He was lacking personal integrity in the sence that he knew that what the south was doing was worng but he went ahead and worked with them anyway.

Lee had the Honor to defend his home no matter what I rest my case.

Nah I dont think so

quote:

Idiom:
honor bound

Under an obligation enforced by the personal integrity of the one obliged: I was honor bound to admit that she had done the work.

this of course according to http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Honor

It seems to support my opinion much more than yours. Personal integrity seems to be lacking where Lee is concerned.

Loyalty above beliefs = Honor a word which almost seems lost today.

Loyalty above beliefs = Sheep

quote:

Originally posted by Hydrok:
First of all source it, and then tell me something about a man that goes against his morals and beliefs to be a political servant.

It wasent about politics it was about him fighting for his home Lee was in the Union army but resigned because of his loyalty to Virginia i believe anyone can admire that devotion or you can demean it whatever i'm not telling you what to think and here is your source
"With all my devotion to the Union and the feeling of loyalty and duty of an American citizen, I have not been able to make up my mind to raise my hand against my relatives, my children, my home. I have therefore resigned my commission in the Army, and save in defense of my native State, with the sincere hope that my poor services may never be needed, I hope I may never be called on to draw my sword....." Lee in a letter to his sister, April 20, 1861
Robert Edward Lee

First of all source it, and then tell me something about a man that goes against his morals and beliefs to be a political servant.

Something you may not know about Robert E. Lee:
Robert E. Lee was AGAINST secession and slavery. Yet he had the honor to fight for his homeland and lead an army that fought against what he believed and i deeply respect him for that. In ancient times he would have been a hero to the enemy.

quote:

Originally posted by zedfez:
The south did not "legally" secced from the union. If you look in the constitution there is no "I wanna leave" clause. A state can't (legally) leave the union any more than the senate can kick one out. Plus, since when can the united states only go to war when a law is broken? Nations go to war to protect their own intrests. The civil war was no great injustice against the south. They opened themselves up to forign agression by declaring independance.

The 10th Amendment states that any power not delegated to the Federal government by the states, and not prohibited to the states by the Constitution remained a right of the states or the people. The Constitution is silent on secession. And the states never delegated to the Federal government any power to suppress secession, therefore seccession remained a reserved right of the states. This is mostly why James Buchann allowed the first 7 states to secede peacefully.

The states of Virginia, New York and Rhode Island included a clause in their ratifications of the Constitution stating they had the right to withdraw from the Union if the new government should become oppressive. It was on this basis they aceded to the Union. Virginia cited this provision of its ratification when seceding in 1861. But since the Constitution is based upon the principle of co-equality -- all the states are equal in dignity and rights, and no state can have more rights than the other -- the right of secession cited by these three states must extend equally to all the states.

William Lloyd Garrison, one of the most prominent abolitionists in America, actually passed a resolution through his American Anti-Slavery Society insisting that it was the duty of each member to work to dissolve the American Union. (It read, "Resolved, That the Abolitionists of this country should make it one of the primary objects of this agitation to dissolve the American Union") He held this view in part because the North, Once seperated from the South, would no longer be morally tainted by its association with slavery ("No Union with slaveholders!" he declared), but also because he believed Northern secession would unermine Southern slavery. If the Northern states were a seperate country, the North would be under no Constitutional obligation to return runaway slaves to their masters. The Northern states would then become a haven for runaway slaves. The enforcement cost of Southern slavery would become prohibitive, and the institution would collapse.

William Rawle, a Philadelphia lawyer of Federalist sympathy and no friend of salvery, conceded in A View of the Constitution (1825) that under certain conditions it would be perfectly legal for a state to withdraw from the Union. Rawle's text was used to teach constitutional law at West Point from 1825 through 1840.

The list of authorities that supported the principle that American states had the legal right to secede is impressive. Taken together, they amount to very serious evidence of the existence of such a right: Thomas Jefferson; John Quincy Adams; William Lloyd Garrison; William Rawle; and Alexis de Tocqueville, the great French observer of American affairs. Add to this that the New England states threatened secession several times in the early nineteenth century (especially New York), and the result is practically unavoidable: The legitimacy of secession, although not held unanimously, had been taken for granted in all sections of the country for years by the time of the war.

