For each question, answer the question completely using proper English and make sure to proofread! You must also respond to at least one other student post to receive full credit.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Chapter Two-Killing: "The Harder Courage"
How did both the North and South justify killing during the Civil War? Of the two sides, whose justification do you agree with more? WHY?
During the Civil War, the North and South justified the killing that took place in a few distinct ways. Initially, the South cited a variety of Old Testament texts to create the Confederate Baptist. This piece suggested that men were excused from following Christianity's Sixth Commandment because, “Lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes.” The North employed similar tactics throughout the war, claiming that they only partook in the violence that took place because they were fighting to save the nation that represented, “the last best hope of earth.” However, the North also looked to the abolishment of slavery to provide justification. Many Northerner’s believed that, “overturning the wrong of slavery made the conflict a righteous one and its carnage justifiable.”
I agree with the North’s justification, despite the fact that both sides contained many similar aspects. This is because the North utilized the abolishment of slavery when seeking justification. Throughout history, I feel few greater injustices have taken place than our enslavement of the African American people. In my mind, only a few things can justify the killing of other human beings, yet freeing an innocent people from the horrors of slavery is most certainly one of them.
The North and South's justification for killing were both similar and different. The North's justification was, as Nick also said, that they were fighting to save the nation. They wanted to keep the nation together. The South's justification was that they were trying to defend their country. Both talked about defending their nation. Their nations were two different things but the meaning still the same. Another justification for both sides was slavery. The North wanted to abolish it, giving the war a more righteous purpose.
I also agree with the north with its purpose in the War. The North believed that slavery should be abolished. They also fought for the nation that had been created on a bases of all men are created equal. But until then it had not been applied to African American people. This war fought for the African American lives, the North fought for their freedom.
I also agree with the North's justification. Slavery was indeed one of the darkest things of our nations history. The opinion of a man was determined by his skin color. The North also allowed them to serve in the war. But even then the South's opinions of Blacks shone through. If the South regiments beat a colored regiment, all of the colored troop would be brutally killed. Slavery needed to be stopped and the North's actions toward this were some of the most important in our history.
During the civil war, both sides, the north and south, had ways of justifying the carnage and bloodshed. "The Confederate Baptist insisted that men were exempt from the commandment not to kill "when lawful war calls for the slaying our country's foes."" They also justified their right to kill as self defense as they believed the north to be invading. Some even held beliefs that the war was "a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders." It is god’s will that they fight and kill their northern brothers. Apposing the South, the North, or Union, justified killing confederate soldiers as fighting to save a nation that represented "the last best hope of earth." To religiously justify themselves, the northerners "cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence. As stated by Nick, "many northerner's believed that, “overturning the wrong of slavery made the conflict a righteous one and its carnage justifiable."" Obviously, the abolishment of slavery itself was the other northerner justification.
Personally, I would have to side with the North's justifications. The abolishment of slavery deeply justifies the act of killing. Slavery is one the United States greatest injustices towards a group of people. Perceiving another group of people as inferior is one of Early Americans’ and even some of today’s people's greatest flaws. Slavery is so untasteful and wrong that it is one of the few situations in which killing can be justified.
I agree with you on the north's side having the best justifications for carnage. As you said, the north fought for the freedom of African Americans, in which also fighting for African American lives, and for the idea of a nation in which everyone is created equal. I also like the way you have joined together the justifications, showing the similarities such as they both fight for their ideal nation. I agree with your differences as well as they state how both sides fought for slavery, the North to abolish it while the south had hopes of maintaining it.
The North and South used religion as their main reason for justifying killing. Southerners “most often appealed to self-defense against invasion as the source of the war’s justness” (33). They believed that since the Union was invading them, they had an excuse for fighting. Both the North and South “avidly claimed God for their side” (33). The North believed that slavery was sinful and that they were trying to “save a nation that represented ‘the last best hope of earth.’” (33). Southerners were trying to defend their way of life and “invoked the notion of divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders.” (33). I agree with the Northerners, they fought to save their country from splitting as stated ‘when we are atacked and our lives are in danger by a gang of men aposed to the best government on earth I shall fight.’ (33).
The North and the South had two very different outlooks on how to justify killing the Civil War. The North believed that they were fighting in order to save the nation from falling apart even more than it already had. The South on the other hand wantedto also defened their newly formed nation. Slavery was also another conflict fueling the war, the North wanted to abolish it while the south needed it. Of the two sides I agree with the North's beliefs in the war because of how they wanted to abolish slavery which should not have even been used at all during that time period.
Burns, I have to disagree with your statemnt for several reasons; first it was a way of life for the southern people to have slaves. this does not make it right but if someone were to threaten our way of life we would want to defend our rights. Also there were the Native Americans who the government treated horribly and the people did nothing to stop that.Also the main goal of the north was not to abolish slavery but to get the southern states back in the Union which was hypocritical of us. Because we declared our own independence form britain just like they did to us. So i agree with the souths justification to kill more than the norths.
The North and South justified killing in the Civil War in a few different ways. Both sides had different reasons why they would kill in spite of the sixth commandment. "...killing violated fundamental biblical law."(33) It is a sin to kill another man. The north killed for two main reasons. They wanted to reunite their country into one because the southerners split from the union into the Confederacy. Also, they wanted to abolish slavery because, "...the wrong of slavery made the conflict (of killing) a righteous one and its carnage justifiable."(34) The South fought for mainly two reasons, too. They fought because the north were coming after them and they wanted to defend their nation. Also, slaves were part of their lives and helped them greatly, so when the north tried to abolish slavery they fought to keep their slaves.
I would have to agree more with the north side. After just getting independence from Britain, of course you don't want to split apart your new country. You need to work as a whole if you want that new country to survive. Also, slavery was a terrible thing and they did the right thing to abolish it.
I completely agree with you. It is hard to believe that less than 150 years ago slavery was an active and prominent thing. That whites discriminated so strongly against a group of people to not let them drink the same water as them. To buy and sell them and force them to do the work that they didn't want to. It was a great injustice and i agree that it justifies killing. It is true that both sides believed that God wanted them to kill the opposing side. For the north to abolish slavery and the south to defend their rights.
The war was not fought over just slavery that didnt even come up until the emancipation proclamation. which Lincoln hoped would gai the support of a slave uprising.
In response to Tanner, I completely agree with your statement that after “just getting independence from Britain, of course you don’t want to split apart your new country.” As stated by a Union soldier ‘when we are atacked and our lives are in danger by a gang of men aposed to the best government on earth I shall fight.’ (33). Also, that “slaves were part of their lives and helped them greatly”. Although we view slavery as wrong and inhumane, they were just trying to defend their way of living.
The justifications given by both the North and the South were similar to each other, but a few justifications varied. Both sides had the common “just war” justification. It was taught that “killing was not merely tolerated but required in God’s service.” As others said, the Confederate Baptist said that the men could kill “‘when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes.’” The south’s main justification was to defend their homes, and some also saw themselves as “Confederate crusaders” of a “holy war.” Both sides believed that God was on their side and they were just to fight. The North fought to save the nation that was the “‘last best hope on earth’” and they were willing to fight all that opposed this hope. One of the big reasons they fought was to “overturn the wrong of slavery.” Later in the war, vengeance also became a key justification to some for killing the enemy.
