Astonishingly:

Slavery did more more than just enslave black people. It cemented white supremacy in the social fabric of the culture, the residue of which still looms large 154 years later.

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive.

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

Johnny Bear said:

---

Newsflash: Slavery ended 154 years ago.

I'm not in any shape, form, or fashion implying "forget history". On the contrary, I think one of the huge ongoing problems in our country is widespread ignorance of our nation's history (and I'm talking about ALL of our history - much of which is pretty doggone glorious). Obviously an ugly part of it is the fact that slavery existed, but the good news is in was vanquished and it ended - again 154 years ago. Nobody alive today has ever been a legal slave in the USA. Nobody alive today has parents who were ever legal slaves in the USA. Almost nobody alive today has grandparents who were slaves (especially if you're under 100 years old). Other than to deliberately keep as many people in the black community bitter and angry (a habitual leftist tactic to keep as many black voters as possible on the democrat plantation), why is it that this topic keeps coming up as if slavery went away a couple of years ago?

---

****ing my ex ended on my wedding night. Should I stop paying alimony and child support?

blackie said:

---

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

---

I have relatives still alive who worked their asses off as domestics and don't have Social Security.

blackie said:

---

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

---

Black, your question missing connective tissue. I grew up in a very diverse community. As a kid, I knew kids whose grandparents were Holocaust survivors. (And learning from them has has a profound impact on me. I also had friends who had a direct tie to Poland and Ireland and Yugoslavia and Vietnam.

I don't understand why my decent from slaves is diminished while Gannon's decent from the Irish is celebrated. My gut is shame but who knows?

My criticism is not just at whites but blacks who forget they are decedents of slaves and with that is a requirement to uplift those who fought for their rights to vote and strive and be educated.

And southerners who don't get that there is a shared culture that goes back not 154 years but 400 years.

tommie said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Newsflash: Slavery ended 154 years ago.

I'm not in any shape, form, or fashion implying "forget history". On the contrary, I think one of the huge ongoing problems in our country is widespread ignorance of our nation's history (and I'm talking about ALL of our history - much of which is pretty doggone glorious). Obviously an ugly part of it is the fact that slavery existed, but the good news is in was vanquished and it ended - again 154 years ago. Nobody alive today has ever been a legal slave in the USA. Nobody alive today has parents who were ever legal slaves in the USA. Almost nobody alive today has grandparents who were slaves (especially if you're under 100 years old). Other than to deliberately keep as many people in the black community bitter and angry (a habitual leftist tactic to keep as many black voters as possible on the democrat plantation), why is it that this topic keeps coming up as if slavery went away a couple of years ago?

---

****ing my ex ended on my wedding night. Should I stop paying alimony and child support?

---

Huh?????

If that is supposed to be some sort of reference to the "reparations issue", forget it. Over 360,000 Union troops (the vast majority were white) died during the War Between the States. Any "reparations" got paid in blood, with interest, a long, long time ago as well. It's history. Yes, let's learn from it, but let's also celebrate the fact that it ended a long time ago and it is only an "issue" today to the extent that the left uses it as a tactic to deliberately deceive as many black voters as possible into believing that it somehow still negatively impacts their lives in the 21st Century.

Johnny Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Newsflash: Slavery ended 154 years ago.

I'm not in any shape, form, or fashion implying "forget history". On the contrary, I think one of the huge ongoing problems in our country is widespread ignorance of our nation's history (and I'm talking about ALL of our history - much of which is pretty doggone glorious). Obviously an ugly part of it is the fact that slavery existed, but the good news is in was vanquished and it ended - again 154 years ago. Nobody alive today has ever been a legal slave in the USA. Nobody alive today has parents who were ever legal slaves in the USA. Almost nobody alive today has grandparents who were slaves (especially if you're under 100 years old). Other than to deliberately keep as many people in the black community bitter and angry (a habitual leftist tactic to keep as many black voters as possible on the democrat plantation), why is it that this topic keeps coming up as if slavery went away a couple of years ago?

---

****ing my ex ended on my wedding night. Should I stop paying alimony and child support?

---

Huh?????

