Byrd Man

World in Revolution: 1861

Pepperm1nts said
"How can I defend myself against a drone if I don't have my .22???"

Don't forget about that heat-seeking Stinger missile... used for hunting purposes, of course.

World in Revolution: 1861

solamelike said
Ok you need a starting point but surely you build off it according to modern politics and society?For instance the second amendment, why is everyone so pissy in just updating it. Maybe make it easier to understand and more specific. Or do they protest because they prefer it to be vague?

Guns are ingrained in the US culture, for better or worse. The Second Amendment, like the Third one that prohibited soldier quartering in US, was done to prevent the UK from coming back to finish the US off. The idea of a militia and citizen soldiers is one that a lot of Americans strongly identify with. I think a lot of citizens, and maybe even the founders, take the Second Amendment as the citizen's check on the government. A government is less likely to force a heavily armed citizenry into doing something they view as being tyrannical.

World in Revolution: 1861

solamelike said
Why is the constitution such a big deal?Shouldn't laws be made according to the modern day or am I missing something?Isn't it like if we still quoted the Magna Carta in the UK.

The constitution is the foundation of our government, like the UK's constitution deciding the roles of the monarchy and parliament. It's the basis that your government build off of.

World in Revolution: 1861

Before it get into a religion debate in here, surprise George Washington!

World in Revolution: 1861

Pepperm1nts said
A lot of people are often afraid to say it, or think of it as unimaginable, but... The Founding Fathers were human beings. They made mistakes. They had flaws. Some of them were hypocrites. What's on the constitution is, for the most part great, but not divine law. Nor is it undeniably correct when it comes to every matter, especially some of the things we face in modern times that the found fathers couldn't have possibly imagined we'd ever have to deal with.

[2]

Plus they left it vague for future generations. It's obvious when you read the part about the President, when they pretty just said "the president should do what George Washington did during the war" No way they could see the huge national government the President would have to be the executive of. Plus, their original stipulations of congressional district expansion would mean that the House would be like 5,000 members by now.

World in Revolution: 1861

Dedonus said
Let's not forget that even with the abolishing of slavery, the former slaves were still second class citizens for a very long time. Jim Crow laws, segregation, etc. I will admit that the North wasn't untainted either. However, I would like to stop before this blows up into an argument.

It's not too much of an argument, we're all pretty much agreeing and agreeing to disagree. It took a 100 years and the Voters Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act for the policies Lincoln and Reconstruction set out to accomplish to be enacted. Abraham Lincoln freed black people, but Lyndon Johnson opened the voter's booth to them.

World in Revolution: 1861

Yeah, everyone forgets that one of the slave states in the Union was Delaware. They forget because it's Delaware.

World in Revolution: 1861

Pasta Sentient said
The argument has always strongly been that even though the North was morally correct; they were constitutionally wrong. I'm neutral on the issue. Personally from my study of history during this time period, Slavery could have been abolished peacefully had cooler heads prevailed. It would have lasted longer most likely, but it would have been abolished without all those deaths. Essentially its just looking at the trends. Slaves were already running away during this Time period. The economic sustainability of it was decreasing. Other States could have 'embargoed' the Slave states...Hindsight is 20/20 though.

You have a point, but don't forget the CSA seceded first as a knee-jerk reaction to Lincoln's election. They just assumed he would try to abolish slavery as their president, and they were probably right but they fired the first shots. But we could be here all day debating the topic to no avail.

World in Revolution: 1861

The UK got rid of slavery and came up with a much better solution: they just killed all the black and brown people they encountered in other countries. EDIT: sarcasm, obviously! Just wanted to make that abundantly clear.

World in Revolution: 1861

If I get a shitty roll and George McClellan is elected, so help me fucking god...

Although, I think with both Grant and Sherman within spitting distance of Charleston and more people becoming in favor of abolition I think I'd have to get a really bad roll to have Lincoln lose.