I agree with the Northern justifications the most. The North wanted to keep the colonies together and to abolish slavery. Both of these I strongly agree with. If the colonies would have split, we would not have the United States that we have today. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, “A house divided can never stand.” The strength of the nation we have today would probably not have been able to exist. The North was also right in wanting to abolish slavery. The degrading and mistreatment of people simply because of the color of their skin had to be stopped.
In response to Baker, I can see where you agree with the Southern justification of defending their homes, but I have to disagree that the Union was hypocritical about wanting the nation to stay together. Reasons for independence from Great Britain and the south wanting independence from the Union were different. The colonies were formed to escape religious and political persecution, and the Revolutionary War was fought to escape the oppressing government and treatment from the king. The Confederate states wanted to secede from the Union because of political, economical, and social issues. They also didn’t agree on whether the state government should be in control or the federal government or on the issue of slavery. The North wasn’t trying to oppress or manipulate them and dictate everything they did. I’m not saying that the North was perfect in how they handled everything, but if a new nation so soon splits apart because of differences, I don’t think it would have lasted very long.
Unfortunately, the North and South did not agree on everything, one of them being slavery, thus creating the horrible hardships of the Civil War. The two sides had two different views on the Constitution. So with that in mind the North, also known as the Union, had the African Americans on their side fighting for their freedom, "Killing was for black soldiers...the instrument of liberation; it was an act of personal empowerment and the vehicle of racial emancipation." (55) For the black soldiers it was easier for them to kill because they were fighting for their very own freedom. Of course, they wouldn't of liked to kill people in order to reach that freedom, but they had to do what they had to do. The North justified killing as defending their country, while the South justified killing as fighting for thier rights to have slavery.
Personally, I am against slavery so I agree with the North's justification. Like Mikayla stated, we would not have the country we do today if it wasn't for the abolishment of slavery so many years ago. I also agree with how the North interpreted the Constitution, that all men are created equal. That includes ALL skin colors.
Mikayla, I agree with what you posted about how both sides thought God was on their side. Both the North and the South were fighting for what they beleived in. And as hard as it was for the men to kill, they had to keep in mind what they were fighting for to keep their mind intact with the harsh realities of the Civil War. Maybe with God said to be on both sides they looked at the war being more of a duty than actually murdering.
The North and South justified killing during the Civil War through many ways, but especially through Christianity and religion. Both sides used the bible to "prove" to themselves and the other side that God was supposedly on their side. The North said that “killing was not merely tolerated but required in God’s service.” They believed that freeing the slaves was God's service. The South, however, believed that they were in need of protecting their homes due to what they were taught in their religion, “lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes”. The North and South also had different interpretations of the Constitution. The North believed that they had to preserve the nation before it fell apart completely. They also pointed out that all men are created equal. The South, however, was simply trying to defend their newly found nation. They also pointed out that the Constitution did not mention slavery. Both sides felt that it was their duty. Personally I agree with the North's justification for many reasons. One of them being that the North fought to abolish slavery which I am strongly against. Also the Constitution does say that every man is equal. This country was based on freedom and equality. Slavery was definitely against both of these principles.
Danielle Sheehan, I completely agree with you say, "Maybe with God said to be on both sides they looked at the war being more of a duty than actually murdering." That is a very good point. It appears to me as though they were using God as almost an excuse to murder and fight the other side.
Both the North and South had their own ways of justifying killing in the Civil War. The North felt that it was okay to kill in the war because they were doing it for a good cause. They felt that abolishing slavery was a very good justification. The South justified killing in the Civil War in a slightly different manner. They found passages in the Old Testament that excused killing because it was a “lawful war”. Also, the South felt that it was necessary to kill because the North was “invading”, which called for self defense.
Although both the North and the South had their own justifications of killing in the Civil war, I agree with the North. The South almost seemed selfish in their justifications, while the North justified by fighting for a better cause. While the South searched for ways to make themselves feel better about the sin, the North did the same thing only for the good of the people. They had the country’s best interest in mind.
I agree with what you have said about siding with the North. Slavery truly has been one of America’s greatest flaws, and the Northerners tried to change that. They fought and killed for a huge group of people in our country. They deserved to have equal rights. This was justification enough for killing in the war, and there were few good justifications.
The North and the South had very differing justifications for the act of killing. Southerners claimed their reasoning was self-defense. From the Confederate perspective, the North had invaded their territory to force their mindset upon Southerners and to control how they lived their daily lives. They wanted to change things from how they have always been freeing slaves which the South had always used for farming on plantations. They addressed the idea of “divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders” (33). Southerners often compared themselves to the rebels during the Revolutionary War who were being controlled by an unjust government and decided to act on their disagreement. Northerners claimed that God was on their side, for they believed they were saving a nation that was considered the “last best hope on earth.” They believed it was right to fight in order to preserve the Union and discipline those who dared tried to undermine their conjoined government that kept the nation together. The North also claimed that slavery was a sin in the eyes of God, so they had religious justification.
I agree with the North’s perspective on the war. They recognized slavery as evil and against God’s will. I believe that no one can be owned and bought by another person, nor can they be treated like animals. It is wrong to enslave another human- they have thoughts and emotions just like those of their owners. No person has rights of ownership over another. A person should not be deemed unworthy of freedom merely by the color of their flesh. I support the North’s justification of killing during the Civil War.
Well said. I agree with your statement- "In my mind, only a few things can justify the killing of other human beings, yet freeing an innocent people from the horrors of slavery is most certainly one of them." There are very few things that can truly make taking another life morally alright.
I believe that although there is no full justification for killing another, the North's reasoning for fighting was better. The abolishment of slavery would ultimately save more people from mistreatment in the future than those killed.
You made a very good point with your response. Although both sides felt they were doing what was best, the North's focus was more for the good of all people. The South's reasoning could be considered selfish like you said. I agree that while the "South searched for ways to make themselves feel better about the sin, the North did the same thing only for the good of the people." You are right about the North's realization of the nation's best interests. Good job.
I agree with CJ, that America didn't want to spilt apart like they did. Even though the north thought that slavery was not right, it was the south's way of life.
The North and South during the civil war justified their killing in the same way and some different ways also. The South’s biggest justification of their killing was that it was self defense. They did self defense because the North was on their land and to protect their new country. The North justified by that they were keeping the nation together. Both the North and South’s biggest justification for killing both by protecting their countries. The South also believes that it is justified by their religion and that it is in biblical law. The North also fought to abolish slavery which was a reason the South fought.
Even though both sides had a good reason to fight I believe that the South’s reason was better. Even though in no way do I believe that slavery is a good thing but it was not the reason the North started the war. We don’t believe that it was a bad reason to have a war against Great Britain, so why didn’t we let the South break away if that is how we became free. Slavery was something that was common during that time in the South. Without slavery they would have trouble keeping up the farms. The south didn’t want to start the war but when the North came in they had to fight back.
I agree with what you said about the South justifying their killing though religion. I like how you said the North justified by claiming that they only partook in the violence that took place because they were fighting to save the nation that represented.
But I don't agree with who you agree with because the North didn't originally join the war to abolish they just added it on in the middle of the war.