If that is supposed to be some sort of reference to the "reparations issue", forget it. Over 360,000 Union troops (the vast majority were white) died during the War Between the States. Any "reparations" got paid in blood, with interest, a long, long time ago as well. It's history. Yes, let's learn from it, but let's also celebrate the fact that it ended a long time ago and it is only an "issue" today to the extent that the left uses it as a tactic to deliberately deceive as many black voters as possible into believing that it somehow still negatively impacts their lives in the 21st Century.

---

Willis, I don't know what you're talking about.

As for the amazing sacrifice my yanks paid in the civil war. They didn't die to end slavery. They died because southerners were willing to fight to keep slaves.

Ending slavery could have been done without any blood shed. Zero Brits or Canadians does to end slavery in their countries.

tommie said:

---

blackie said:

---

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

---

Black, your question missing connective tissue. I grew up in a very diverse community. As a kid, I knew kids whose grandparents were Holocaust survivors. (And learning from them has has a profound impact on me. I also had friends who had a direct tie to Poland and Ireland and Yugoslavia and Vietnam.

I don't understand why my decent from slaves is diminished while Gannon's decent from the Irish is celebrated. My gut is shame but who knows?

My criticism is not just at whites but blacks who forget they are decedents of slaves and with that is a requirement to uplift those who fought for their rights to vote and strive and be educated.

And southerners who don't get that there is a shared culture that goes back not 154 years but 400 years.

---

Don't disagree with what you said. But I (nor anyone else posting on this board) still can't control any actions, thoughts, or beliefs done or held by my ancestors. Just as my kids can't control what I do or think today. We can certainly learn from their stories (as your example provides). But from cinque's post it sounded like there was a vote to deny black domestic workers access to social security. I was merely asking when that vote was taken in order to put it into more context compared on where we are today. Certainly we all have heard of or seen "employers" not following the law to pay social security taxes for their employees, even today....and that isn't limited to any particular race, both employer and employee.

I just turned 70. The world of my childhood is vastly different from the world I live in today. Attitudes change as time passes. However it is a fine line between bringing up history in a way that is constructive for the future versus bringing it up in a way that just creates more division. Telling someone today that they are a bad person just because they "fit" a demographic that had bad characters contained in it in the past is not constructive, IMO. Hence my example of the Democratic Party. They should be vilified just as much as the southerns or "Bible believing Christians" if they are to be judged because they had bad characters in the past. Are they the same today as they were in the first half of the 20th century? Heck, is any demographic the same today as they were in that era? The obvious answer is "no". I suspect that all of us will at some point in the future be looked on in a negative way............for doing things today that reasonable people consider to be right and just, but in that future world don't fit the cultural expectations. All of us are to an extent a product of our time.....and time changes everything.

tommie said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Newsflash: Slavery ended 154 years ago.

I'm not in any shape, form, or fashion implying "forget history". On the contrary, I think one of the huge ongoing problems in our country is widespread ignorance of our nation's history (and I'm talking about ALL of our history - much of which is pretty doggone glorious). Obviously an ugly part of it is the fact that slavery existed, but the good news is in was vanquished and it ended - again 154 years ago. Nobody alive today has ever been a legal slave in the USA. Nobody alive today has parents who were ever legal slaves in the USA. Almost nobody alive today has grandparents who were slaves (especially if you're under 100 years old). Other than to deliberately keep as many people in the black community bitter and angry (a habitual leftist tactic to keep as many black voters as possible on the democrat plantation), why is it that this topic keeps coming up as if slavery went away a couple of years ago?

---

****ing my ex ended on my wedding night. Should I stop paying alimony and child support?

---

Huh?????

If that is supposed to be some sort of reference to the "reparations issue", forget it. Over 360,000 Union troops (the vast majority were white) died during the War Between the States. Any "reparations" got paid in blood, with interest, a long, long time ago as well. It's history. Yes, let's learn from it, but let's also celebrate the fact that it ended a long time ago and it is only an "issue" today to the extent that the left uses it as a tactic to deliberately deceive as many black voters as possible into believing that it somehow still negatively impacts their lives in the 21st Century.

---

Willis, I don't know what you're talking about.

As for the amazing sacrifice my yanks paid in the civil war. They didn't die to end slavery. They died because southerners were willing to fight to keep slaves.

Ending slavery could have been done without any blood shed. Zero Brits or Canadians does to end slavery in their countries.

