GDG- Eman Proc & the value of a slave

[Dave Glorioso]

This conversation is very circular and nonproductive
Lets agree on following:
If there was no such thing as border states, Lincoln would have freed all the slaves in 1862.
Lincoln would probably have not allowed expansion of slavery in West.
The south seceded due to slavery and racism- if don't believe that read the secessionist papers.
There was a battle at Gettysburg and a subsequent Gettysburg address that made a connection between that battle and ending slavery.
There was a civil war that had alot to do with slavery and for goodness sake ended slavery.
And with that, Dennis 
PLEASE HOOK AND END THIS CONVERSATION

Dave

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 3, 2012, at 9:40 PM, ATMackeyJr at aol.com wrote:

> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> 
> 
> In a message dated 1/3/2012 9:33:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> CWMHTours at aol.com writes:
> 
> Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
> 
> But basically Linkn said that the slaves were  property and the  Federal 
> gov 
> decided that in areas of rebellion that  this property became  "free".
> -------------------------
> No.  Lincoln said the slaves were a source of labor for the  rebels.  In 
> other words, they were people doing work.  They worked on  fortifications and 
> they worked in the fields bringing in the crops, work that,  if they were 
> not there, would be done by someone who was now on the fighting  line.
> 
> Since your entire argument is based on the false assumption that Lincoln  
> said slaves were property just like an inanimate object, then your entire  
> argument is flawed.
> 
> The EP was neither insane nor stupid.
> 
> And you should learn to spell "Lincoln." If for no other reason, it won't  
> make you look bad.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Al Mackey
> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com -to unsubscribe
> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>