BF2S Forums Question to the rest of the world regarding slavery.

No

When someone is forced to do something against their will, thats kidnapping.

Question? Can I walk away on my own free will?  NO!!

Kidnapping!

Slaves are bought and sold, do yard work and choirs.

If I bought some lady and kept her in my house against her will, the charge will be KIDNAPPING not slavery.

Another reason of the war is the government wanted to impose new taxes on the southern crops, the south didn't like that they were being told that all of a sudden they had to give a large portion of the profits to the government.{the start of illegal taxes.}
Slavery was a side issue of the war at the time as the south didn't want to lose their cheap labor & the north was indifferent except for progressive thinkers.
At least they didn't get exterminated like the poor Indians.

Yes, but previously you couldn't be.  You would be charged for the crimes rather than for being a terrorist.  You also assume that kidnapping and slavery are mutually exclusive.  So, the only slaves were the ones who wanted to be there?  Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.  Sex slaves are sold, from the traffickers to those who want them.  And they don't see any money because it goes straight into paying their "debt".

I have no problem with people fighting for just causes, whether that was why the civil war was fought is the issue here.  You use your conclusion to attempt to strengthen your conclusion.

By that logic, nobody is kidnapped because it's illegal.

HeavyMetalDave wrote:

Im fully convinced your all HIGH.

*I'm, you're

Regardless, I find it funny that someone called HeavyMetalDave is accusing other people of being on drugs.  So now, tell me what's wrong with my use of your logic.

for once i agree w/ bubbalo

Flecco wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

for once i agree w/ bubbalo

Quick, somebody get a picture... Queeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeck.... It's a miracle... .

yes it is.

Bubbalo wrote:

Actually, I'm pretty sure we've agreed on something before..........can't for the life of me remember what though.

well lol not much i agree w/ u that human traffiking is slavery

HeavyMetalDave wrote:

Are you HIGH!

Do you understand that this country divided and fought itself?

And the north fought the south to stop slavery!

The Northern states fought to free the slaves.

What are you talking about.  Have you read any of the post here?  Have you even read the Emancipation Proclamation?  I think you should before you start to debate what the Civil War was over.

The Civil War in America was not about slavery, it was over how much power each state had.  Most Southern states believed that the Federal Government had to much power, so they succeeded from the Union.  They formed their own government, like the Confederation of United States  (if you know what that is), which gave the states more power then the Federal government, and the states were loosely connected to each other.  For slaves to be free they did not escape to the Northern states.  They had to flee the nation.  There were Slave Hunters in the Northern States that would take slaves that ran away back to the South, and get paid for doing it.  Also, Maryland, a state in the Union, people had slaves.  Most wealthy Americans had slaves before the war, just that the South had more.  Most family's in the North only had one slave for their house, not multiple slaves like the South did. 

You ever heard of Frederick Douglass?  He was born in Maryland, but was a slave.  His "owner" freed him, and taught him how to read and write.  Here are a few sources:

http://www.nps.gov/frdo/freddoug.html
http://www.nps.gov/frdo/fdlife.htm

Another link to show that Maryland was part of the Union:

http://www.indixie.com/indixie/csa_states_map.htm

Also, as stated in my previous post, the Civil War did not free the slaves unless they joined the Army.

Kirokura wrote:

Abolished in Sweden 1335.

God damn pansy Europeans all big on your "human rights" and doing the "right thing".  How's that working out for ya, huh?  Bet you're bogged down in stupid wars in the Middle East.  Meanwhile our PM doesn't give a damn about human rights, and we're not bogged.......oh, wait.......Iraq......right.......

Wasn't Britain attacking the slaver colonies with Redcoats whilst the US was still buying?

HeavyMetalDave wrote:

Are you HIGH!

Do you understand that this country divided and fought itself?

And the north fought the south to stop slavery!

The Northern states fought to free the slaves.

the war was fought as a matter of federalism and state's rights primarily, and as a matter of congressional voting power for the states secondarily,
lincoln and others wanted to consolidate the nation's government under DC creating a nation in which the states answered to the federal government, as opposed to the states telling the fed what to do (this is the basic meaning of "confederate states of america"),
there was also a power struggle between the more industrialized states and the agricultural states in that the ag states wanted the slave population to be counted as genereal population allowing them to have more seats in the house of representatives, the industrialized states arguing that the slaves were not allowed to vote and were not subject to representation
but it all falls back to the matter of federalization, this is evidenced in part by the fact that there were non-slave states in the confederacy and there would have been more, even New York, if Lincoln had not had there governors and other legislative leaders jailed for treason
there wasn't a noble and glorious mission to end slavery, it didn't even come up until about 3 years into the war, in fact if you read Lincoln's "emancipation proclamation" carefully you will see that it saw the slaves more as property to be confiscated from the CSA like livestock and plantations, as they were getting sick of Lee handing them their asses on a regular basis and decided that if they could not defeat the CSA armies strategically they would defeat them by attacking civilian targets and burning food stores and such, this was the basic principle behind Sherman's march to the sea, avoid militia, confiscate everything (slaves included), burn what you couldn't confiscate
once the confiscated slaves made it north of the Mason-Dixon line, there was no slave trade so technically they were free

kessel! wrote:

We didn't have slavery in Canada. yay!

no, we had Manitoba and Louis Riel, we had millions of gallons of rum for the indians and made them slave to that

EDIT - the above post, true
Vancouver gets human traffic in cargo boxes all year long

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-06-20 01:48:06)