Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Arkansas State Rep: ‘If Slavery Were So God-Awful, Why Didn’t Jesus Or Paul Condemn It?’ [View all]freshwest
(53,661 posts)149. Confederate philosophy, read the dreck (emboldening font mine) and weep:
Last edited Wed Sep 4, 2013, 08:26 PM - Edit history (1)
But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted.The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day.
Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail.
That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal...
As I have stated, the truth of this principle may be slow in development, as all truths are and ever have been, in the various branches of science. It was so with the principles announced by Galileo it was so with Adam Smith and his principles of political economy. It was so with Harvey, and his theory of the circulation of the blood. It is stated that not a single one of the medical profession, living at the time of the announcement of the truths made by him, admitted them. Now, they are universally acknowledged. May we not, therefore, look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgment of the truths upon which our system rests? It is the first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society.
Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite; then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is best, not only for the superior, but for the inferior race, that it should be so.
It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances, or to question them. For His own purposes, He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made "one star to differ from another star in glory." The great objects of humanity are best attained when there is conformity to His laws and decrees, in the formation of governments as well as in all things else.
Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders "is become the chief of the corner" the real "corner-stone" in our new edifice. I have been asked, what of the future? It has been apprehended by some that we would have arrayed against us the civilized world.
I care not who or how many they may be against us, when we stand upon the eternal principles of truth, if we are true to ourselves and the principles for which we contend, we are obliged to, and must triumph...
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=76
This is where the conservatives began calling liberals insane, by their logic. That is what it boils down to, accept inequality as the basis of society or not.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
188 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Arkansas State Rep: ‘If Slavery Were So God-Awful, Why Didn’t Jesus Or Paul Condemn It?’ [View all]
Galraedia
Oct 2012
OP
Here we go again, with the supposed third party confirmations that Jesus really existed.
stopbush
Oct 2012
#103
You are right, a dude named Jesus did live, but he was just an average carpenter
snooper2
Oct 2012
#116
Nonsense. There's no proof that Paul actually existed. If you have such proof, produce it.
stopbush
Oct 2012
#51
If for those who don't believe in Jesus, the guy was a pretty admirable person
LynneSin
Oct 2012
#28
Yes, the Founders' ideas are unknown to most Americans. The GOPTeaParty rewrote history.
freshwest
Oct 2012
#60
I'd like to put in a pitch for the Book of Job, which is great in a black-humor
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#163
Because they worship evil and Jesus doesn't qualify, but Paul most certainly does.
Vidar
Oct 2012
#84
What's funny about Paul is that most of "his" fundamentalist writings weren't written by him.
antigone382
Oct 2012
#88
They like Paul because he was a cranky bald dude who hated sex and feared women.
Ken Burch
Oct 2012
#175
Paul wrote the Epistles, converted the Gentiles, and is historically more significant than Jesus.
Bucky
Oct 2012
#186
therefore "IF being gay were so god-awful, why didn't Jesus or Paul condemn it"? nt
msongs
Oct 2012
#5
Er well um not everything they said was meant to be taking literally
4th law of robotics
Oct 2012
#143
Am not a believer in the rapture, however, if there really is one I hope God takes
southernyankeebelle
Oct 2012
#10
Me, I want to come back as a flea so I can bite rich Republicans in the ass. I would like to
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#164
I remember when H. W. denounced David Duke when he was the Republican nominee for LA governor.
Mike Daniels
Oct 2012
#12
Dear Second Stone:"Jesus was absolutely clear everyone was to be treated as a loved one"
Manifestor_of_Light
Oct 2012
#58
The Republicans are going nuts in trying out-crazy each other in Arkansas. From yesterday:
Whovian
Oct 2012
#34
Leaving us the problem of figuring out when he was right and when he was wrong.
FiveGoodMen
Oct 2012
#38
State GOP pulls funds for now, but will start funneling money once the furor dies down.
bullwinkle428
Oct 2012
#43
The Abrahamic religions are flawed and inconsistent & contradict themselves.
Manifestor_of_Light
Oct 2012
#145
he's seen too many of those african cartoons boiling the missionaries in the pot
newspeak
Oct 2012
#142
Interesting analogue (precedent to Thanksgiving): would the lives of native Americans
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#165
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. You ignorant Arkansas fuckwad.
Lint Head
Oct 2012
#55
You know, this is gooing TOO f@cking far....black folks chafed under the lash
Ecumenist
Oct 2012
#68
this man really wants his state prison slave labor chain gangs back..with him as the whip cracker
Sunlei
Oct 2012
#76
Hmmm, lets see, they condemned adultery, can I watch while you stone Gingrich
still_one
Oct 2012
#79
They probably did until Rome rewrote Christianity in the mold of their slave state
Coyotl
Oct 2012
#93
Then you've got the GOP in Arkansas saying that there should be a Death Penalty
blkmusclmachine
Oct 2012
#109
This guy is the pioneer. In four years, expect a pro-slavery plank in the Republican platform.
tclambert
Oct 2012
#111
At which point, I think we can realistically expect to see Abraham Lincoln
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#166
The 'abolition' of slavery had a lot to do with things Biblical. Radical
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#167
Saying that John Brown and the radical abolitionists 'reinterpreted' or 'misread' the
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#178
As I understand it, Brown found Biblical warrant for abolitionism in the
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#181
Fundamentalists can and will sink lower than their imagined Satan ever would.
FiveGoodMen
Oct 2012
#122
The slavery we had in the US was completely different than that of those days. For one thing back
jwirr
Oct 2012
#121
Dante reserved the lowest circle of his Inferno to the hypocrites. That
coalition_unwilling
Oct 2012
#168
Soooooo . . . . would Mauch be cool with Jesus being the slave of Herrod?
no_hypocrisy
Oct 2012
#128
Because then, shit bag, slavery was common place and acceptable...
and-justice-for-all
Oct 2012
#140
Because they were ignorant, superstitious goatherders, that's why.
Manifestor_of_Light
Oct 2012
#146
I guess this is final proof that the neanderthals did mate with real humans.
truthisfreedom
Oct 2012
#162