---

I'm pretty sure my great-grandfather didn't leave his home and family and lie about his age to enlist in the Union Army at 17 for any reason other than to see an end to slavery.

cinque said:

---

blackie said:

---

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

---

I have relatives still alive who worked their asses off as domestics and don't have Social Security.

---

Yet, you wanted HRC to be elected.

May I remind you of her prejudice?Here she goes again.

Dude, it may be time for you to quit this game, as you keep being wrong every time you post.

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

blackie said:

---

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

---

I have relatives still alive who worked their asses off as domestics and don't have Social Security.

---

Yet, you wanted HRC to be elected.

May I remind you of her prejudice?Here she goes again.

Dude, it may be time for you to quit this game, as you keep being wrong every time you post.

---

Explain to me what was racist about her busting the chops of somebody misidentifying Eric Holder as Corey Booker?

cinque said:

---

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

blackie said:

---

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

---

I have relatives still alive who worked their asses off as domestics and don't have Social Security.

---

Yet, you wanted HRC to be elected.

May I remind you of her prejudice?Here she goes again.

Dude, it may be time for you to quit this game, as you keep being wrong every time you post.

---

Explain to me what was racist about her busting the chops of somebody misidentifying Eric Holder as Corey Booker?

I know this apparently a difficult concept to you, but she outright said all black people look alike to her. Says all we need to know about you and your views as you continue to support HRC.

---

JXL said:

---

tommie said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Newsflash: Slavery ended 154 years ago.

I'm not in any shape, form, or fashion implying "forget history". On the contrary, I think one of the huge ongoing problems in our country is widespread ignorance of our nation's history (and I'm talking about ALL of our history - much of which is pretty doggone glorious). Obviously an ugly part of it is the fact that slavery existed, but the good news is in was vanquished and it ended - again 154 years ago. Nobody alive today has ever been a legal slave in the USA. Nobody alive today has parents who were ever legal slaves in the USA. Almost nobody alive today has grandparents who were slaves (especially if you're under 100 years old). Other than to deliberately keep as many people in the black community bitter and angry (a habitual leftist tactic to keep as many black voters as possible on the democrat plantation), why is it that this topic keeps coming up as if slavery went away a couple of years ago?

---

****ing my ex ended on my wedding night. Should I stop paying alimony and child support?

---

Huh?????

If that is supposed to be some sort of reference to the "reparations issue", forget it. Over 360,000 Union troops (the vast majority were white) died during the War Between the States. Any "reparations" got paid in blood, with interest, a long, long time ago as well. It's history. Yes, let's learn from it, but let's also celebrate the fact that it ended a long time ago and it is only an "issue" today to the extent that the left uses it as a tactic to deliberately deceive as many black voters as possible into believing that it somehow still negatively impacts their lives in the 21st Century.

---

Willis, I don't know what you're talking about.

As for the amazing sacrifice my yanks paid in the civil war. They didn't die to end slavery. They died because southerners were willing to fight to keep slaves.

Ending slavery could have been done without any blood shed. Zero Brits or Canadians does to end slavery in their countries.

---

I'm pretty sure my great-grandfather didn't leave his home and family and lie about his age to enlist in the Union Army at 17 for any reason other than to see an end to slavery.

---

He did. Or he fought to save the union. Regardless, he fought for noble reasons.

However, the beginning at Ft Sumpter was because the south wanted to keep slaves. They were willing to fight and die for "states right (to keep slaves) and their way of life.

I'm not diminishing what your grandfather did. I'm saying the north didn't say "end slavery by June 1st were coming to end it".

Slavery could have ended without a fight but there were many willing to fight to keep it.

My ancestors in Pennsylvania were Anabaptists, and detested Slavery as an abomination. Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery. Five died in the Civil War, one was maimed and could not walk after the war. Another two young men from my family lied about their age and served as scouts for the Union Army and died the day before the Battle of Gettysburg began, ambushed by Confederates.

They fought and died specifically and only to end Slavery. Not for politics or for the Union, not for Lincoln or General Meade. They fought because they believed to their core that Slavery was evil and must be opposed with every ounce of energy and will they possessed.

