



You guys can't think beyond the simple.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[SpeedRacer 1]

The difference came up specifically over the impending illegalization of slavery.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[quade 4]

So then you're admitting it was about slavery and not only that, you seem to be saying it's still a good idea.

Is that really how you wanted that post to go down?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Bolas 5]

Quote

So then you're admitting it was about slavery and not only that, you seem to be saying it's still a good idea.

Is that really how you wanted that post to go down?

You may be on to something there...

Of course it'd have to be PC: Anyone could own anyone else. That is except for white people. They couldn't own but could be owned.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

So then you're admitting it was about slavery and not only that, you seem to be saying it's still a good idea.

Is that really how you wanted that post to go down?

You may be on to something there...

Of course it'd have to be PC: Anyone could anyone else. That is except for white people. They couldn't own but could be owned.

You do realize that thruout history there have been MILLIONS of whites who were slaves as well right???

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So then you're admitting it was about slavery and not only that, you seem to be saying it's still a good idea.

Is that really how you wanted that post to go down?

You may be on to something there...

Of course it'd have to be PC: Anyone could own anyone else. That is except for white people. They couldn't own but could be owned.

You do realize that thruout history there have been MILLIONS of whites who were slaves as well right???

If you're gonna start using facts and logic, PC isn't gonna work and we'll just have to say white people are evil.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[jakee 1,501]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Slavery was just one part of the war. It was a good rallying point though.

Flour is "just one part of" bread. It is, however, the biggest part.

Yep. Th g'ment tells them, "Make bread but no longer use flour even though the agreement we bought into with you to start with says you can use flour."

Baker says. "Wait a minute. We got an agreement!"

G'ment says, "Well we're changing it whether you like it or not"

So, the reply the g'ment got was, "Fuck you. You make your own bread. We're gonna continue to make ours.

"Oh NO! Use no flour or we'll kick your ass." says the g/ment.

"Oh yeah? Well, here's the first haymaker asshole."



You guys can't think beyond the simple.

Yeah, except when you replace the word flour with slaves, it turns out the baker's a cunt.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Andy9o8 2]

The War of Southern Slavery and Treason was the only one in which the history was written by the side that lost the war.

[RonD1120 62]

In our recent unpleasantness, the South was treated unfairly. The North had them out manned, out equipped and, out financed. The North took unfair advantage.

Let's fight that war again. This time around, all the SPECOPS commands are in the South. Well, the important ones anyway.

The cause needs to be redefined though. How about the military's right to own gays?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

Quote

So then you're admitting it was about slavery and not only that, you seem to be saying it's still a good idea.

Is that really how you wanted that post to go down?

You may be on to something there...

Of course it'd have to be PC: Anyone could own anyone else. That is except for white people. They couldn't own but could be owned.

Only the Christians, Muslim Whities would be exempt from that rule.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

In our recent unpleasantness, the South was treated unfairly. The North had them out manned, out equipped and, out financed. The North took unfair advantage.

I can't tell if this part is serious or not but war is not sports. You are not supossed to start with a level playing field.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Yep. Th g'ment tells them, "Make bread but no longer use flour even though the agreement we bought into with you to start with says you can use flour."

Baker says. "Wait a minute. We got an agreement!"

G'ment says, "Well we're changing it whether you like it or not"

So, the reply the g'ment got was, "Fuck you. You make your own bread. We're gonna continue to make ours.

"Oh NO! Use no flour or we'll kick your ass." says the g/ment.

"Oh yeah? Well, here's the first haymaker asshole."



You guys can't think beyond the simple.

Sure, then 150+ years later the baker's descendents keep insisting, "That war wasn't really about flour anyway."

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[billvon 3,009]

You're arguing Quade's point. If that really was an analogy for the civil war, then slavery was the biggest issue, despite what the south saw as an "agreement" that they could keep it.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Quote

In our recent unpleasantness, the South was treated unfairly. The North had them out manned, out equipped and, out financed. The North took unfair advantage.

I can't tell if this part is serious or not but war is not sports. You are not supossed to start with a level playing field.

Uh, don't the Libs think so?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

So then you're admitting it was about slavery and not only that, you seem to be saying it's still a good idea.

Is that really how you wanted that post to go down?

Nice shot, Quade!
Good job reading your POV into it!

But *whoooooosh*

The problem is that you still have that pesky thing about not reading what is written and choosing to only incorporate ideas stemming from your limited POV.

Now, tell me again what I said. You seem to know better than me, eh?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239