It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
And that's what is sad to me. You're so wrapped up in the past, that you can't see how a word/symbol can change connotations, and show little to no responsibility for your use or actions towards the present. I guess you would be fine if people wore swastikas or draped swastika flags around, cause they may find it as a symbol of "power, strength, and good luck". There is no way that a swastika could be tied to Nazis. I mean, who in their right mind would think of such a thing?
Originally posted by TheRedneck
(Yes, I know you wrote that as sarcasm. But in your attempt you actually made perfect sense to me.)
edit on 9/17/2011 by TheRedneck because: (no reason given)
Washington, August 22, 1862
Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir. I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptible in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.
As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt. I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave 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. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.
You're so wrapped up in the past, that you can't see how a word/symbol can change connotations, and show little to no responsibility for your use or actions towards the present.
Originally posted by hanyak69
reply to post by poet1b
he also coined the belief that blacks were 3/5 human which maintained until the early 1970's.
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by tankerpilot
You should also know that the famous Lincoln Douglas debates were about slavery. "Slavery is a stain on our nation".
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people.
I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.
Do the people of the south really entertain fears that a Republican administration would, directly or indirectly, interfere with their slaves, or with them, about their slaves? If they do, I wish to assure you, as once a friend, and still, I hope, not an enemy, there is no cause for such fears.
" I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
The reason behind this was that Madison, Franklin, and other ABOLITIONISTS knew that by allowing the south to count all slaves in the census would mean that the south would have a massive majority in congress because representation then, as it is now, is determined by state population.
Originally posted by tankerpilot
IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE. Get over yourself. By playing the race card in every aspect of life you prove only one thing....that you are a rascist!!!!