Both the North and South "justified" their killing in a similar way. They both used the reason that they must do it in order to protect their country. The south used a more religous approuch saying, in essance, that they were exempt from the sith of the ten commandments because they are required to kill to protect their country from its foes. The North used basically the same reason that they a required to for their country. Manysoldiers used the exuse that they were defending themselfs. Not all of the sodiers did kill and avoided it all together by fireing into the air or ground or not at all.
I dont agree to one more than the other. I disagree with any and all "justifications" of killing. Its not up to us whether a person should live or die. You can't justify murder.
hank hammond The North and South justified killing in very similar aspects in the terms that they used religion. They took scripture out of the Old Testament to justify the righteousness of the killing. Within a just war, the men felt in no need to be forgiven through Christianity as if this killing was not a sin. This cleared them from disobeying the sixth commandment. Soldiers also had the same views coming into the war about killing on both sides and how to approach it. Most found themselves at ease with killing in self-defense. This was one of the main reasons why sharp-shooting was viewed unethical.
I agree with the northern justifications of killing in the sense that they were not as ruthless and merciless in the context of killing blacks. This was against the rules of war, yet some might say that this would of helped practice ars morendi. This could be looked at as a more optimistic point of view, but in reality, harshness of the treatment of black soldiers is wrong.
hank hammond In response to Jerimiah Mulloy I disagree with Jerimiah that killing is always murder. Most of these soldiers were Christian, and in Christianity, it is not forbidden to kill under all circumstances. In acts of self defense to preserve a righteous life is acceptable. Many times in the bible, especially the Old Testament, "righteous killing" is taken place. So in this case, these soldiers knew no better than to kill with sole purposes of what their religion and great country had taught them.
The North and the South had many of the same reasons to justify killing but they also had many differences. They both were fighting and killing for their country but the south used more of a religious approach in that they were exempt from the commandments because they were defending their country. The north however took the approach that they were fighting to keep the country together and to free the blacks which the south held in slavery.
I agree with the North because they were killing in essence,to save the southern slaves and to save a nation. I believe that thier reasons were more justifiable.
I agree with Kendra when she said that the North was fighting for a better cause where the south was selfish. This is a good way to put it because it captures the ideas of killing during the Civil War in a few short words.
Both the North and South used various tactics to justify killing, even though it "violated fundamental biblical law," The South used texts for the Old Testament to convince soldiers that the Sixth Commandment did not apply when "lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes" Also, the South claimed "divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate soldiers," On the other hand, Union soldiers justified killing because it was protecting the "best government on earth," The Union also "cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence,"
Personally, I agree with the North's justification. They were killing to save our nation. If they had not fought, the United States would not be what it is today. Also, they saved many innocent slaves from living a terrible life.
The North and South used religion as a key component in justifying killing during the Civil War. On both sides, soldiers violated the fundamental Biblical law of the 6th Commandment. They also believed that God was on their side. With this factor in play, the dispute turned into a holy war. However, both the North and the South had their own perspective on the ideals and laws of killing. Based upon teachings from the Old Testament, the Confederate Baptists believed that any man fighting for the South is excused from the rule not to commit the act of killing. The only time they are exempt from the Commandment is “when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes.” (33). The Union fought for a great cause; the abolishment of slavery and the reuniting of the once glorious country. The Confederacy fought for the desire to become its own country and for self defense.
Of the two sides, I agree with the North’s justification of killing more. The North fought to reunite the country and to end the terrible, horrific slave trade and slavery altogether. However, the South’s defiance and selfishness led to arrogance with the hope of acquiring personal gain. Due to the good cause for which the North was fighting for, it could have helped them win the Civil War.
I agree with your statement saying that the North was primarily fighting for the reuniting of the two opposing sides and the South was trying to defend themselves and their new country. This kind of reminds me of the American Revolution. A group of Southerners (colonists) didn’t like the government (king) in the North (Britain) and decided to revolt. They rallied more people to their cause and eventually broke away hoping of becoming their own separate nation. However, the outcome differed from the American Revolution. The Rebels lost and rejoined the Union.
The North and the South justified all the killing during the Civil War in contrasting ways. The main issue was that “killing violated fundamental biblical law”. The South’s grounds for killing were that the North was invading their land and that it was self defense. Oppositely, the northerners, “cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification” and also that the South was, “aposed to the best government on Earth”.
I agree with the North’s justification of killing. Slavery contradicted the foundation of our country which is freedom and the belief that every man is equal. Slavery was a horrid thing and abolishing it saved many African Americans from a terrible life of oppression.
During the Civil War, the North's justifications on killing was to save there nation. The South said they were pretecting there land and wanted to be a newly created nation. As most people know, slavery had a big impact on the war. It gave the war an importance. As the North made it that all men were created equal. Were the South was for slavery. During the war both sides violated the basic religious law of killing. The South created the Confederate Baptist which, for war purposes, excuses men from the Christian's Sixth Commandment which states not to kill. Where the North, which I stated once before, thought it was okay to kill because they were fighting gor there nation.
I agree with the North's justification for killing. I say that because a nation is worth fighting for. I believe that making a somewhat new belief system just for war is wrong.
Getting men to fight has always been an exceptionally difficult the crusaders used god the Vikings used riches and the confederates used state pride and racial division. Understanding what makes a man fight is at its heart divided into three categories a noble man will fight for what is threatened. A greedy man will fight for what he can gain, and a foolish man will fight for glory. A general or warmonger need only encourage these feelings for example he would threaten the noble man’s family saying that the enemy will destroy it whether true or not the reaction is the same Noble goes to war. The Union used the nobility of Emancipating to encourage soldiers. While the south chose to view the union as evil home wreckers that had to be stopped The commander then would offer money and power to the greedy man and he goes to war (this deal works well for the commander because he doesn’t have to pay his debts if greedy gets killed). The easiest to exploit is the foolish man who goes to fight for glory in war William Tecumseh Sherman once said “there is no glory in war is hell” For this reason the foolish men looking for glory were the ones who mostly deserted when they found no glory on the field. Never the less they fought and after 600,000 dead one side was beaten. Sherman also said “one class of man starts the war and leaves the rest to fight it” Think on that.
Both the North and South justified killing another man surprisingly enough with religious opinion. The North believed that slavery was a dark sin that no man should be allowed to commit in "‘the last best hope of earth’" or the United States of America. The South however justified that they “invoked the notion of divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders.” Along with this the South was fighting in a defensive war on their land, and the North was fighting to hold together the greatest Union in the world.
While I feel each at that time each had a somewhat justified argument the truth is that only the North had god behind them. Slavery still today goes down as the worst and darkest sin this country has ever committed and had the North not fought this evil time there is no telling what this nation would be today. The Union truly had god behind them, and for that reason my opinions stand by what is right.
While I understand your point I have to disagree with what you are saying. Yes, the South had a justified reason to leave the Union and what they did at that time made sense to that economy. However when the colonies originally broke away from Great Britain there was a great war between the early colonists and the British army in order to regain control. Yet it seems to me that you feel the North had less of a reason to fight then the British. The North was fighting to rebuild a great Union, and the British were fighting to regain control over the people they were able to steal from. The North had every reason and right to start the Civil War. To compare the two just doesn’t serve justice to what the North was forced to do.
