Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.xcski.com!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail From: Chris Thompson Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: Re: Lincoln's Letter to the Editor of the N,Y, Tribune Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 14:11:10 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 147 Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org Message-ID: References: <2e5n3j1u9a0pdcmpd4m78l2dssq3kns552@4ax.com> <7Ya3O.2266$gKW1.1925@fx13.iad> <%Lq3O.283$8CY1.60@fx37.iad> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89"; logging-data="89544"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.2 To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:OEzfTKKXj8M6i/vOMxtehA+kZ2E= Return-Path: X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org id 76358229870; Thu, 23 May 2024 14:10:59 -0400 (EDT) by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E5622986E for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 14:10:57 -0400 (EDT) id 93BCD7D128; Thu, 23 May 2024 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org by mod-relay.zaccari.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 753B97D121 for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 18:11:16 +0000 (UTC) id 4EF4FDC01A9; Thu, 23 May 2024 20:11:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Injection-Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 20:11:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX1+HNHztlObjg2Tm8z+ZHM8X0Mi5Ktf+acqladcZCSDpdH8JgwgeWN2i In-Reply-To: Bytes: 10209 Ron Dean wrote: > Chris Thompson wrote: >> Ron Dean wrote: >>> Chris Thompson wrote: >>>> Ron Dean wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I do not doubt that slavery was a cause of the US Civil War, but it >>>>> was President Lincoln's expressed primary objective as he wrote to >>>>> the editor of the New York Tribune was to Preserve the Union. It >>>>> was the South's fear that Lincoln would free the slaves, but it >>>>> appears, based on the letter he wrote  to the editor of the New >>>>> York newspaper, that this was a misjudgement by the South of >>>>> Lincoln and his objective. >>>>> >>>>> The institution had existed f0r over 2 centuries in the South, the >>>>> question is would there have >>>>> been war had the South _n0t_ succeeded? The succession of Carolina >>>>> followed by the attack on Ft. Sumter started the Civil War. >>>>> >>>>> I had read, believed and defended the opinion that unfair tariffs >>>>> imposed on the South was the main cause of the war, but this was >>>>> proven wrong, in spite of the cites on the net advocating this fraud. >>>>> >>>>> Lincoln's Letter to the editor of the New York Newspaper was >>>>> written 1n August 22, 1862,  ab0ut a year and a half after the >>>>> start of the War between the States: >>>>> >>>>> Picture >>>>> Mathew Brady Photographs of Civil War-Era Personalities and Scenes, >>>>> National Archives and Records Administration >>>>> Hon. Horace Greely: Executive Mansion, >>>>> Dear Sir Washington, August 22, 1862. >>>>> >>>>> 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 perceptable 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 every where could be free. Yours, >>>>> A. LINCOLN >>>>> >>>>> http://lincolnandemancipation.weebly.com/letter-to-horace-greeley-1862.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> This really isn't difficult. I fail to see how you have so many >>>> problems with it. >>>> >>>> Yes, Lincoln's goal was to preserve the Union. >>>> Why did the Union need preserving? >>>> Because slave states seceded. (Not "succeeded".) >>>> Why did those states secede? >>>> Slavery. >>>> Don't take my word for it. >>>> Look up the Articles of Secession. Read the Cornerstone speech. >>>> It's all written down. >>>> >>> You are right. This was the South's reason for the secession, but >>> secession was due to a misunderstanding of Lincoln's objective. This >>> based upon Lincoln's expressed words as to his objective in his >>> letter almost 2 years after the start of the war. But maybe this was >>> his immediate objective not his ultimate purpose. But would this not >>> be disingenuous? >>> >>> This is not to say that Lincoln approved slavery, he preferred >>> freedom for all people. Did you bother to read the Letter to to the >>> editor by Lincoln? >>> >> >> You have been shown how much in error you are with all of these >> ridiculous assertions. You keep repeating Lost Cause revisionist lies. >> For someone who claims to "not have a dog in this fight" you're >> clinging desperately to any shred of Lost Cause garbage you can grasp. >> I don't think anyone who's read your posts believes you aren't >> invested somehow in whitewashing the south's actions. >> >> As to your most recent claim- that the south misunderstood Lincoln's >> objectives. Nonsense. Utter rubbish. There was never a >> misunderstanding about slavery. Read the discussions of slavery from >> the 1787 Constitutional Convention. A fair number of delegates wanted >> abolition immediately- most notably Benjamin Franklin and Alexander >> Hamilton. But the Constitution would never have been ratified if it >> ended slavery right then. The southern states had to be placated, but >> the northern states did win concessions- the end of the international >> slave trade in 1808 for instance. And even some slaveholding delegates >> realized that slavery had to be abolished eventually, and sooner >> better than later. George Mason was one of these. >> >> So there was never and misunderstanding on the south's part about >> slavery. The abolitionists had only grown more influential and >> numerous in the years since the convention. The south was terrified of >> slave uprisings- that's why they responded to John Brown's actions so >> viciously (and ever since have portrayed him as a lunatic, rather than >> a (mostly) righteous and dedicated man. >> >> So once again you are just wrong about this. But I'm pretty certain >> you will repeat Lost Cause junk some more, and maybe come up with some >> new garbage, because for some reason you're an apologist for slavers. >> That's pretty repugnant, you now. >> >> Chris >> > You've twisted what I wrote to mean something I did not - This is > dishonest You are corrupt! I twisted nothing. I took what you wrote to its only logical conclusion. Your own words take you there. > So, According to you, Lincoln was a liar! > No, according to me, you are the liar. > I'm done with this topic! > You've made your case and proven yourself an apologist for slavers and rebels. I agree- there's nothing left for you to accomplish in this thread. ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========