popsjumper 2 #26 December 21, 2010 Quote 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. You didn't actually do the replacement and re-read, did you? My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #27 December 21, 2010 Quote The difference came up specifically over the impending illegalization of slavery. Now, Speedracer is starting to think a little. The "impending illegalization" [sic] could have been directed at anything...say, "the right to self-govern" for instance. "OK, you States, you're no longer allowed to self-govern even though that was our original agreement. We're changing that agreement. All government must be done by the Federals now. You have to shut down your state legislature" Hmmmm...do you think that the States would have cause for action in a case like that? So now the conflict was all about those pesky state legislator people? Oh...and for the bozos that refuse to think and choose to drag out the "you're pro-slavery" card...I do not condone the enslavement of any human being. Well, except in cases of voluntary enslavement...Banesura comes to mind here. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #28 December 21, 2010 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. Only the Christians, Muslim Whities would be exempt from that rule. That would mean letting white athiests, agnostics, and Jews have slaves. Best to just make white Muslims the only exception.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #29 December 21, 2010 QuoteYou didn't actually do the replacement and re-read, did you? Yep. And the baker really does sound like a cunt. Having 'an agreement' to be able to use slaves doesn't make slavery any less abhorrent, and so is no excuse for fighting to keep being able to use slaves.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #30 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteYou didn't actually do the replacement and re-read, did you? Yep. And the baker really does sound like a cunt. Having 'an agreement' to be able to use slaves doesn't make slavery any less abhorrent, and so is no excuse for fighting to keep being able to use slaves. Ok, Jakee. Slavery is such an emotional issue. Take the emotions out of it and use the intellect. Yes, slavery is abhorrent. No argument there. So is breaking an agreement. Not expecting a response is just silly. Using force to see your "new" agreement through is abhorrent, too. Once you do that, you take it out of the realm of 'agreement' and put into the realm of dictatorial.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #31 December 21, 2010 QuoteUsing force to see your "new" agreement through is abhorrent, too. If aggression to free slaves isn't a good justification to fight a war, then I'm not really certain what is. Certainly a LOT of wars have been fought over much less.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #32 December 21, 2010 I don't know, man. You have a war, that means military-that means that you have to start worrying about who does or doesn't have the right to wear insignia supporting that military. That whole 'give a moose a muffin' thing. Is there a valid reason to have to deal with all that?You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #33 December 21, 2010 QuoteThat whole 'give a moose a muffin' thing. You talking about that Palin chick?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #34 December 21, 2010 QuoteOk, Jakee. Slavery is such an emotional issue. Take the emotions out of it and use the intellect. Whether you're emotional or not, slavery is still abhorrent and antithetical to the stated aims of the USA. QuoteYes, slavery is abhorrent. No argument there. So is breaking an agreement. Right. Breaking an agreement to let someone use slaves is as bad as using slaves. Well done sir. Well done. QuoteNot expecting a response is just silly. So? Doesn't make someone who fights for his right to own slaves any less of a cunt. QuoteUsing force to see your "new" agreement through is abhorrent, too. Once you do that, you take it out of the realm of 'agreement' and put into the realm of dictatorial. You're going to complain about using force to make someone else do your bidding whilst defending a bunch of slave owners!? Maybe if you weren't so emotional about your precious South you would notice how few legs you have to stand on here.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #35 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteOk, Jakee. Slavery is such an emotional issue. Take the emotions out of it and use the intellect. Whether you're emotional or not, slavery is still abhorrent and antithetical to the stated aims of the USA. QuoteYes, slavery is abhorrent. No argument there. So is breaking an agreement. Right. Breaking an agreement to let someone use slaves is as bad as using slaves. Well done sir. Well done. QuoteNot expecting a response is just silly. So? Doesn't make someone who fights for his right to own slaves any less of a cunt. QuoteUsing force to see your "new" agreement through is abhorrent, too. Once you do that, you take it out of the realm of 'agreement' and put into the realm of dictatorial. You're going to complain about using force to make someone else do your bidding whilst defending a bunch of slave owners!? Maybe if you weren't so emotional about your precious South you would notice how few legs you have to stand on here. If the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them?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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #36 December 21, 2010 QuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #37 December 21, 2010 Quote Ok, Jakee. Slavery is such an emotional issue. Take the emotions out of it and use the intellect. Yes, slavery is abhorrent. No argument there. So is breaking an agreement. Not expecting a response is just silly. Using force to see your "new" agreement through is abhorrent, too. Once you do that, you take it out of the realm of 'agreement' and put into the realm of dictatorial. I fail to see how the North broke any agreement. There was no move afoot to abolish slavery. Lincoln offered to support a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the rights of slave owners in the south permanently."