Just as “Civil War Americans worked to construct Good Deaths for themselves and their comrades” (30) they worked to create means to justify killing. The North and South had similar thoughts on how to go about this remarkably complex aspect of the war. The two sides “invoked and explored the traditional ‘just war’ doctrine, emphasizing that killing was not merely tolerated but required in God’s service” (33). The idea of killing for God made the thought of committing murder on the battlefield endurable for Civil War soldiers. However, as any divided nation would, the North and South had their differentiating views as well. The North “fought to save a nation that represented ‘the last best hope of earth’” (33). The last best hope of earth being the hope to end slavery. “Northerners increasingly cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence” (34). Even though the North had a seemingly moral rationale, the South’s validation was self-defense. “Southerners most often appealed to self-defense against invasion as the source of the war’s justness” (33). The south didn’t make arguments on who was sinning what; they had an aspiration and would fight for the protection of it. In my eyes, self-preservation outweighs the excuse of who is committing the uglier sin when justifying murder. Hence I lean more toward the South‘s justification of the mass destruction of the Civil War. They didn’t disguise murder as righteousness as the North did. The South saw a powerful troupe impending them and their beliefs and made a decision that would protect them both.
RE: Sarah You say that “This war fought for the African American lives, the North fought for their freedom.” The South was also fighting for a freedom; its own free will. They felt oppressed by the North and the new systems and laws being thrust upon them. Slavery was the only way of life the Southerners had come to know and the North was attempting to disrupt it. How would you feel if a people with greater authority, capital, and numbers than you were trying to change your way of life? You would defend it. You would fight for your freedom just as the South did.
During the Civil War, both the North and the South looked for reasons to justify the war and for killing. For the North, their reason was basically that they were fighting to keep their nation together, and, later on, to abolish slavery. The South, on the other hand, were fighting to defend themselves. I cannot agree with either side more than the other. Both sides had reasons for fighting that I both understand, and, I myself would use either excuse if I were ever in such a situation as the Civil War. However, because slavery is wrong, I would have to side with the North more than the South.
Your reasoning for siding with the North was fabulous. It is true that this country was founded on freedom and 'all men are created equal'. I totally agree with you.
The North and the South justified killing in many terms, one example would have to be religion.The North was fighting to save the nation and later on during the war they added that they wanted to abolish slavery, and this was used to give a moral boost to the Northern states and it worked well. The South was fighting to defend their newly found nation, rights, and lifestyle. The south knew the north threatend them so they made the first move and attacked fort Sumter and the American Civil War erupted.
In my opinion i agree with the South. Im not saying was good , it was a very bad thing in U.S. history. The thing is the South actually had a better reasson to fight than the North.
I do agree with your opinion on how the south was fighting to defend everything they had and that the North was threatening their way of life in the South. An yes slavery was bad but like you said that was how they worked in the South during that time.
During the Civil War, the North and South justified killing in a few ways. They both thought that by killing you are claiming a human right, and achieving manhood. They each had different reasons aside from this one shared. The North justified killing with the goal of "overturning the wrong of slavery." "Northerners increasingly sited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence." Whereas southerners claimed self-defense from the invading Union as justification for killing. Some southerners also felt they were "Confederate crusaders" in a "holy war."
Both the North and the South had very good reason for killing during the war, but I agree more with the North. To me the North had a more righteous justification, than the South. Self-defense does not seem good enough to me, when comparing against abolishing slavery to kill. I believe more with the North in "overturning the wrong of slavery," and it was all for the good of the country.
That was very well said. I like how you said "the South's defiance and selfishness led to arrogance with the hope of acquiring personal gain." This is a different view than anyone else and it really makes me think. Also, how you said the North fought to reunite the country, this is very true in my eyes.
I agree with Kristine Ayre. I believe the North had a better justification than the South. I am not just saying this because I wanted the North to win. Just like Kristine said the self-defense is not a good enough reason for war. Although I disagree with when Kristine said that the North fought for slavery. That is true but that is not why the war began. There was an economic difference between the North and the South. They also had different beliefs about how laws should be.
The north and the south both had very diverse ways to justify killing. The main problem with killing that both sides saw was that it was not morally or religiously right to kill another human being. The north “cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification.” They thought that since the south was committing, in my own opinion, a very terrible sin, they could commit a terrible sin of their own. The south justified killing by saying that they only did it in self defense. I agree with the north’s justifications. I’m glad that the northerners fought to abolish slavery. The southerners, although their reason was valid, was just not as good as the north’s reason to fight.
In response to Mark Miller I disagree that the south had a better reason for fighting. The north wanted to help all the blacks that were enslaved by the southerners, and although it threatened the southern lifestyle, I think it was the right thing to do. Also, the north found a way to live without slaves, and the south would have been able to do the same thing.
During the Civil War, both the North and the South had their reasons to justify killing. I think they needed something to justify the killing of innocent human beings for peace of mind. The South's reason was that of self defense and religion. On page 33, Faust states that "While southerners most often appealed to self-defense against invasion as the source of the war's justness, they invoked as well the notion of divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders.", Whereas "northerners increasingly cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification" and "concluding that the goal of overturning the wrong of slavery made the conflict a righteous one and its carnage justifiable."
I think I would have to agree with the North's point of view. I don't think that many things justify the killing of tens of thousands of people. However, the cause to free an entire race from an awful, undeserved fate to a better life seems to be a good reason to go to war.
Mary Harris- I definitely agree with your post, and it was very well written. You made a good point when you said that although the north thought the south was committing a sin they thought it was okay to commit one of their own. I also agree with you that both sides had justifiable reasons but that the North had a better reason than the South.
During the Civil War, both the North and South side had very justifiable (in my opinion) reason for killing one another. The North's basis for killing men of the South was that they were sinners for having kept slaves. Their justification for this was that "men were exempt from the commandment not to kill 'when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes.'" The South's justification for killing was purely self-defense. To be quite honest, I believe that the South did indeed have a slightly better reason than that of the North. Sure, the North did have an exceptionally noble cause, one worthy of admiration. But I, myself, am a martial artist and I simply cannot see a better reason for fighting than in self-defense. I believe that if you are attacked in any way, for any reason, you should have the right to defend yourself by all means necessary.
While you make a valid argument about how Southerner’s were just trying to preserve their way of life, I do not think anyone would agree that the enslavement of African Americans was something worth preserving. Also, while the initial purpose of fighting the war for the North was certainly preserving the Union, as the war progressed the abolishment of slavery also became a central goal of the North. You and I will just have to agree to disagree because I do not see how the lives claimed by the South were justified by trying to defend the atrocity that was slavery.
Both the North and the South clearly knew that their religion stated that killing was sinning and, therefore, searched for different ways to justify their fatal actions in this civil war. The North felt that their killings were directly justified by the sin the South was commiting for having slaves and these northerners claimed they were fighting to abolish this cruel act of inhumanity. It is also implified in the book that the North believed America was better as a whole united nation instead of a big piece of land divided by two and were also fighting for this belief. The south, meanwhile, was justifying their proceedings in this gruesome war by saying they were fighting only as a sort of self-defense, because it was them who was invaded for the most part. Some southerners were even recorded to believe to be "confederate crusaders" in a war which to them was "holy".