Oldbear83 said:

---

My ancestors in Pennsylvania were Anabaptists, and detested Slavery as an abomination. Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery. Five died in the Civil War, one was maimed and could not walk after the war. Another two young men from my family lied about their age and served as scouts for the Union Army and died the day before the Battle of Gettysburg began, ambushed by Confederates.

They fought and died specifically and only to end Slavery. Not for politics or for the Union, not for Lincoln or General Meade. They fought because they believed to their core that Slavery was evil and must be opposed with every ounce of energy and will they possessed.

---

I appreciate both their fight and your blood line. My point is a bit different if you'd allow me.

There are some basic things that should go beyond politics. When there is a fight, it happens because the coin has two sides. It has the side that says "gasing people is wrong." And the side that says "these people should be extinguished".

I do t understand the second group but they continue to exists throughout human history. So when we roll in, they never just see the error of their ways. They fight to maintain their (whatever it is).

As both a northerner (with deep southern roots), an Illinoian, and a descendent of slaves, I am extremely thankful for what people like your ancestors did.

I am often told of southerners who, without benefit of land ownership or "belief" in slavery, died for the confederacy. I can see how easy that is to do. I don't want to paint them with the pro slavery brush. But the leadership of the day was clearly willing to sacrifice those cats for their benefit.

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

My ancestors in Pennsylvania were Anabaptists, and detested Slavery as an abomination. Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery. Five died in the Civil War, one was maimed and could not walk after the war. Another two young men from my family lied about their age and served as scouts for the Union Army and died the day before the Battle of Gettysburg began, ambushed by Confederates.

They fought and died specifically and only to end Slavery. Not for politics or for the Union, not for Lincoln or General Meade. They fought because they believed to their core that Slavery was evil and must be opposed with every ounce of energy and will they possessed.

---

I appreciate both their fight and your blood line. My point is a bit different if you'd allow me.

There are some basic things that should go beyond politics. When there is a fight, it happens because the coin has two sides. It has the side that says "gasing people is wrong." And the side that says "these people should be extinguished".

I do t understand the second group but they continue to exists throughout human history. So when we roll in, they never just see the error of their ways. They fight to maintain their (whatever it is).

As both a northerner (with deep southern roots), an Illinoian, and a descendent of slaves, I am extremely thankful for what people like your ancestors did.

I am often told of southerners who, without benefit of land ownership or "belief" in slavery, died for the confederacy. I can see how easy that is to do. I don't want to paint them with the pro slavery brush. But the leadership of the day was clearly willing to sacrifice those cats for their benefit.

---

Thanks for your thoughts tommie. I disagree to some extent - when someone attacks a person in the street, others may not want to fight but are compelled to act. In that context, when a fight happens it is because one person or group wanted it to happen. The other side has no choice but is merely reacting to the violence.

I am not trying to disrespect anything said in the last few posts, but a thought came to mind that I have to ask. We talk a lot about our ancestors doing this or that for this or that reason. Are such statements made because we think (or hope) that would have been their reason or because you actually have family documents or reliable family oral history passed down where they state that is what they did and why? Even in OldBear's case, they certainly likely had beliefs concerning slavery. But how do we know for certain that is the reason they fought? I had feelings as well in the 70's, but my involvement in the military at that time had absolutely nothing to do with those beliefs or feelings.

Once again, not trying to be argumentative or disrespectful, just wondering. I have ancestors that fought on both sides of the Civil War. However, I have absolutely nothing documented where they stated their reasons for joining up. As such, I do not feel comfortable stating as to why they did so.

cinque said:

---

Slavery did more more than just enslave black people. It cemented white supremacy in the social fabric of the culture, the residue of which still looms large 154 years later.

---

What if I told you there was a whole continent full of black people......one so big that all of Europe, Russia, and the USA could fit into it..........and you could move there tomorrow.

Like be on a fight out of Houston tonight and be there in less than 24hrs.

Or just stay here and continue to b**ch and complain about the mean ole white man 24/7

Your choice.

Oldbear83 said:

---

My ancestors in Pennsylvania were Anabaptists, and detested Slavery as an abomination. Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery. Five died in the Civil War, one was maimed and could not walk after the war. Another two young men from my family lied about their age and served as scouts for the Union Army and died the day before the Battle of Gettysburg began, ambushed by Confederates.

They fought and died specifically and only to end Slavery. Not for politics or for the Union, not for Lincoln or General Meade. They fought because they believed to their core that Slavery was evil and must be opposed with every ounce of energy and will they possessed.

---

"Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery."

No they didn't

The Federalists from day one said they were fighting to "muh persevere the union"

There we draft riots (that killed untold thousands) in every major Northern city when it seemed like the war was turning into an anti-slavery radical abolitionist jihad.

I know if makes you feel good in some strange way to think your ancestors were bloody moral crusades.

But there were not.

They invaded another country, raped, and murdered innocent civilians and got killed for it.

blackie said:

---

I am not trying to disrespect anything said in the last few posts, but a thought came to mind that I have to ask. We talk a lot about our ancestors doing this or that for this or that reason. Are such statements made because we think (or hope) that would have been their reason or because you actually have family documents or reliable family oral history passed down where they state that is what they did and why? Even in OldBear's case, they certainly likely had beliefs concerning slavery. But how do we know for certain that is the reason they fought?

---

In the case of my family, there was a consistent oral history, supported by family documents like letters and sermons written out (I don't know about all denominations, but the Anabaptists liked to print out and distribute speeches to focus attention to key issues, such as self-restraint, civil disobedience in protest, and of course Slavery and later segregation). In addition, my father spoke about his family's beliefs and disappointment that the Anabaptist movement largely died out in the Philadelphia region by the end of the 19th Century, but morphed somewhat into social movements like the Women's vote and Desegregation. Basically, my family were seen as troublemakers by the Establishment and they counted it a badge of pride

Me: "Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery."

Redbrickbear: "No they didn't"

Me: They absolutely did. They enlisted and fought within 100 miles of their homes. Most of them died within sight of places they had gone to school and worked. So claiming my family "invaded another country" is a lie, and a stupid one at that.

I respect the Confederate soldier and even some of the reasons for their secession, but I know my family history and heritage, and my answer was completely honest and true.

Too bad if you don't like it, but you are lying to say my family fought for anything but to end Slavery. Call them naive if you want to, say what you want about Sherman and his raiders, and yes, war is brutal and a civil war is a horrific series of terrible events. Some of the Union Army did terrible things, but many - like my family - joined up to protect their towns and communities from a rebel army that invaded the North.



So in sum, I cited the facts from my family, and too f ing bad if that hurts your feelings.

Oldbear83 said:

---

blackie said:

---

I am not trying to disrespect anything said in the last few posts, but a thought came to mind that I have to ask. We talk a lot about our ancestors doing this or that for this or that reason. Are such statements made because we think (or hope) that would have been their reason or because you actually have family documents or reliable family oral history passed down where they state that is what they did and why? Even in OldBear's case, they certainly likely had beliefs concerning slavery. But how do we know for certain that is the reason they fought?

---

In the case of my family, there was a consistent oral history, supported by family documents like letters and sermons written out (I don't know about all denominations, but the Anabaptists liked to print out and distribute speeches to focus attention to key issues, such as self-restraint, civil disobedience in protest, and of course Slavery and later segregation). In addition, my father spoke about his family's beliefs and disappointment that the Anabaptist movement largely died out in the Philadelphia region by the end of the 19th Century, but morphed somewhat into social movements like the Women's vote and Desegregation. Basically, my family were seen as troublemakers by the Establishment and they counted it a badge of pride

---

Was your family from the Mennonite Anabaptist group. I know from studies they hated slavery and repression of people in all forms. On the other hand, the Mennonite group also did not encourage engaging in war, as a pacifist group. A real dilema for the Mennonites in the Civil War.

If your family held the strong hatred of slavery, but were not of the pacifist Anabaptist groups, no matter what the government fought for, they very well may have fought specifically to end slavery, even if the Union fought specifically to save the Union.

Forest Bueller said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

blackie said:

---

I am not trying to disrespect anything said in the last few posts, but a thought came to mind that I have to ask. We talk a lot about our ancestors doing this or that for this or that reason. Are such statements made because we think (or hope) that would have been their reason or because you actually have family documents or reliable family oral history passed down where they state that is what they did and why? Even in OldBear's case, they certainly likely had beliefs concerning slavery. But how do we know for certain that is the reason they fought?

