It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
We have so many great thinkers and doers here on ATS... I know we can do better than what's being shoved down our throats.
originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Boadicea
It's good to see another thread like this, but from my experience, they quickly devolve into more of the same......
Perhaps this thread will be different. Let's see who contributes.....
originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: Boadicea
I can't really give a good answer to you, but I have an idea of where to look.
I'd say the most divisive issue in US history was over slavery. A middle ground was sought at one time: essentially let slave owners keep their slaves, but don't let anyone import any more. Nobody was satisfied with that peaceful compromise though. The issue was solved with extreme violence, and looking back most people say that was the right thing to do.
Was the Civil War justified?
Would you accept slavery today, as long as we kept it running through a middle ground compromise?
Or should we all try to understand what is right, through sincere study and consideration; and educate others on the truth as we bring ourselves to understand it?
I'll admit I'm fairly ignorant of world history. How did the rest of the world deal with slavery? Did it take a brutal civil war to bring its abolition to each nation that practiced it? If not, what separated the US from the other nations that ended it peacefully?
originally posted by: onequestion
Yeah but we need to establish something before we can get along.
What race are you?
No seriously because thats the most important thing to everyone.
originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Maybe we should adopt a National Hug Your Congressman Day. Kill'em with kindness.
originally posted by: Boadicea
originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Maybe we should adopt a National Hug Your Congressman Day. Kill'em with kindness.
I'll bet some of that goo from Ghostbusters would do the trick!
If only it were that easy...
originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: Boadicea
We have to agree to one law.
Acceptance not conversion.
And use Democracy to determine the limits set by the Law.
Anything less and we just keep fighting until it escalates to war.
originally posted by: zardust
a reply to: Boadicea
Didn't the constitution originally have the 3/5s clause ? Sorry on my phone and bad signal so I can't fact check that now.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached between delegates from southern states and those from northern states during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. The debate was over whether, and if so, how, slaves would be counted when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes. The issue was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The effect was to give the southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored (but fewer than if counts of slaves and free persons had been lumped together), allowing the slaveholder interests to largely dominate the government of the United States until 1865.
originally posted by: zardust
a reply to: Boadicea
Providing a clause in the constitution for slavery is acknowledging and legitimizing slavery. To say that slavery is unconstitutional when they've provided a means to continue its propagation is a bit blind.
I know its hard to admit but our founding fathers are not the spotless men they've been made out to be. It's ok. We need to admit it. Not sugar coat it or try and claim they thought something different. Maybe it was a compromise to get the south to sign. But considering Washington and Jefferson owned slaves...
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Boadicea
Nice thread and i think you are spot on...there is a need for finding a "middle ground " so to speak......
Your post reminds me of a book by "Edward De Bono" named "i am right,you are wrong",he talks breifly in it about a language he was developing and his "middle" word was "po"...this word was something in between the left and right,or right and wrong....such a simple concept yet lost on so many......
originally posted by: zardust
a reply to: Boadicea
I was just responding to the part of your post that said that slavery was unconstitutional.
I actually agree with the op.
My point is we have a great propensity to white wash our own "sins" and those who belong to us. Republicans with Reagan. Democrats with Rosevelt. Christians, statists, atheists, libertarians all do it. The founding fathers tend to fall in there and the constitution is held up as this sacred document.
What this has to do with the OP is that we can't rely on mythologized heroes or documents in moving forward. I like the constitution. I'm not against it. But I just think we need to own what it is and isn't. And it did practically promote slavery and division.
And yes the fact that we did end slavery is worth noting. The point is that we were doing dispicable things as a country that we were able to turn from and change. If we could do it then we can do it now.