I agree more with the North because I, too, feel that slavery is something brutal that should have never taken place anywhere on Earth, and especially in a great country like this one.
I agree with what you said about this country not being what it is today if it were not for the North's desire to unite the nation, and I also feel the same way about the judgement and maltreatment of people solely because of the color of their skin. These two rigid reasons are not enough to justify the act of taking away another's life but they were definately enough to get the northerner's adrenaline pumping and for them to want to go into battle and fight to end such discrimination and lack of union.
I have to agree with Baker when he says; "it was a way of life for the southern people to have slaves. this does not make it right but if someone were to threaten our way of life we would want to defend our rights." The Southerners grew up knowing only what they were taught, so when the Northerners came telling them what they had been doing for their entire life was wrong, how would you expect them to react? It would be like telling us, of the modern day, that the use of a cell phone is a sin.
The North and South both had different justifications for fighting in the war, and both are understandable, although i agree with the North. The North was fighting to abolish slavery, which i completely agree with. The South was fighting to defend their country and what they believed in. Also, I find the North's want to keep the nation together very noble and selfless because not only did they help our country in the end, they were fighting for the slaves to be freed.
Both the southerners and the northerners shared common justifications for killing each other. They both saw it as acting in self-defense when they killed the opposing soldiers. Also, it was pointed out by religious publications of the time "killing was not merely tolerated, but required in God's service." (33) Soldiers believed that when they killed their enemies on the battlefield, they were acting on behalf of God and on behalf of their country. As said on page 33, "When lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes," the soldiers were considered "exempt from the commandment not to kill." Although some of their justifications for killing each other in war were common, there were also very diverse reasons for this. It was said that southerners felt that their homeland and way of life were being invaded, so they "most often appealed to self-defense" to justify their kills. It is said "northerners increasingly cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence." (33-34). Personally, I agree with the northerner’s justification for killing during the Civil War. Although the southerner’s make a good point of killing in self-defense, what they are truly defending is not acceptable. They were defending their way of life, which, at the time, was focused around slavery. Therefore, I believe that the northerner’s were not only killing because of their cause to end slavery, but also to emancipate thousands of slaves from their owners.
In response to Erick: When you said "Both the North and the South clearly knew that their religion stated that killing was sinning and, therefore, searched for different ways to justify their fatal actions in this civil war.", I fully agree with you. As if the Civil War wasn't enough, there was the added element of both the North and the South trying to justify their own actions, which was a war within itself. It was as if the North and the South were fighting in a battle of justifications, attempting to prove their own justification to be true. The conflict of the different justifications was the backbone of the Civil War, what caused so many Americans to die in this bloody battle.
Both the north and the south shared similar justifications for killing. They both saw it as defending themselves and their country. However, they both went different ways about justifying the killing. The North stated it was to protect "the last best hope on earth" and to completely abolish slavery. The South on the other hand, made it religious and pointed out technicalities in verses from the Old Testament. These technicalities pointed out that under lawful war the slaying of their foes was necessary.
I agree with the Northerners justifications. I agree with them because a war is necessary to free an entire race of people. African Americans stuck in the south were still slaves. I found that this was a legitimate reason raise a war.
The whole disagreement between the North and South was just that, a disagreement. The south did not like what it was being told to do, much like a teenager with his/her parents. Rather than working to resolve the issue, the South rebelled. Im in complete agreement with the North because of their views on slavery and the fact that they were trying to fix everything, whereas the South was just instigating.
In response to BAKER I disagree with your statement, "The war was not fought over just slavery that didnt even come up until the emancipation proclamation," True, the war was not directly fought over slavery, but one of the main reasons the South seceded was because they were worried slavery would be abolished by the North. The seceding of the South led to the Civil War, so slavery played a large part in the Civil War.
Katie- I agree with your statement, "I find the North's want to keep the nation together very noble and selfless..." This is true because although the death tolls were high, they helped free slaves and reunite a country.
Sevan, I completely agree with your opinion. Despite other reasons, slavery was definitely a legitimate reason "for raising a war." A good modern day example of this is the liberation of the Iraqi people. Though they aren't slaves, they were still being treated unfairly and we sided to help "free" them.
During the Civil War, the North and South had similar justifications for killing. Both felt that it was defending there country. The North wanted to completely abolish slavery, while the South made it religious.
I agree with the North because, I believe that slavery needed to be abolished. Slaves were stuck in the South and deserved to be set free.
The justification of killing during the civil war was very different from north and south. "when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes."(pg.33). The southern states justified their actions because of their strong religious beliefs. "religious justification for the use of violence."(pg.34). The northern states, were fighting to preserve the nation the best as they could. I agree with the northern states’ justification because I feel if you need to fight to preserve a nation that you have faith in, you should.
During the Civil War, both the North and the South each had justifications behind the extreme amount of killing which occurred. The South justified their killing as being "self-defense against invasion" and the North justified their killing as fighting "to save a nation that represented 'the last best hope of earth'", and also later to abolish slavery. I personally agree with the North, because I am strongly against slavery and I believe that fighting for the freedom of the African American people was the right thing to do. To me, nothing can ever justify treating people so terribly, and although killing is wrong, I think it is more justified if it is for something as precious as freedom.
I completely agree with everything that you stated in your post and I thought that it was extremely well said. I fully agree with your statement that "In my mind, only a few things can justify the killing of other human beings, yet freeing an innocent people from the horrors of slavery is most certainly one of them", for that is the exact way that I feel.
The reasoning for killing between both North and South had their differences and similarities. The North's reason was that they had been fighting to save the nation and keep it together as one. Also, they wanted to abolish slavery. However, the South's reasonwas that they were defending their country, and they wanted slavery.
On this i would have to side with the North's reasoning. This is because the North believed slavary should be abolished. Also, they were fighting for the nation that was created off the belief that all men should be treated equally. The North was fighting for their freedom.
I completely agree with you that slavery was the worst and darkest sin out nation has ever committed. Abolishing slavery was one of the best things that ever happened to our country.
The North justified killing during the Civil War claiming God for their side as they fought to save a nation that represented “the last best hope on earth.” They also used the sin of slavery to justify the violence. The South justified killing during the Civil War as self-defense against an invasion. They also thought of it as a holy war were they served as Confederate crusaders.
I agree with the justifications of both the North and the South, although I agree more with the North. I agree with the North more because they fought against slavery and for the hope for the future. They fought to protect their nation, which I believe was more noble.
Brian- I agree that freeing the slaves was a good reason to start a war, but i dont think that this statement also applies to the modern day war in Iraq..
In response to Anna Gibson, I liked what you said about defending yourself anyone should be allowed the means to do that that is what the 2nd amendment is for. As a way to legitimize violence in war the two warring governments used the threat to one’s family more than anything else. The north had the abolition of slavery on their side a driving force that won the war.
In response to Nick Burns. I disagree that the North's justification was better. However I did agree with the abolishing of slavery. I just felt like the North was kind of being forceful. On the other hand, the South was acting mostly in defense, which I think is really the only good reason to fight in war.