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #38 December 21, 2010 QuoteI fail to see how the North broke any agreement. There was no move afoot to abolish slavery. Lincoln offered to support a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the rights of slave owners in the south permanently. So, uh, you're saying Lincoln was pro-slavery?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #39 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy. You are focusing on specifics - Open your mind - it works better that way.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #40 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteI fail to see how the North broke any agreement. There was no move afoot to abolish slavery. Lincoln offered to support a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the rights of slave owners in the south permanently. So, uh, you're saying Lincoln was pro-slavery? Well, as always, history is a little more comlicated than just handing out white marks and black marks on a report card. Lincoln was against any further extension of slavery into any more of the western territories. Slave owners in the south very much wanted to preserve the right to further expand slave territory in the west. Lincoln was more than willing to accept permanent slavery in the south as a cost of preserving the Union. You should read his inaugural address and the text of the Northern Permanent Slavery Amendment. Yes, Lincoln endorsed the amendment."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #41 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy. You are focusing on specifics. No, you're ignoring facts that you don't like.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #42 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy. You are focusing on specifics. No, you're ignoring facts that you don't like. Not ignoring - However, you are twisting and spinning.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #43 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy. You are focusing on specifics. No, you're ignoring facts that you don't like. Not ignoring - However, you are twisting and spinning. Says the guy who just compared intolerance of slavery with a bank foreclosing on a mortgage for no reason. Well played.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #44 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy. You are focusing on specifics. No, you're ignoring facts that you don't like. Not ignoring - However, you are twisting and spinning. Says the guy who just compared intolerance of slavery with a bank foreclosing on a mortgage for no reason. Well played. Wrong - I compared a broken agreement to a broken agreement, please try to keep up.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #45 December 21, 2010 More argument from emotion - as Andy said, you may want to disconnect the emotion.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #46 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy. You are focusing on specifics. No, you're ignoring facts that you don't like. Not ignoring - However, you are twisting and spinning. Says the guy who just compared intolerance of slavery with a bank foreclosing on a mortgage for no reason. Well played. Wrong - I compared a broken agreement to a broken agreement, please try to keep up. Ok. So as I said to pops; Right. Breaking an agreement to let someone use slaves is as bad as using slaves. Well done sir. Well done.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #47 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the bank you have an agreement for the mortgage of your house just decided one day that they didn't like the way you live, and then decided that you no longer could live in your house, would you try to stop them? Unless 'the way I live' means having people locked in cages in the basement, I fail to see the worth of the analogy. You are focusing on specifics. No, you're ignoring facts that you don't like. Not ignoring - However, you are twisting and spinning. Says the guy who just compared intolerance of slavery with a bank foreclosing on a mortgage for no reason. Well played. Wrong - I compared a broken agreement to a broken agreement, please try to keep up. Ok. So as I said to pops; Right. Breaking an agreement to let someone use slaves is as bad as using slaves. Well done sir. Well done. As I said - open your mind - People had a way different mind set and thought differently then. Or are you trying to state otherwise?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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #48 December 21, 2010 QuoteMore argument from emotion, yay! How, exactly? Fighting a war over slavery is abhorrent. That's not an emotional response, it just is. You southerners are arguing from emotion. You desperately want to believe that your homeland was in the right, so you twist and obfuscate and ignore the facts you don't like.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #49 December 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteMore argument from emotion, yay! How, exactly? Fighting a war over slavery is abhorrent. That's not an emotional response, it just is. You southerners are arguing from emotion. You desperately want to believe that your homeland was in the right, so you twist and obfuscate and ignore the facts you don't like. How exactly? You will not even consider a different point of view - that is irrational. You are refusing to let logic into your argument. Absence of logic is emotion.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #50 December 21, 2010 QuotePeople had a way different mind set and thought differently then. Oh, right, so slavery was Ok because they thought it was Ok. Seriously? Well the people in the North didn't. The people in the North were right. The people in the South were wrong.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
