God

[Tinkerpeach]

I have little doubt this is true, but the fact remains that slavery was the primary casus belli for the Civil War. The focus on "states rights" is a means of avoiding the fact that the South went to war in order to keep slavery and the North didn't want it expanded out to the new states coming in.

There were many reasons the South was so concerned about representation in Congress because if the North could pass anything they wanted the South would have to do it.

At the time the tobacco and Cotten trade was making the South extremely profitable and congress wanted to increase the taxes on their exports.

The Southern democrats blocked it but with more free states coming into the union they knew they would ultimately lose.

There were also issues with education where the North wanted to begin making standards in teaching but the South was comprised of mostly farmers so didn’t put as much priority on that.

Many other issues were also going on at the time which had nothing to do with slavery.

However the big debate with the new states coming in was the slavery issue as the abolitionists were pushing very hard to make them free states and they were far more organized than the Southern supporters were.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

There were many reasons the South was so concerned about representation in Congress because if the North could pass anything they wanted the South would have to do it.

At the time the tobacco and Cotten trade was making the South extremely profitable and congress wanted to increase the taxes on their exports.

The Southern democrats blocked it but with more free states coming into the union they knew they would ultimately lose.

There were also issues with education where the North wanted to begin making standards in teaching but the South was comprised of mostly farmers so didn’t put as much priority on that.

Many other issues were also going on at the time which had nothing to do with slavery.

However the big debate with the new states coming in was the slavery issue as the abolitionists were pushing very hard to make them free states and they were far more organized than the Southern supporters were.

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

Well that is certainly one way to look at it

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Well that is certainly one way to look at it

Who invaded whom? Where did most Civil War battles take place? Who employed the Scorched Earth strategy, a tactic now banned by the Geneva Convention?

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

Who invaded whom? Where did most Civil War battles take place? Who employed the Scorched Earth strategy, a tactic now banned by the Geneva Convention?

The South fired the first shot at Fort Sumpter, most battles took place in the South and Sherman led the union army on their scorched earth attack

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The South fired the first shot at Fort Sumpter, most battles took place in the South and Sherman led the union army on their scorched earth attack

WTF, Tink??? South Carolina gives an eviction order, in which they killed no one, and the fucking Republicans use that as an excuse to invade Virginia? That makes as much sense as Nixon ending the Vietnam War by invading Cambodia.

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

Can God make a rock he can’t move?

It is not fair or appropriate for me to tell you what your God of choice can do or not do.

 

[goat]

WTF, Tink??? South Carolina gives an eviction order, in which they killed no one, and the fucking Republicans use that as an excuse to invade Virginia? That makes as much sense as Nixon ending the Vietnam War by invading Cambodia.

Cambodia had better heroin.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

WTF, Tink??? South Carolina gives an eviction order, in which they killed no one, and the fucking Republicans use that as an excuse to invade Virginia? That makes as much sense as Nixon ending the Vietnam War by invading Cambodia.

The fight was already on regardless of the details.

It wasn’t an accident that led to the war, both sides knew it was going to happen

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Re-read your own fucking post.

Geez...does being a fake Christian ALSO require you to be dumb as a box of hammers.

nope....but it certainly comes with your idiotic persona.....

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The fight was already on regardless of the details.

It wasn’t an accident that led to the war, both sides knew it was going to happen

What fight? It was a choice by the Republican President to force the Southern States back into the Union at the point of a gun. The Republicans deliberately caused the deaths of 2% of the American population.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

What fight? It was a choice by the Republican President to force the Southern States back into the Union at the point of a gun. The Republicans deliberately caused the deaths of 2% of the American population.

It was a choice to keep the union together.

Losing 11 states which represented almost 50% of the landmass of the US would have been catastrophic

The economic impact alone would have been horrible but the North also relied on their agricultural production for food and supplies

Had the South left the entire US would have been in serious trouble and we would be wide open for a foreign invasion

 

[Dutch Uncle]

It was a choice to keep the union together.

Losing 11 states which represented almost 50% of the landmass of the US would have been catastrophic

The economic impact alone would have been horrible but the North also relied on their agricultural production for food and supplies

Had the South left the entire US would have been in serious trouble and we would be wide open for a foreign invasion

At a cost of 2% of the American population. In today’s terms, 2% equals 6.6M dead Americans.

You are supporting the Republicans in murdering 2% of the American population over profits. Why do you think lives should be sold so cheaply?

Your speculation is interesting, but unlikely. If foreigners invaded, it’s more likely Southern and Northern states would have stood together just like Britain and France stood against Germany.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

At a cost of 2% of the American population. In today’s terms, 2% equals 6.6M dead Americans.

You are supporting the Republicans in murdering 2% of the American population over profits. Why do you think lives should be sold so cheaply?

Your speculation is interesting, but unlikely. If foreigners invaded, it’s more likely Southern and Northern states would have stood together just like Britain and France stood against Germany.

So you are a supporter of slavery

 

[Dutch Uncle]

So you are a supporter of slavery

No. Figures someone who scams others over ghosts would take a leap of logic as you’ve done. Is this your feeble attempt to justify the mass murder of about 700,000 Americans?

 

[IBDaMann]

Deflection! Oh ! Jesus was God incarnate! He wrote the whole Bible!

Deflection. EVASION. Answer the question.

Wait, never mind, I'll save us all time and jump to the correct answer because you are apparently a little too slow on the uptake for my liking.

Jesus didn't write any of the New Testament. Everything was written by others who were professing Jesus' words. Ergo, Paul's words of Jesus' words were Jesus' words. Your question is answered thoroughly and gfm7175 was correct.

Paul explained to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 6:9 that Jesus stated "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, ..."

Now you can move on to the next point.

 

[IBDaMann]

They were trying to hold onto it!

The Southern States were each trying to hold onto their sovereignty in the face of tyranny.

They feared Lincoln would end it ! Numb nuts

They feared that a tyrannical Congress would end their sovereignty if they remained in the Union.

 

[IBDaMann]

... but from what I gather most historians feel that ...

Listen to you! Hilarious! Well, at least you understand why most of what you write is stupid.

Please continue to pretend that you speak for the feelings of historians because the consensus that you determine alters the past into the desired reality. Awesome!

...slavery was indeed the primary topic.

Of course, ... because they already had it ... hmmm. Yes, the South wanted to secede because they already had slavery. It makes so much sense.

Shall I presume that slavery was occurring, slavery that the south already had, and suddenly a civil war broke out, whereby the North was lulled into attacking the South?

Certainly the desire to allow slavery in the western expansion was critical to the laws the South wanted to ignore.

The South didn't want any laws imposed on them unconstitutionally, i.e. in violation of their sovereignty.

You are trying very hard to revise history.

 

[gfm7175]

I don't understand how a single man is the model for marriage.

I don't understand how you got that out of what I said.

 

[gfm7175]

Again Chapter and verse where Jesus spoke specifically on the subject of homosexuality

Again. Already provided to you.