Both the north and the south have their own views on how they justify killing and had their own reasons for it. The north was fighting to stop slavery and keep the union together. The south was fighting a defensive war for their land. Both, in their minds, thought god was on their side but personally I think that, because the north was fighting slavery, god was only with them. Cyrus
Nick I agree with you that slavery is one of the worst things to have happened in our history. I also agreed when you said that only a few things justify killing and that freeing people from slavery is definitely one of them. This is one of the many reasons that the north won the war because so many things drove them to win
The North and the South justified why the were killing. They justified it in their own reasonings to kill in the war. The South was fighting in defense of the there land. The North was fighting in order to save the nation or land as well as to keep the union in order. The North also wanted to abolish slavery. The North believe that to own another person, slavery, was a sin and in which also justified their killings.
I agree with the North's justification. I believe that they had good intentions in mind and were fighting for a cause that certainly needed to be abolished. They were also fighting for the rights as equals and the land they stood upon which gave them even more justice in my eyes.
I agree with Erick. He pointed out that they had justified there reasonings by god and the holy "confederate crusaders". I believe that their is not any reasoning to kill for the holy ones and or have a hatred towards them. This does not in any way reason that you should kill a human being. I also think that slavery could never be justified and is a horrible criminal act no matter how well the slaves are treated. It is wrong to own a person and it can not be justifiyed.
During the Civil War, the North and South justified the killing that took place in a few distinct ways. Initially, the South cited a variety of Old Testament texts to create the Confederate Baptist. This piece suggested that men were excused from following Christianity's Sixth Commandment because, “Lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes.” The North employed similar tactics throughout the war, claiming that they only partook in the violence that took place because they were fighting to save the nation that represented, “the last best hope of earth.” However, the North also looked to the abolishment of slavery to provide justification. Many Northerner’s believed that, “overturning the wrong of slavery made the conflict a righteous one and its carnage justifiable.”
ReplyDeleteI agree with the North’s justification, despite the fact that both sides contained many similar aspects. This is because the North utilized the abolishment of slavery when seeking justification. Throughout history, I feel few greater injustices have taken place than our enslavement of the African American people. In my mind, only a few things can justify the killing of other human beings, yet freeing an innocent people from the horrors of slavery is most certainly one of them.
The North and South's justification for killing were both similar and different. The North's justification was, as Nick also said, that they were fighting to save the nation. They wanted to keep the nation together. The South's justification was that they were trying to defend their country. Both talked about defending their nation. Their nations were two different things but the meaning still the same. Another justification for both sides was slavery. The North wanted to abolish it, giving the war a more righteous purpose.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with the north with its purpose in the War. The North believed that slavery should be abolished. They also fought for the nation that had been created on a bases of all men are created equal. But until then it had not been applied to African American people. This war fought for the African American lives, the North fought for their freedom.
Nick
ReplyDeleteI also agree with the North's justification. Slavery was indeed one of the darkest things of our nations history. The opinion of a man was determined by his skin color. The North also allowed them to serve in the war. But even then the South's opinions of Blacks shone through. If the South regiments beat a colored regiment, all of the colored troop would be brutally killed. Slavery needed to be stopped and the North's actions toward this were some of the most important in our history.
During the civil war, both sides, the north and south, had ways of justifying the carnage and bloodshed. "The Confederate Baptist insisted that men were exempt from the commandment not to kill "when lawful war calls for the slaying our country's foes."" They also justified their right to kill as self defense as they believed the north to be invading. Some even held beliefs that the war was "a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders." It is god’s will that they fight and kill their northern brothers. Apposing the South, the North, or Union, justified killing confederate soldiers as fighting to save a nation that represented "the last best hope of earth." To religiously justify themselves, the northerners "cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence. As stated by Nick, "many northerner's believed that, “overturning the wrong of slavery made the conflict a righteous one and its carnage justifiable."" Obviously, the abolishment of slavery itself was the other northerner justification.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I would have to side with the North's justifications. The abolishment of slavery deeply justifies the act of killing. Slavery is one the United States greatest injustices towards a group of people. Perceiving another group of people as inferior is one of Early Americans’ and even some of today’s people's greatest flaws. Slavery is so untasteful and wrong that it is one of the few situations in which killing can be justified.
Sarah
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the north's side having the best justifications for carnage. As you said, the north fought for the freedom of African Americans, in which also fighting for African American lives, and for the idea of a nation in which everyone is created equal. I also like the way you have joined together the justifications, showing the similarities such as they both fight for their ideal nation. I agree with your differences as well as they state how both sides fought for slavery, the North to abolish it while the south had hopes of maintaining it.
The North and South used religion as their main reason for justifying killing. Southerners “most often appealed to self-defense against invasion as the source of the war’s justness” (33). They believed that since the Union was invading them, they had an excuse for fighting. Both the North and South “avidly claimed God for their side” (33). The North believed that slavery was sinful and that they were trying to “save a nation that represented ‘the last best hope of earth.’” (33). Southerners were trying to defend their way of life and “invoked the notion of divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders.” (33). I agree with the Northerners, they fought to save their country from splitting as stated ‘when we are atacked and our lives are in danger by a gang of men aposed to the best government on earth I shall fight.’ (33).
ReplyDeleteThe North and the South had two very different outlooks on how to justify killing the Civil War. The North believed that they were fighting in order to save the nation from falling apart even more than it already had. The South on the other hand wantedto also defened their newly formed nation. Slavery was also another conflict fueling the war, the North wanted to abolish it while the south needed it. Of the two sides I agree with the North's beliefs in the war because of how they wanted to abolish slavery which should not have even been used at all during that time period.
ReplyDeleteBurns,
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with your statemnt for several reasons; first it was a way of life for the southern people to have slaves. this does not make it right but if someone were to threaten our way of life we would want to defend our rights. Also there were the Native Americans who the government treated horribly and the people did nothing to stop that.Also the main goal of the north was not to abolish slavery but to get the southern states back in the Union which was hypocritical of us. Because we declared our own independence form britain just like they did to us. So i agree with the souths justification to kill more than the norths.
The North and South justified killing in the Civil War in a few different ways. Both sides had different reasons why they would kill in spite of the sixth commandment. "...killing violated fundamental biblical law."(33) It is a sin to kill another man. The north killed for two main reasons. They wanted to reunite their country into one because the southerners split from the union into the Confederacy. Also, they wanted to abolish slavery because, "...the wrong of slavery made the conflict (of killing) a righteous one and its carnage justifiable."(34) The South fought for mainly two reasons, too. They fought because the north were coming after them and they wanted to defend their nation. Also, slaves were part of their lives and helped them greatly, so when the north tried to abolish slavery they fought to keep their slaves.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree more with the north side. After just getting independence from Britain, of course you don't want to split apart your new country. You need to work as a whole if you want that new country to survive. Also, slavery was a terrible thing and they did the right thing to abolish it.
Respond to Jordan Farmer XD,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you. It is hard to believe that less than 150 years ago slavery was an active and prominent thing. That whites discriminated so strongly against a group of people to not let them drink the same water as them. To buy and sell them and force them to do the work that they didn't want to. It was a great injustice and i agree that it justifies killing. It is true that both sides believed that God wanted them to kill the opposing side. For the north to abolish slavery and the south to defend their rights.
