John Calhoun

[OpnDownfall]

True enough I am not the scholar of Locke as Hanny considers himself to be, but I do think that to Locke, there was Illegitimate and Legitimate slavery and there was only one Legitimate slavery. One must be an unjust aggressor defeated in war. The 'just' victor has the option to kill the aggressor or enslave them. According to Locke, the state of slavery is the continuation of the state of war between a lawful conqueror and a captive, in which the conqueror delays to take the life of the captive, and instead makes use of him. This is a continued war because, if conqueror and captive make some compact for obedience on the one side and limited power on the other, the state of slavery ceases.
Not surprisingly, Hany seems to be a student of that particular stream of articles over the 'last forty' years arguing that given Locke's involvent with trade and colonial governmen, the theory of slavery in the "Second Treatise" was intended to justify the institution and practices of Afro-American slavery.

[Hanny]

Originally Posted by OpnDownfall

True enough I am not the scholar of Locke as Hanny considers himself to be, but I do think that to Locke, there was Illegitimate and Legitimate slavery and there was only one Legitimate slavery.

about as much double talk as your likly to find anywhere.

[OpnDownfall]

Does Hanny disagree with Locke?

[5fish]

The 2nd amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."


A line:"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"

"A Free State"; We know the 2nd amendment gives the individual the right to self defense but does it give the states the right to defend themselves as well??

NRA has always boasted that the greatest defense of our democracy is an armed citizenry but an armed State achieve the same thing.

Our founding Fathers believed states' armed militias would keep the central government from becoming Tyrannical.

I argue that the 2nd amendment implies that States are free which means they have "free will"

It is a State right to defend itself against a central government that is being Tyrannical even to used arms to protect itself.

I believe the southern leaders should have invoke the second amendment declaring they were protecting themselves from a tyrannical central government.

The southern leaders were invoking their Constitutional right to self defense under the second amendment.


The acts of the southern leaders could not be consider Traitorous or Treasonous for they were following the Constitution desired will.

The argument that the south was fighting for states right would not have rung so hollow..

State are Free and have the right to self defense as outline in the 2nd amendment..

Friends of "STATE RIGHTS" lets rally around the second amendment for it could justify why the Civil War was fought for more then Slavery.... Rally friends Rally to the cause!!