-Caveat Lector-
Lord, have mercy, lady.
Shall I really go through your noise, what is your point?
[1]
Hawk is offering classic apologist argumentation. So are you by the way.
So there were black slave owners. That does does not mean slavery is/was
wrong? And your argumenyt is racist.
[2]
Oh, Carlene, so what is apropriate, let some apologist tell lies backed up by
his own personal interpretations of scripture?
[3]
How noble and hypocrotical
[4]
So you want to ba a slave? Again your answers are racist.
[5]
Weren't we benevolent. We did it for their own good. Again, you want to be a
slave?
[6]
Nice, massa, . . . I guess if ya get raped nicely, It's OK.
[7] I am sure the courage the gentleman showd was 'instilled' into him by the
institution of slavery. You are getting close to being a gooberette.
[8] Again, ya want to be a slave?
[9] Invoking, Lincoln for what reason?
[10] Well, then that makes it right. . .
[11] Standing up for man and god.
[12] Yes slavery was wrong then and now. Options - lick the boot or stand
tall
[13] Hawk is a hypocrite for espousing supernatural authority for the
institution of slavery for chauvanistic reason, while stating that he wouldn't
want to be a slaveholder or slave, whilst particpating in said supernaturals'
'universe'.
[14] "separate but equal" was unconstitutional and void 'ab intio'.
[15] Read it. Show me . . .
[16] The nature of the day is not legality. Separate but equal was a sham and
unconstitutional.
In a message dated 1/13/99 2:17:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
>> An apologist for slavery and . . . You may think what you want, but do you
>> realize your rationalzations are inhumane.
>
>[1]"""""""No...I don't see him apologizing...and like I noted in a previous
>post...there were black slave owers and there were white slaves as well...but
that
>tends to be over looked...look at my other post for references in regard to
this.
>
>h
>
>> do not personally approve of slavery. Seems you would finally get that
>> through your head.
>
>I don't either, and I have the sense to realize that was acceptable than is
not
>necessarily so now....and things that are acceptable now will not be
acceptable
>in
>the future. You have different societies and different mores...will find a
>reference if you really need one....and you can not justify or condemn a
>society..the past on the mores and beliefs of the now.
>
>> Have you ever heard of the word hypocrite?
>
>[2]"""""""Sorry to get in the middle here..but this post...oh well...did you
ever
>hear of the term.....never mind...not appropriate on the list.
>
>>
>>
>> I do not say that "owning a human being is a humane idea" -- but neither is
it
>> an inhumane act.
>
>> personally do not wish to own a slave nor be a slave.
>> -----
>
>>
>> Gosh, again, how noble. Gee, you wouldn't wish to be a slave.
>
>>>>[3]Didn't this gentleman also say he did not want to own slaves as well,
>
>> Which I will stand-up again, and again and say -you are wrong.
>> [4]>>>>I am sorry don't understand what he is wrong about.
>> ===================================
>>>Blacks are deprived ?
>> http://memory.loc.gov/
>> gi-
bin/query/D?wpa:8:./temp/~ammem_DgOA::@@@mdb=cwar,fsaall,vv,detr,wtc,dag,gotts
cho,horyd,nfor,papr,wpa,aap,bdsbib,nawbib,consrvbib,varstg,presp,cowellbib,cal
bkbib,suffrg,pan,gmd,mcc,toddbib,mgw,hlaw,bbpix,award97,ncr,musdibib,alad,lhbu
mbib,hh,bbcards,mussm,rbpebib,raelbib
>>
>> http://e.usia.gov/education/amstudy/hislink.htm
>
>[5]""""Do you really know what there options were ? If they stayed in Africa
what
>do
>you think would of happened ?? Many times being a slave was safer than other
>alternatives at the time.
>
>[6]""""Look at the following article and see what is all provided....I know
your mind
>is set one way, but look at the other side of the coin.
>
>""""Here is an article you might enjoy...and it is documentated.
>
>"""Atlanta Journal and Constitution, Thurs. Nov. 26,
>1998
>> SecD-14
>>
>>"""" "Slaves' descendants honor slavemaster of ancestors"
>
>"""" "Defying political correctness, decendants of Panola County, Texas,
>slaves are dedicating a historical marker to the slaveholder who brought
their
>families here. .....The marker will be dedicated to Spearman "Major" Holland
>who brought slaves to East Texas in the 1840's.....