The war was not fought over just slavery that didnt even come up until the emancipation proclamation. which Lincoln hoped would gai the support of a slave uprising.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Tanner, I completely agree with your statement that after “just getting independence from Britain, of course you don’t want to split apart your new country.” As stated by a Union soldier ‘when we are atacked and our lives are in danger by a gang of men aposed to the best government on earth I shall fight.’ (33). Also, that “slaves were part of their lives and helped them greatly”. Although we view slavery as wrong and inhumane, they were just trying to defend their way of living.
ReplyDeleteThe justifications given by both the North and the South were similar to each other, but a few justifications varied. Both sides had the common “just war” justification. It was taught that “killing was not merely tolerated but required in God’s service.” As others said, the Confederate Baptist said that the men could kill “‘when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes.’” The south’s main justification was to defend their homes, and some also saw themselves as “Confederate crusaders” of a “holy war.” Both sides believed that God was on their side and they were just to fight. The North fought to save the nation that was the “‘last best hope on earth’” and they were willing to fight all that opposed this hope. One of the big reasons they fought was to “overturn the wrong of slavery.” Later in the war, vengeance also became a key justification to some for killing the enemy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the Northern justifications the most. The North wanted to keep the colonies together and to abolish slavery. Both of these I strongly agree with. If the colonies would have split, we would not have the United States that we have today. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, “A house divided can never stand.” The strength of the nation we have today would probably not have been able to exist. The North was also right in wanting to abolish slavery. The degrading and mistreatment of people simply because of the color of their skin had to be stopped.
In response to Baker,
ReplyDeleteI can see where you agree with the Southern justification of defending their homes, but I have to disagree that the Union was hypocritical about wanting the nation to stay together. Reasons for independence from Great Britain and the south wanting independence from the Union were different. The colonies were formed to escape religious and political persecution, and the Revolutionary War was fought to escape the oppressing government and treatment from the king. The Confederate states wanted to secede from the Union because of political, economical, and social issues. They also didn’t agree on whether the state government should be in control or the federal government or on the issue of slavery. The North wasn’t trying to oppress or manipulate them and dictate everything they did. I’m not saying that the North was perfect in how they handled everything, but if a new nation so soon splits apart because of differences, I don’t think it would have lasted very long.
Unfortunately, the North and South did not agree on everything, one of them being slavery, thus creating the horrible hardships of the Civil War. The two sides had two different views on the Constitution. So with that in mind the North, also known as the Union, had the African Americans on their side fighting for their freedom, "Killing was for black soldiers...the instrument of liberation; it was an act of personal empowerment and the vehicle of racial emancipation." (55) For the black soldiers it was easier for them to kill because they were fighting for their very own freedom. Of course, they wouldn't of liked to kill people in order to reach that freedom, but they had to do what they had to do. The North justified killing as defending their country, while the South justified killing as fighting for thier rights to have slavery.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am against slavery so I agree with the North's justification. Like Mikayla stated, we would not have the country we do today if it wasn't for the abolishment of slavery so many years ago. I also agree with how the North interpreted the Constitution, that all men are created equal. That includes ALL skin colors.
Mikayla,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you posted about how both sides thought God was on their side. Both the North and the South were fighting for what they beleived in. And as hard as it was for the men to kill, they had to keep in mind what they were fighting for to keep their mind intact with the harsh realities of the Civil War. Maybe with God said to be on both sides they looked at the war being more of a duty than actually murdering.
The North and South justified killing during the Civil War through many ways, but especially through Christianity and religion. Both sides used the bible to "prove" to themselves and the other side that God was supposedly on their side. The North said that “killing was not merely tolerated but required in God’s service.” They believed that freeing the slaves was God's service. The South, however, believed that they were in need of protecting their homes due to what they were taught in their religion, “lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes”. The North and South also had different interpretations of the Constitution. The North believed that they had to preserve the nation before it fell apart completely. They also pointed out that all men are created equal. The South, however, was simply trying to defend their newly found nation. They also pointed out that the Constitution did not mention slavery. Both sides felt that it was their duty.
ReplyDeletePersonally I agree with the North's justification for many reasons. One of them being that the North fought to abolish slavery which I am strongly against. Also the Constitution does say that every man is equal. This country was based on freedom and equality. Slavery was definitely against both of these principles.
Danielle Sheehan,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you say, "Maybe with God said to be on both sides they looked at the war being more of a duty than actually murdering." That is a very good point. It appears to me as though they were using God as almost an excuse to murder and fight the other side.
Both the North and South had their own ways of justifying killing in the Civil War. The North felt that it was okay to kill in the war because they were doing it for a good cause. They felt that abolishing slavery was a very good justification. The South justified killing in the Civil War in a slightly different manner. They found passages in the Old Testament that excused killing because it was a “lawful war”. Also, the South felt that it was necessary to kill because the North was “invading”, which called for self defense.
ReplyDeleteAlthough both the North and the South had their own justifications of killing in the Civil war, I agree with the North. The South almost seemed selfish in their justifications, while the North justified by fighting for a better cause. While the South searched for ways to make themselves feel better about the sin, the North did the same thing only for the good of the people. They had the country’s best interest in mind.
Jordan,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you have said about siding with the North. Slavery truly has been one of America’s greatest flaws, and the Northerners tried to change that. They fought and killed for a huge group of people in our country. They deserved to have equal rights. This was justification enough for killing in the war, and there were few good justifications.
The North and the South had very differing justifications for the act of killing. Southerners claimed their reasoning was self-defense. From the Confederate perspective, the North had invaded their territory to force their mindset upon Southerners and to control how they lived their daily lives. They wanted to change things from how they have always been freeing slaves which the South had always used for farming on plantations. They addressed the idea of “divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders” (33). Southerners often compared themselves to the rebels during the Revolutionary War who were being controlled by an unjust government and decided to act on their disagreement. Northerners claimed that God was on their side, for they believed they were saving a nation that was considered the “last best hope on earth.” They believed it was right to fight in order to preserve the Union and discipline those who dared tried to undermine their conjoined government that kept the nation together. The North also claimed that slavery was a sin in the eyes of God, so they had religious justification.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the North’s perspective on the war. They recognized slavery as evil and against God’s will. I believe that no one can be owned and bought by another person, nor can they be treated like animals. It is wrong to enslave another human- they have thoughts and emotions just like those of their owners. No person has rights of ownership over another. A person should not be deemed unworthy of freedom merely by the color of their flesh. I support the North’s justification of killing during the Civil War.
Nick-
ReplyDeleteWell said. I agree with your statement- "In my mind, only a few things can justify the killing of other human beings, yet freeing an innocent people from the horrors of slavery is most certainly one of them." There are very few things that can truly make taking another life morally alright.
I believe that although there is no full justification for killing another, the North's reasoning for fighting was better. The abolishment of slavery would ultimately save more people from mistreatment in the future than those killed.
Kendra-
ReplyDeleteYou made a very good point with your response. Although both sides felt they were doing what was best, the North's focus was more for the good of all people. The South's reasoning could be considered selfish like you said. I agree that while the "South searched for ways to make themselves feel better about the sin, the North did the same thing only for the good of the people." You are right about the North's realization of the nation's best interests. Good job.
