Celebrating the Birthday (1/19) of a True American Hero

I have a book on Robert E. Lee and it says that he trusted Jesus Christ as his saviour. If this book is true than he is in Heaven right now. General Grant was a drunkard and as far as I know was never saved. He is most likely in Hell right now. However, Lee WAS ON THE WRONG SIDE. Lee even though he was a Christian was used by Satan to fight for a wrong cause. General Grant even though he was unsaved was used by God for a good cause. When Lee made it to Heaven Jesus Christ took his nail scarred hands and slapped General Lee around. Why would you want to honor a man who fought AGAINST freedom for blacks? Do you love the United States? We have problems in this country but it is the BEST country on earth. If Lee's side one the war there would be NO United States. Lee is no hero. He is a disgrace. He did not honor Christ by fighting for the south.

 

You make some really weird statements, Andy, such as Jesus slapping people around in Heaven. How much do you reckon He'll be slapping you around, Andy?

For the record, General Lee was certainly on the right side - he was fighting for the principles on which the original federal Constitution was based - such as the principle of self-determination by the various States. It is well doumented that the Founders recognized the right of the States to secede.

Personally, I wish the CSA still existed. We would have much more left of limited, constitutional government in the CSA than exists in the USA today.

My advice to you, Andy, is to stop reading Yankee propaganda and find a fair and balanced history of the War for Southern Independence to read.

 

Amen.

 

Dear Ken, When I go to Heaven when I die I will be a janitor up there. However, I would rather be a janitor in Heaven than a King in hell. You are correct that the south had the RIGHT to leave the union, but I think history has proven that they were wrong to secede. I do not think the United States would have been as strong today if it were divided. Also, why did you not address the black issue in your thread?

 

Maybe he didn't answer it because anybody who has taken the initiative to study a little and think rationally about it knows that slavery was not the issue. Lee was not fighting for slavery, he was fighting for the sovereignty of the state of Virginia. Your statements are just assanine, Andy. No one who was involved in the Civil War would have accused the South of being the Devil's side. Most understood and respected the conviction that caused their brother or cousin or son to fight for the other side, whichever that might have been. Robert E. Lee was one of the greatest Christian gentlemen America has ever produced. It's a shame that the federal government stole all his property after the war.

 

Andy,

Slavery was a dying institution being overtaken by mechanization. Was it worth the deaths of 600,000 people to end slavery through violence? I know we live in an "instant results" society today and we think that waiting for an institution to end in, say 20 years, is a long time. But I think it would have been preferable to all of the deaths and the destruction that took place. If I recall correctly, there was only one other nation where slavery was ended through violence. Everywhere else it was ended peacefully and the same could have taken place here.

The CSA was not wrong to secede. The Yankees had a much larger population to fill it's army and was more industrialized; thus, the Yankees finally won after four years of war. However, if the CSA had won at Antietam then the European powers would have recognized the CSA and the CSA would very likely have achieved independence.

Personally, I think that by the 20th Century that the USA and the CSA would have cooperated in foreign policy and might even have gotten back together by now. But the CSA would have had much more limited government principles than the USA; thus, we Southerners wouldn't be having to put up with Big Brother/Big Nanny government like Yankees do.

By the way, you didn't address my question as to how much you think Jesus is going to slap you around in Heaven.

 

Dear Pastor Greg, I realize that Lee was not fighting for the slaves that is pretty much common knowledge in any history book. However, the END RESULT of the North victory in the civil war was the freedom of the black slaves. Do you think the slaves would have been set free if the south won the war? I am also not debating if Lee was a Christian gentleman because that was most likely the case. However, I wonder why this thread was started on Martin Luther King day Is the purpose of the thread to antagonize blacks?

 

The CSA constitution already banned the importation of any more slaves. As mechanization took over, there would have been no need for slaves. Yes, it would have been a gradual process but that would have been preferable to 600,000 deaths and all of the destruction and misery.

 

Dear Ken, I think that Jesus Christ is going to slap me around something silly when I get to Heaven.

 

Perhaps because January 19th is Robert E. Lee's actual birthday.

 

Sorry, Andy, the end result of the Civil War was not the freedom of the slaves. That was already underway as Ken said. The end result was the unconstitutional massive federal government that we have today. The thread was started on the day it was because it was R. E. Lee's birthday. If that offends someone, they must be looking for soemthing about which to be offended.

 

You have a much different conception of Heaven than I do, Andy.

 

Dear Pastor Greg, Let me see if I have got this right. You are saying that we have big government today because the North won the civil war? This is something that I have never heard before taught. What is your basis for this belief?

 

Andy,

Check this out - Lincoln's 'Second American Revolution'

 

Dear Ken, You say that if the south won the war the C.S.A. would have limited government. How do you know that would have been the case? The last time I checked most of the south votes DEMOCRAT.

 

One historian put it this way, "The Civil War didn't take blacks off the plantation, it put all Americans on the plantation." The issue was sovereignty. By invading and defeating the south, the north established the unconstitutional dominance of the federal government over the states. Since that time the Fed has continued to intrude into areas that were previously the turf of the states (and constitutionally, still are)such as education, transportation, etc. The Federal monstrosity continues to grow in areas not intended such as welfare, social security, health care, etc. All because the Civil War decided that the federal govt. can do whatever it wants.

 

Actually, the South is pretty much Republican now, especially on the presidential level. A Democrat apparently just about can't win the presidency unless he is from a former State of the CSA. The last Democrat president not from the old CSA States was John F. Kennedy in the early 1960's. If the Democrats don't nominate a Southerner, then the Republican candidate pretty much sweeps the South.

Also, you need to look at history. Until about 100 years ago, the Democrat Party was for limited government and the Republican Party was for big government. In the early part of the 20th Century this changed so that the Democrat Party became the party of big government and the Republican Party became the party of limited government(although I seriously question whether the GOP is still for limited government).

When I was growing up in Texas, it was an almost totally Democrat State but the politicians were mostly for small State government. They would be considered Republicans policy-wise today and, in fact, Texas is now pretty much a Republican Party State politically.

 

Dear Ken, the south used to have what were called "yellow dog democrats." You know a Harry Truman type of democrat. You are correct many of these Yellow dogs vote republican now. Truman was into big government but he always balanced the budget. If the south won the civil war I am still not sure that they would not have had the same problems anyway.