Civil War arguments

[Peter666]

It is not morally justifiable to have a civil war over slavery unless slaves were being slaughtered themselves, which they were not.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
It is not morally justifiable to have a civil war over slavery unless slaves were being slaughtered themselves, which they were not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know you are making an argument according to catholic teachings on just war, and that the means/casualties must be proportionate to the injustice to be fought over. But the enslavement of human beings in fact slaughters their dignity as children of God. Furthermore, defrauding a laborer of his just wages, which is certainly the case here, is one of the sins that "cries out to heaven for vengence".

And you might read my earlier posts in this thread with quotes by Lincoln that involve God's judgement on slavery.

[Peter666]

Having 600,000 good men killed over perceived unjust wages and "human dignity" is still not justifiable. This is especially in light of the fact that slavery around the world was in its dying stages. Furthermore, the imprudent war of Northern aggression, a violation of the Constitution led to many other great evils such as:

- the destruction of a morally superior agricultural society by a morally inferior industrialized society

- a modern conception and undertaking of total war as shown by Sherman's march

- plus the rise of racist organizations such as the KKK post war

The sum total of the evil effect that came out of the Civil War is completely disproportionate to any good that came out of it. This was shrewdly perceived by Pope Pius IX who recognized the Confederacy for the legitimate government that it was.

[peritonlogon]

[ QUOTE ]
Having 600,000 good men killed over perceived unjust wages and "human dignity" is still not justifiable. This is especially in light of the fact that slavery around the world was in its dying stages. Furthermore, the imprudent war of Northern aggression, a violation of the Constitution led to many other great evils such as:

- the destruction of a morally superior agricultural society by a morally inferior industrialized society

- a modern conception and undertaking of total war as shown by Sherman's march

- plus the rise of racist organizations such as the KKK post war

The sum total of the evil effect that came out of the Civil War is completely disproportionate to any good that came out of it. This was shrewdly perceived by Pope Pius IX who recognized the Confederacy for the legitimate government that it was.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a joke?

[Peter666]

Yeah, a very funny one. Either contribute of stick your head back in your ass.

[peritonlogon]

I was serious.... and I still don't know.... was it a joke?

[BluffTHIS!]

Peter, you are really losing your grip. You place 600,000 dead versus the millions enslaved and who also often were treated harshly or killed at the whim of their owners. You posit that an agricultural society is morally superior (WTF?). And you attribute the rise of the KKK which oppressed and lynched blacks as an evil worse than the enslavement of those black slaves. All this shows that your value system and anlystical skills are in need of adjustment.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
Peter, you are really losing your grip. You place 600,000 dead versus the millions enslaved and who also often were treated harshly or killed at the whim of their owners. You posit that an agricultural society is morally superior (WTF?). And you attribute the rise of the KKK which oppressed and lynched blacks as an evil worse than the enslavement of those black slaves. All this shows that your value system and anlystical skills are in need of adjustment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously his argument is a poor one...

Still, can you defend the "two wrongs make a right" case? That being mass enslavement (and, of course, death) through consciption, as a means of abolishing the other people's enslavement.

Again, I don't seem to understand why you think America is different than other places in the world, where slavery ended peacefully. It merely requires a paradigm shift (and even a minor one is likely to end such an egregious practice).

[BluffTHIS!]

Conscription is no less valid an action for a nation to take in this example than if it were under attack from another. The federal government was protecting its black citizens.

And as I have said before, only if seccession had not happened was there a reasonable chance of slavery being abolished. With the South left to itself, there was no reasonable such expectation because of the political dominance of the slave owning aristocracy and the likelihood that even poorer non-slave owning southerners would not relish the prospect of so many blacks being freed (KKK after the war shows this).

[Peter666]

- How many slaves were simply murdered at the whim of their owners?

- If you use Catholic morality as a basis for argument, which you always do, then surely you should be aware of the Catholic land movement and moral inferiority of an industrial state, the same type of industrial state whose injustices lead to communism

- the historical KKK is merely an inordinate response to the injustices legitimately felt by southerners, it would not exist today of those grievances were handled correctly

- there is no response to the total war concept initiated by the North on the South, a modern American military precedent making its way felt all the way to the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

- And just the whole notion of being able to declare war on nations whom you feel morally superior over, despite the fact that you are breaking moral law itself in doing so: a modern example being the invasion of Iraq.

Here's a hypothetical question: if Russia were to outlaw abortion, and then nuke parts of the US and invade others because abortion here is legal, whose side would you fight on?