---

In the case of my family, there was a consistent oral history, supported by family documents like letters and sermons written out (I don't know about all denominations, but the Anabaptists liked to print out and distribute speeches to focus attention to key issues, such as self-restraint, civil disobedience in protest, and of course Slavery and later segregation). In addition, my father spoke about his family's beliefs and disappointment that the Anabaptist movement largely died out in the Philadelphia region by the end of the 19th Century, but morphed somewhat into social movements like the Women's vote and Desegregation. Basically, my family were seen as troublemakers by the Establishment and they counted it a badge of pride

---

Was your family from the Mennonite Anabaptist group. I know from studies they hated slavery and repression of people in all forms. On the other hand, the Mennonite group also did not encourage engaging in war, as a pacifist group. A real dilema for the Mennonites in the Civil War.

If your family held the strong hatred of slavery, but were not of the pacifist Anabaptist groups, no matter what the government fought for, they very well may have fought specifically to end slavery, even if the Union fought specifically to save the Union.

---

At least in Pennsylvania, the Mennonites splintered quite a bit. The Pennsylvania Abolition Society, founded in 1775, provoked a wide range of opinions even among people who agreed Slavery was evil. By the time of the Civil War, many Philadelphians felt force was needed and frankly overdue.

I think that Redbrickbear did hit on a valid point, that to some degree the government played on sentiment to get enlistees. In my family's case, enlistment in 1862 and 1863 came with verbal assurances that they would just protect Pennsylvania, although many were sent to other fronts as the war went on. In my family's case, all the casualties happened near home, so whether intentionally or not the Union Army at least kept its promise that they were fighting to end slavery, and doing so while protecting their homes.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

My ancestors in Pennsylvania were Anabaptists, and detested Slavery as an abomination. Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery. Five died in the Civil War, one was maimed and could not walk after the war. Another two young men from my family lied about their age and served as scouts for the Union Army and died the day before the Battle of Gettysburg began, ambushed by Confederates.

They fought and died specifically and only to end Slavery. Not for politics or for the Union, not for Lincoln or General Meade. They fought because they believed to their core that Slavery was evil and must be opposed with every ounce of energy and will they possessed.

---

"Six adult men in my family enlisted specifically to fight and end Slavery."

No they didn't

The Federalists from day one said they were fighting to "muh persevere the union"

There we draft riots (that killed untold thousands) in every major Northern city when it seemed like the war was turning into an anti-slavery radical abolitionist jihad.

I know if makes you feel good in some strange way to think your ancestors were bloody moral crusades.

But there were not.

They invaded another country, raped, and murdered innocent civilians and got killed for it.

---

You are applying the aggregate to the individual. You have ZERO information if your statement is correct.

This same statement could apply to many on this thread.

News flash: evil **** happened years ago

Side note: My very Southern Grandmother - RIP - born around 1906 had an old pic of one of her Grandfathers from the civil war.

Despite seeing the picture on her wall thousands of times - I don't think it ever registered with her that it clearly was a Union uniform

Keyser Soze said:

---

News flash: evil **** happened years ago

---

No kidding, of the first two men born, 50% of them was a murderer. From day one of the fall, we've been bad.

From someone who is often mistaken as Hispanic, I've experienced much more racism from black people than white people. Far more...

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

blackie said:

---

cinque said:

---

Here's an example: Bible believing Christians, especially in the South, would not approve passage of a Social Security bill that included security for black domestic workers. This was not a violent, act, but a planned, intentional way to keep the Slave Bible's spirit alive

---

When was this action taken? I am interested in that answer to determine how many of those voters are alive today. I have no control over the actions of my ancestors as does the Democratic party of today have any control over the despicable acts taken by Democrats of the past.

---

I have relatives still alive who worked their asses off as domestics and don't have Social Security.

---

Yet, you wanted HRC to be elected.

May I remind you of her prejudice?Here she goes again.

Dude, it may be time for you to quit this game, as you keep being wrong every time you post.

---

Explain to me what was racist about her busting the chops of somebody misidentifying Eric Holder as Corey Booker?

I know this apparently a difficult concept to you, but she outright said all black people look alike to her. Says all we need to know about you and your views as you continue to support HRC.

---

---

That's not what she said. Read the quote you provided.