--Signed,
Williamson
American Civil War re-enactor, author of related topics, and general amateur authority on the nature of the American Civil War

wahahahahahahahah REVIVE!

what do you guys think about civil war reenactments? I'm thinking about joining a US Infantry group out if Bent's Fort shortly

The south did not "legally" secced from the union. If you look in the constitution there is no "I wanna leave" clause. A state can't (legally) leave the union any more than the senate can kick one out. Plus, since when can the united states only go to war when a law is broken? Nations go to war to protect their own intrests. The civil war was no great injustice against the south. They opened themselves up to forign agression by declaring independance.

exactly

states rights was the fundemental cause for the civil war, but it was manifest in slavery



the average white southerner didnt think "those damn northerners and theiranti states right jargon"

he thought

"those damn northerners and their john brown abolishionism"



the states rights issue came to a front in slavery

Slavery was not the "reason" for the Civil War. The South wanted strong state's rights and the most glaring example of this was, of course, slavery. The union believed that it should be a "federal" law to abolish slavery in new states coming about, but the South believed it was up to the states to decide.

Compare it to now. If you could have state militias. The "Northern" states want abortion to be legal in every state, and wants the federal government to pass a law requiring all states make it legal. "Southern" states do not want it to be legal, so they fight for the ability for states to decide whether they legalize abortion or not.

It isn't about the issue, it's about who has the right to enforce it. The issue is just the backdrop for the war.

Nonetheless, had there been no slavery, there would not have been a war. There would be no moral division between the states and the federal government.

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
no I haven't but the orginal intenet of the civil war was not to free slaves it was to preserve the union

wrong, again. That was the north's agenda. The slave issue is what tore appart the union, again, in the first place. Therefore, the war was inherentally about slavery.

no I haven't but the orginal intenet of the civil war was not to free slaves it was to preserve the union

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
north the war wasn't over slavery the main purpose of the American Civil was was to keep the union united, slaves became a factor late in the war

No. wrong. Slave power broke the union up in the first place, or have you forgotten that?

north the war wasn't over slavery the main purpose of the American Civil was was to keep the union united, slaves became a factor late in the war

quote:

beacsue your reminding the rest of the US that you came and took the Confederate States of America from it's rightful owners who succeded legally from the union

I still don't understand how it happened. About 1% of the white population woned slaves, but they could still hold a massive and terrible war over something from which they would not benefit. It was positively repulsive. The entire southern system of economics and society needed to be seriously raped until it bled out the mouth. The southern lords, and yes, they were fuedal lords in the mideval sense, did nothing but work their laborers and live in the lap of luxury. Southern culture was possessed by the ability to do absolutely nothing, and therefore we have little to speak of from antebellum southern high-society to add to our culture in the form of higher-educational systems, scientific study, art, literature, or architecture, unless it applied to the ostentation of the personal dwelling.
So we have a pathetic attempt of a stuck up bunch of southern lords trying to perpetuate their cruel system of servitude. Wow. How far had they come from the days when knights rode in armor? Absolutely disgusting and dishonorable. I'm even more suprised that when the Emancipation Proclimation became known to the general slave population, that the slaves didn't kill the sons of bitches who were keeping them in fetters. I know I would have been the first to empty my "mistress'" jewelry chest as I booted her off a veranda.

I notice now that the south has taken over the country, and we are walking the primrose path to Tartarus.

I live in south. I can't say that Union.But i think there is no harm In flying the Confed. flag. I see it like a memorial, to those who fought the north to protect their beliefs.

Hey I am from Ohio and I love the Civil War. I was a little freaked when I read that Ohio has more KKK groups... which I do not think is true. I am going to re-enact for the Confederates because I think that it would be funner, not because of the issues... I am a fifer and I just know those songs...
Ok well i really would like people to give me any locations of re-enactments in Ohio please