Opinion of Robert E. Lee

[SPC]

anti-slavery secessionist general = freedom fighter.

[SPC]

anti-slavery secessionist general = freedom fighter.

All of the secessionists were fighting for slavery, SPC, whether or not they liked to admit it. Robert E. Lee, unlike many of the poor, ignorant conscripts he sent to their deaths, actually chose to fight for it though.

Don't act like the Union didn't have the draft, and at least in the political sense, it was the South fighting against political enslavement.

[SPC]

anti-slavery secessionist general = freedom fighter.

All of the secessionists were fighting for slavery, SPC, whether or not they liked to admit it. Robert E. Lee, unlike many of the poor, ignorant conscripts he sent to their deaths, actually chose to fight for it though.

Don't act like the Union didn't have the draft, and at least in the political sense, it was the South fighting against political enslavement.

I don't pretend to not support conscription. When a country is threatened, then they should be able to draft their citizens to defend the country. And I don't buy this "political enslavement" garbage; politically enslaved to do what? Treat people as human-beings rather than property? And if you want to talk about political enslavement, the South did their part in pushing their pro-slavery policies on the north, through the Fugitive Slave Act, and things like the Crittenden and Corwin amendments.

What is the point of defending one's country if one already lives under a tyranny, one where the state can send you to die? They are politically enslaved to the United States government, thanks to the Union victory. I don't deny that the South pushed pro-slavery policies on the North (BTW, Lincoln was the one who sponsored the Corwin Amendment). However, apparently unbeknownst to you, by seceding, the South made it so the North wouldn't have to put up with political enslavement. Thus, an independent South meant that the Fugutive Slave Act wouldn't be enforced, and that the North wouldn't have to put up with the South's slavery anymore. Also, it is funny that you support the draft and at the same time object to the idea that humans are property, since apparently when someone can send you to a battlefield at your life's risk far away from your home, you can still own yourself. Good luck explaining that one.

[SPC]

anti-slavery secessionist general = freedom fighter.

All of the secessionists were fighting for slavery, SPC, whether or not they liked to admit it. Robert E. Lee, unlike many of the poor, ignorant conscripts he sent to their deaths, actually chose to fight for it though.

Don't act like the Union didn't have the draft, and at least in the political sense, it was the South fighting against political enslavement.

I don't pretend to not support conscription. When a country is threatened, then they should be able to draft their citizens to defend the country. And I don't buy this "political enslavement" garbage; politically enslaved to do what? Treat people as human-beings rather than property? And if you want to talk about political enslavement, the South did their part in pushing their pro-slavery policies on the north, through the Fugitive Slave Act, and things like the Crittenden and Corwin amendments.

What is the point of defending one's country if one already lives under a tyranny, one where the state can send you to die? They are politically enslaved to the United States government, thanks to the Union victory. I don't deny that the South pushed pro-slavery policies on the North (BTW, Lincoln was the one who sponsored the Corwin Amendment). However, apparently unbeknownst to you, by seceding, the South made it so the North wouldn't have to put up with political enslavement. Thus, an independent South meant that the Fugutive Slave Act wouldn't be enforced, and that the North wouldn't have to put up with the South's slavery anymore. Also, it is funny that you support the draft and at the same time object to the idea that humans are property, since apparently when someone can send you to a battlefield at your life's risk far away from your home, you can still own yourself. Good luck explaining that one.

You and I have different definitions of tyranny, obviously. Conscription is never a good thing, and obviously not a goal of a democratic government, but sometimes some freedoms must be temporarily taken away to preserve the state, so that it can continue to protect freedom and natural rights after the conflict is over.

So, you wouldn't consider it tyranny if I had the power to take you away from your job, family, and friends and send you to do the work of my choice that happens to have a high mortality rate? Also, LOL at the state protecting freedom and natural rights.