• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Did the founding fathers end slavery?

Did the founding fathers end slavery?

  • Yes

    Votes: 2 3.9%

  • No

    Votes: 47 92.2%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 2 3.9%
  • Total voters
    51
SheWolf

SheWolf

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2010
Messages
37,412
Reaction score
13,543
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
What's your opinion...
 
slavery was still legal after all the founders were gone IIRC. so no even though many didn't own slaves. I guess my main question is what is the point-there is only one right answer but its relevance is obscure
 
In short, no.

If you mean, did they provide the groundwork that was later (what, 100-200 years later, depending on how you define it?) worked into an end to slavery, then ask that question.
 
No, and Abraham Lincoln did not free even one slave in the U.S.

The founding fathers did establish a Constitution that allowed the people of the United States to outlaw slavery--mostly.
 
No, the founding fathers did nothing to end slavery, end of story.
 
There has to be a story to this poll, so what is it? I hate polls where the reason for the poll comes out later...
 
Redress said:
There has to be a story to this poll, so what is it? I hate polls where the reason for the poll comes out later...
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it's a response to the recent wave of historical revisionism in which people want to accredit everything possible that is good to the founding fathers. This particular case being that the 3/5 compromise led to end of slavery. Which is a load of crap.
 
Your Star said:
I'm guessing it's a response to the recent wave of historical revisionism in which people want to accredit everything possible that is good to the founding fathers. This particular case being that the 3/5 compromise led to end of slavery. Which is a load of crap.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are pretty much right... It's not really about a particular poll or news story...
 
I was waiting for someone to bring up the "3/5th" clause.

Golly....who would know more about it...you...or Frederick Douglas?

Your Star said:
I'm guessing it's a response to the recent wave of historical revisionism in which people want to accredit everything possible that is good to the founding fathers. This particular case being that the 3/5 compromise led to end of slavery. Which is a load of crap.
Click to expand...
 
Actually, they did. They ended it in the new territory after the revolutionary war. They made slavery not allowed, but it was impossible with the society at the time to end it in the south. The North came up with a deal to end it over a period of time, so the effects wouldn't be so sudden.
 
this isnt even a debate its just history. all of the founding fathers were dead by the time slavery was outlawed. no they didnt end slavery and frankly this question is so vague and pointless that im offended.
 
LOL....tell us your understanding of the 3/5ths clause....be prepared to back it up w/o revisionist info ;)


Badfish420 said:
this isnt even a debate its just history. all of the founding fathers were dead by the time slavery was outlawed. no they didnt end slavery and frankly this question is so vague and pointless that im offended.
Click to expand...
 
'I believe that, as long as there is plenty, poverty is evil.' - Bobby Kennedy

Ummm......the Kennedy's are still rich...and there are still plenty of poor...I'm jus sayin...





Badfish420 said:
this isnt even a debate its just history. all of the founding fathers were dead by the time slavery was outlawed. no they didnt end slavery and frankly this question is so vague and pointless that im offended.
Click to expand...
 
Amazed said:
LOL....tell us your understanding of the 3/5ths clause....be prepared to back it up w/o revisionist info ;)
Click to expand...

The 3/5 Compromise, the Northern states didn't want to count slaves at all, because they could not vote, but the Southern states wanted to count them all, so that they could have greater representation in Congress. So instead of not counting the slaves at all, and instead of counting all of them, the 3/5 compromise was born.
 
Which meant....go on....that the South would not have undue power in the Congress.....which turned out (as they had planned) was a good thing.

;)

Your Star said:
The 3/5 Compromise, the Northern states didn't want to count slaves at all, because they could not vote, but the Southern states wanted to count them all, so that they could have greater representation in Congress. So instead of not counting the slaves at all, and instead of counting all of them, the 3/5 compromise was born.
Click to expand...
 
Amazed said:
Which meant....go on....that the South would not have undue power in the Congress.....which turned out (as they had planned) was a good thing.

;)
Click to expand...

And that didn't end slavery, at all. It had nothing to do with ending slavery, it was all about representation in Congress, not ending slavery.
 
Amazed said:
Which meant....go on....that the South would not have undue power in the Congress.....which turned out (as they had planned) was a good thing.

;)
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean the founding fathers ended slavery, though.

There were founding fathers who opposed slavery. There were founding fathers who supported slavery. There were some who supported slavery but abhorred the international slave trade.

They were not a homogenous group by any stretch.
 
(smile) It was about not giving undue power to those that held slaves....w/o this "compromise" there would have been no Constitution...

I'll ask you.....do you know more about this than Frederick Douglas did?



Your Star said:
And that didn't end slavery, at all. It had nothing to do with ending slavery, it was all about representation in Congress, not ending slavery.
Click to expand...
 
Douglass goes on to address the specific parts of the Constitution that others have claimed to be "pro-slavery".


Art.I §2
3/5 Compromise is a detriment to slaveholding states. Douglass assumes that blacks are counted as whole people in receiving representation, etc. in non-slavery states.
 
Amazed said:
(smile) It was about not giving undue power to those that held slaves....w/o this "compromise" there would have been no Constitution...

I'll ask you.....do you know more about this than Frederick Douglas did?
Click to expand...

And how did this end slavery? I mean it would be until 1865 when slavery was abolished, and that was due to the Civil War, not a legislative action, which would be the only way you could even connect the 3/5 Compromise with the end of slavery.
 
SheWolf said:
What's your opinion...
Click to expand...

Yes. Its simple, the founders made is possible for the WE THE PEOPLE...the self governed peoples of the United States to evolve the constitution when society was ready for a change. Name one Civil Right for any Minority or Female right that did not come about by the fact of SELF GOVERNMENT and an amendment to the constitution. The Constitution works. Society did not want slavery to end during the founding time period as such was a societal NORM (in a free society where THE PEOPLE establish the government and are in fact THE GOVERNMENT our laws could and still cannot do anything except reflect the morality thereof, what you consider immoral was at that time considered MORAL by the majority of US CITIZENS)....but Society evolved over the years and thanks to our Founding Fathers and their WISDOM....so did our Constitution.
 
Last edited:
It was all part of the process....


Douglass goes on to address the specific parts of the Constitution that others have claimed to be "pro-slavery".


Art.I §2
3/5 Compromise is a detriment to slaveholding states. Douglass assumes that blacks are counted as whole people in receiving representation, etc. in non-slavery states.

Your Star said:
And how did this end slavery? I mean it would be until 1865 when slavery was abolished, and that was due to the Civil War, not a legislative action, which would be the only way you could even connect the 3/5 Compromise with the end of slavery.
Click to expand...
 
Isn't this thread sooooo two months ago?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom