Is murder, rape, and beatings of slaves in the south morally righteous by slave owners, and did the confederacy defend the practice?

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
1,950
#2
Is the murder, rape, and beating of slaves in the south morally righteous by slave owners, and did the confederacy defend the practice of murder, rape, and assault?
No more Morally Righteous than the Federal Governments attacking Native Americans and trying to Exterminate them, during this same period. I don't think any treatment by Whites against any of the other than White populations was morally righteous. However it was pretty much, Universal.

Crimes against Blacks were looked down upon by most. The number of instances claimed as happening date back to Abolitionist Propaganda. Most people recognize that. It did happen obviously. Why would a rich Planter want chaos to rule his labor force? These people were wealth, if they want to have Sex, they had other avenues for that. Most Whites were so racist, that would of kept them from doing it.
 
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,342
Location
los angeles ca
#3
No more Morally Righteous than the Federal Governments attacking Native Americans and trying to Exterminate them, during this same period. I don't think any treatment by Whites against any of the other than White populations was morally righteous. However it was pretty much, Universal.

Crimes against Blacks were looked down upon by most. The number of instances claimed as happening date back to Abolitionist Propaganda. Most people recognize that. It did happen obviously. Why would a rich Planter want chaos to rule his labor force? These people were wealth, if they want to have Sex, they had other avenues for that. Most Whites were so racist, that would of kept them from doing it.
Actual DNA evidence posted by @Matl definitely prices that slave owners constantly raped their female slaves. Historians have documented thousands of lynchings during Reconstruction. No Southern politician condemned any anti Indian policy during the 19th Century. The Confederate Army during its brief existence also killed Indian Civilians.
Leftyhunter
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
20
Location
Lufkin, TX
#4
There are many instances of sexual domination of female slaves. My Ancestors from that time period and before produced a few mixed race off spring and DNA evidence with the use of our last name continues today. There were even county court records (Wills) that even listed slaves and circumstances they were given to after the owner passed away. Times may have changed, but somethings stay the same.
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#5
Actual DNA evidence posted by @Matl definitely prices that slave owners constantly raped their female slaves. Historians have documented thousands of lynchings during Reconstruction. No Southern politician condemned any anti Indian policy during the 19th Century. The Confederate Army during its brief existence also killed Indian Civilians.
Leftyhunter
What the heck is "definitely prices that slave owners constantly raped their slaves"?...….try a coherent English sentence...…..

Provide evidence of this constant raping instead of making exaggerated disingenuous statements. Did It happen? Yes? However it wasnt universal nor constant despite your rhetoric....BTW theres numerous instances of union soldiers raping slaves...….you think some of their DNA may have been included? Not to mention women have been blackmailed for sex in the workplace forever, which would also include free blacks...……..also Interracial DNA would go far beyond just the south, from them being captured in Africa, to slave ship journey, and also include slaves who had been held elsewhere as in the Caribbean, and held by the British, French, and Spanish well before ever becoming "americian" or "southern" slaves............. Your attempt to confine or limit DNA intermingling tojust the south is very disingenious.

You seem to overlook slaves had been in the new world for centuries before there was even a United States...........They actually had been here longer under French, British, and Spanish rule then under the United States..........
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,342
Location
los angeles ca
#6
What the heck is "definitely prices that slave owners constantly raped their slaves"?...….try a coherent English sentence...…..

Provide evidence of this constant raping instead of making exaggerated disingenuous statements. Did It happen? Yes? However it wasnt universal nor constant despite your rhetoric....BTW theres numerous instances of union soldiers raping slaves...….you think some of their DNA may have been included? Not to mention women have been blackmailed for sex in the workplace forever, which would also include free blacks...……..also Interracial DNA would go far beyond just the south, from them being captured in Africa, to slave ship journey, and also include slaves who had been held elsewhere as in the Caribbean, and held by the British, French, and Spanish well before ever becoming "americian" or "southern" slaves............. Your attempt to confine or limit DNA intermingling tojust the south is very disingenious.

You seem to overlook slaves had been in the new world for centuries before there was even a United States...........They actually had been here longer under French, British, and Spanish rule then under the United States..........
I stand by what I stated. The DNA evidence is overwhelming that slave owners raped their slave's constantly. Yes some Union soldiers raped slaves and no doubt so did Confederate soldiers.
Leftyhunter
 

ebg12

Corporal
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
444
#7
What the heck is "definitely prices that slave owners constantly raped their slaves"?...….try a coherent English sentence...…..

Provide evidence of this constant raping instead of making exaggerated disingenuous statements. Did It happen? Yes? However it wasnt universal nor constant despite your rhetoric....BTW theres numerous instances of union soldiers raping slaves...….you think some of their DNA may have been included? Not to mention women have been blackmailed for sex in the workplace forever, which would also include free blacks...……..also Interracial DNA would go far beyond just the south, from them being captured in Africa, to slave ship journey, and also include slaves who had been held elsewhere as in the Caribbean, and held by the British, French, and Spanish well before ever becoming "americian" or "southern" slaves............. Your attempt to confine or limit DNA intermingling tojust the south is very disingenious.

You seem to overlook slaves had been in the new world for centuries before there was even a United States...........They actually had been here longer under French, British, and Spanish rule then under the United States..........
So, you agree that the institution of slavery allowed the crime of rape ....be it in the south, on slave ship, or any other place around the world in 1800s. Then it wasn’t right in the south or any other part of the world that allowed slavery, and it was wrong to support slavery if it allowed rape?
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#9
So, you agree that the institution of slavery allowed the crime of rape ....be it in the south, on slave ship, or any other place around the world in 1800s. Then it wasn’t right in the south or any other part of the world that allowed slavery, and it was wrong to support slavery if it allowed rape?
Yes would say rape is wrong.........however seems silly to single out four years of the confederacy, and ignore 90 some years of rape under the United States and 100's of years under the French, British, and Spanish........its ignoring the mountain to complain about a molehill if the systematic rape of black women is truly your concern, as the majority of it didn't occur during those 4 years but during the 100's proceeding it.