>>
>
>"""""Holland Quarters, a black community four miles north of Carthage in
>Panola> County on land once used as a plantation. has been home to
generations
>descended> from Holland's slaves. ..... Research has shown that Holland was
know
>for
> generosity toward his slaves...> According to Barbara Jefferson-Bonner, a
Panola
>County historian. She stated> "He was a great guy. He cared for his slaves
in
>a
>unique kind of way.
>When> Spearman left here, hye left his thousands of acres to slaves, who were
> ancestors of mine." .....During the Civil War, Spearman served as a captain
in
>the Texas
>State> Troops, 4th Brigade. After the war he moved away and left the land to
the
>> slaves.......His brother was known to have bought slaves and then free
>them.
>>
>
>[7]"""""" One of these freed slaves would go on to be awarded the Medal of
Honor
>while> serving in the Union army during the war......
>>
>>"""""" (No political comment is intended here, just to share an interesting
>story.)
>>
>
>[8]""""""I can find other such stories...it was also prefered for one to be a
slave
>than to be transported back to Liberia....want documentation on that I can
get
>it.
>
>[9]""""""By the way, transporting the blacks back to Africa was a plan of
Lincolns.
>
>[10]""""""and please note my other post, the north, many northern states had
laws
>against black residency in the state.
>
>> >> Your contention that owning people, because of interpretations of
>> scripture, a valid human endeavour is ill-founded.
>
>"""""Is it ??? I don't know...is this opinion or fact...everything I have
said
>so
>far I can documentate, can you documentate that this is ill-founded.
>
>>
>> Again, you are a hypocrite. In "desirable' to you mean worth doing,
advisable
>> or is it wrong to do?
>>
>
>"""""Huh ?
>
>> ==============================
>> >
>> >
>> >> Slavery is wrong, is known by the fact of the actions of slavery, not by
>> any vaunted scribblings.
>
>[11]"""""what are the..what were the options at that time...again there were
black
>slave holders and white slaves. Their were slaves in the north, but they
weren't
>freed with the Emancipation
>Proclamation, none were.
>
>>
>> I was paraprhasing some wise words from a wise man. 'By the fruits, ye
shall
>> know the tree"
>>
>> Slavery is wrong from the actions of slavery. Simple.
>
>
[12]"""Huh ? Is it, was it at the time that they had it, again what other
options
>were open at that time.
>
>> The social rules were racist.
>>
>> >Of course they were.... Do you think anyone is denying that? Would you
say
>> that>there are NO racist tendencies in yourself? Or that racism is to this
day
>> as
>> >>rampant or more than ever before? Or that minorities are not themselves
>> racists?
>> >
>> """"""Yes...ran into that bout a month ago...at Hardees with a young girl
around
>> two, white girl, she turned around and saw a lady, skinny and blacker than
a
>ace
>> of spades...well the little girl threw closer to me, and the lady said
something
>> about her not seeing a darkee before...I didn't say anything, but her
brother
>is
>> black...but it was still the other person that brought up the issue.
>
>>
>> If you wish to 'ban' the use of thebiblein determining whether something
is
>> "right" or "wrong," then don't use it in YOUR>arguments. If you do want to
use
>> it, you're in a heap o' trouble, boy....and>I>>look forward to the debate.
>
>IF it can provide history like most of the old Testament can, as a historical
book
>it should be valid
>
>>
>> >
>> You are just a hypocrite.
>
>[13]""""""Please document why he is a hypocrite...lot of name
calling...proof..and
>if
>you want to call a person name you should say I think you are a
>hypocrite...otherwise you are stating a fact and he can haul your butt into
court.
>
>
>
>> ike I said, I was raised in the South, home of gentlemen/women and racism
>> fostered by an illegal social and political system.
>
>[14]""""""It wasn't illegal at the time, separate but equal was quite legal.
and it
>was legal according to the constitution....two major references slaves were
>counted as 3/5 of a person for representation...and such. Second one..second
>reference said bringing slaves into the country
>was legal till 1808.
>
>[15]"""""See the Constitution.
>
>> >It was not LEGAL. It was a sham.
>>
>> The Constitution of the United States.
>
>[16]""""""NOT !! Separate but equal was the nature of the day.....sitting on
the bus,
>having differnent rest rooms , bubblers and the like. That was
constitutional
>
>Carlene
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