Btw even during those four years of the CSA, the US also still held slaves and would assume they would have been as risk as any in the south, or preceding the war as well

Perhaps you think the United States defended the practice as well? I live in what was a slave holding US state during the war, doesn't seem to have been alot of rape charges filed during the war, does that mean it was sanctioned by the US?
 
Last edited:

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,138
Location
Laurinburg NC
#10
Actual DNA evidence posted by @Matl definitely prices that slave owners constantly raped their female slaves. Historians have documented thousands of lynchings during Reconstruction. No Southern politician condemned any anti Indian policy during the 19th Century. The Confederate Army during its brief existence also killed Indian Civilians.
Leftyhunter
Wouldn't it be more accurate and inclusive to say no US politician condemned anti- Indian policy during the 19th century?

“Then came the Black Hawk War; and I was elected a Captain of Volunteers - a success which gave me more pleasure than any I have had since.”
Abraham Lincoln, December 20, 1859.
 

ebg12

Corporal
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
444
#11
Yes would say rape is wrong.........however seems silly to single out four years of the confederacy, and ignore 90 some years of rape under the United States and 100's of years under the French, British, and Spanish........its ignoring the mountain to complain about a molehill if the systematic rape of black women is truly your concern, as the majority of it didn't occur during those 4 years but during the 100's proceeding it.

Btw even during those four years of the CSA, the US also still held slaves and would assume they would have been as risk as any in the south, or preceding the war as well

Perhaps you think the United States defended the practice as well? I live in what was a slave holding US state during the war, doesn't seem to have been alot of rape charges filed during the war, does that mean it was sanctioned by the US?
Do two wrongs make a right? Is a crime ok in a neighborhood because it
Is happening in another neighborhood. The institution of slavery is wrong because it allows life and death power over another human being....slaves of the south were human victims that could be murdered,raped, beaten, separated from family all on the whim of the white criminal owner.
 
Last edited:

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
3,659
Location
mo
#12
Who said anything about two wrongs making a right? Again I'm not the one who seemingly seems to wish to ignore the majority of slavery which was from 1619, not 1861, and occurred under the United States and the colonial powers......to the contrary I think the majority is very relevant, rather then focus on 1.6% of the time slavery occurred here in north America, I would think the whole 246 years far more relevant then a 4 year anomaly of the US and the CSA jointly being slaveholding nations.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
640
#13
Do two wrongs make a right? Is a crime ok in a neighborhood because it
Is happening in another neighborhood. The institution of slavery is wrong because it allows life and death power over another human being....slaves of the south were human victims that could be murdered,raped, beaten, separated from family all on the whim of the white criminal owner.
Of course slavery is wrong, we all know that in modern times. Nobody on here wants to own slaves, so I have no idea who you are preaching at. Unfortunately it was legal in the US, and before that in the colonies, and all over the world for 1000s of years. In fact still in some places even today. I would dare say slaves throughout history have been treated poorly.
 
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
640
#14
I stand by what I stated. The DNA evidence is overwhelming that slave owners raped their slave's constantly. Yes some Union soldiers raped slaves and no doubt so did Confederate soldiers.
Leftyhunter
You should include the word "some", like you did for the Union soldiers, or provide evidence that most or all slave owners raped slaves.....waiting eagerly
 

ebg12

Corporal
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
444
#15
Of course slavery is wrong, we all know that in modern times. Nobody on here wants to own slaves, so I have no idea who you are preaching at. Unfortunately it was legal in the US, and before that in the colonies, and all over the world for 1000s of years. In fact still in some places even today. I would dare say slaves throughout history have been treated poorly.
Does. Being legal make it right? Is the law always just? Does not the law influenced by money and greed? How can the confederate cause be just if the Thorn in its side is slavery?
 
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,342
Location
los angeles ca
#16
Wouldn't it be more accurate and inclusive to say no US politician condemned anti- Indian policy during the 19th century?

“Then came the Black Hawk War; and I was elected a Captain of Volunteers - a success which gave me more pleasure than any I have had since.”
Abraham Lincoln, December 20, 1859.
Highly doubtful any historian can verify that Lincoln or even the men in his command killed even one Indian. There is a false narrative that the Confederacy never harmed a hair on one Indian and fought for Indian equality. In fact both the Union and the Confederate Army had Indian troops and both deliberately killed Indian Civilians. No Southern politician had any issues whatsoever with Indians being mistreated by the federal government before or after the ACW.
Leftyhunter
 

ebg12

Corporal
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
444
#18
You should include the word "some", like you did for the Union soldiers, or provide evidence that most or all slave owners raped slaves.....waiting eagerly
Is some too many? How about separating families at slave actions. Was that a few?
 

Ole Miss

Sergeant Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
2,198
Location
North Mississippi
#20
What is the point of your thread? Are you seriously expecting someone to defend slavery and its abuses as morally righteous? The South and the border states were the last bastion of a evil practice that was part of America's history since 1619. The U.S. Constitution barred any state from preventing slavery until 1808 and "The Peculiar Institution" was not outlawed till the adoption of the The Thirteenth Amendment in December of 1865. So we Americans are hardly clean enough to cast aspersions against anyone.

So should not your question be reworded to:
Is the murder, rape, and beating of slaves in the south United States morally righteous by slave owners, and did the confederacy America defend the practice of murder, rape, and assault?
Regards
David
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top