I agree with CJ, that America didn't want to spilt apart like they did. Even though the north thought that slavery was not right, it was the south's way of life.
ReplyDeleteThe North and South during the civil war justified their killing in the same way and some different ways also. The South’s biggest justification of their killing was that it was self defense. They did self defense because the North was on their land and to protect their new country. The North justified by that they were keeping the nation together. Both the North and South’s biggest justification for killing both by protecting their countries. The South also believes that it is justified by their religion and that it is in biblical law. The North also fought to abolish slavery which was a reason the South fought.
ReplyDeleteEven though both sides had a good reason to fight I believe that the South’s reason was better. Even though in no way do I believe that slavery is a good thing but it was not the reason the North started the war. We don’t believe that it was a bad reason to have a war against Great Britain, so why didn’t we let the South break away if that is how we became free. Slavery was something that was common during that time in the South. Without slavery they would have trouble keeping up the farms. The south didn’t want to start the war but when the North came in they had to fight back.
Nick,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about the South justifying their killing though religion. I like how you said the North justified by claiming that they only partook in the violence that took place because they were fighting to save the nation that represented.
But I don't agree with who you agree with because the North didn't originally join the war to abolish they just added it on in the middle of the war.
Both the North and South "justified" their killing in a similar way. They both used the reason that they must do it in order to protect their country. The south used a more religous approuch saying, in essance, that they were exempt from the sith of the ten commandments because they are required to kill to protect their country from its foes. The North used basically the same reason that they a required to for their country. Manysoldiers used the exuse that they were defending themselfs. Not all of the sodiers did kill and avoided it all together by fireing into the air or ground or not at all.
ReplyDeleteI dont agree to one more than the other. I disagree with any and all "justifications" of killing. Its not up to us whether a person should live or die. You can't justify murder.
hank hammond
ReplyDeleteThe North and South justified killing in very similar aspects in the terms that they used religion. They took scripture out of the Old Testament to justify the righteousness of the killing. Within a just war, the men felt in no need to be forgiven through Christianity as if this killing was not a sin. This cleared them from disobeying the sixth commandment. Soldiers also had the same views coming into the war about killing on both sides and how to approach it. Most found themselves at ease with killing in self-defense. This was one of the main reasons why sharp-shooting was viewed unethical.
I agree with the northern justifications of killing in the sense that they were not as ruthless and merciless in the context of killing blacks. This was against the rules of war, yet some might say that this would of helped practice ars morendi. This could be looked at as a more optimistic point of view, but in reality, harshness of the treatment of black soldiers is wrong.
hank hammond
ReplyDeleteIn response to Jerimiah Mulloy
I disagree with Jerimiah that killing is always murder. Most of these soldiers were Christian, and in Christianity, it is not forbidden to kill under all circumstances. In acts of self defense to preserve a righteous life is acceptable. Many times in the bible, especially the Old Testament, "righteous killing" is taken place. So in this case, these soldiers knew no better than to kill with sole purposes of what their religion and great country had taught them.
The North and the South had many of the same reasons to justify killing but they also had many differences. They both were fighting and killing for their country but the south used more of a religious approach in that they were exempt from the commandments because they were defending their country. The north however took the approach that they were fighting to keep the country together and to free the blacks which the south held in slavery.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the North because they were killing in essence,to save the southern slaves and to save a nation. I believe that thier reasons were more justifiable.
I agree with Kendra when she said that the North was fighting for a better cause where the south was selfish. This is a good way to put it because it captures the ideas of killing during the Civil War in a few short words.
ReplyDeleteBoth the North and South used various tactics to justify killing, even though it "violated fundamental biblical law," The South used texts for the Old Testament to convince soldiers that the Sixth Commandment did not apply when "lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes" Also, the South claimed "divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate soldiers," On the other hand, Union soldiers justified killing because it was protecting the "best government on earth," The Union also "cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence,"
ReplyDeletePersonally, I agree with the North's justification. They were killing to save our nation. If they had not fought, the United States would not be what it is today. Also, they saved many innocent slaves from living a terrible life.
The North and South used religion as a key component in justifying killing during the Civil War. On both sides, soldiers violated the fundamental Biblical law of the 6th Commandment. They also believed that God was on their side. With this factor in play, the dispute turned into a holy war. However, both the North and the South had their own perspective on the ideals and laws of killing. Based upon teachings from the Old Testament, the Confederate Baptists believed that any man fighting for the South is excused from the rule not to commit the act of killing. The only time they are exempt from the Commandment is “when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country’s foes.” (33). The Union fought for a great cause; the abolishment of slavery and the reuniting of the once glorious country. The Confederacy fought for the desire to become its own country and for self defense.
ReplyDeleteOf the two sides, I agree with the North’s justification of killing more. The North fought to reunite the country and to end the terrible, horrific slave trade and slavery altogether. However, the South’s defiance and selfishness led to arrogance with the hope of acquiring personal gain. Due to the good cause for which the North was fighting for, it could have helped them win the Civil War.
Re: Evan H
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement saying that the North was primarily fighting for the reuniting of the two opposing sides and the South was trying to defend themselves and their new country. This kind of reminds me of the American Revolution. A group of Southerners (colonists) didn’t like the government (king) in the North (Britain) and decided to revolt. They rallied more people to their cause and eventually broke away hoping of becoming their own separate nation. However, the outcome differed from the American Revolution. The Rebels lost and rejoined the Union.
The North and the South justified all the killing during the Civil War in contrasting ways. The main issue was that “killing violated fundamental biblical law”. The South’s grounds for killing were that the North was invading their land and that it was self defense. Oppositely, the northerners, “cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification” and also that the South was, “aposed to the best government on Earth”.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the North’s justification of killing. Slavery contradicted the foundation of our country which is freedom and the belief that every man is equal. Slavery was a horrid thing and abolishing it saved many African Americans from a terrible life of oppression.
During the Civil War, the North's justifications on killing was to save there nation. The South said they were pretecting there land and wanted to be a newly created nation. As most people know, slavery had a big impact on the war. It gave the war an importance. As the North made it that all men were created equal. Were the South was for slavery. During the war both sides violated the basic religious law of killing. The South created the Confederate Baptist which, for war purposes, excuses men from the Christian's Sixth Commandment which states not to kill. Where the North, which I stated once before, thought it was okay to kill because they were fighting gor there nation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the North's justification for killing. I say that because a nation is worth fighting for. I believe that making a somewhat new belief system just for war is wrong.
Getting men to fight has always been an exceptionally difficult the crusaders used god the Vikings used riches and the confederates used state pride and racial division. Understanding what makes a man fight is at its heart divided into three categories a noble man will fight for what is threatened. A greedy man will fight for what he can gain, and a foolish man will fight for glory. A general or warmonger need only encourage these feelings for example he would threaten the noble man’s family saying that the enemy will destroy it whether true or not the reaction is the same Noble goes to war. The Union used the nobility of Emancipating to encourage soldiers. While the south chose to view the union as evil home wreckers that had to be stopped The commander then would offer money and power to the greedy man and he goes to war (this deal works well for the commander because he doesn’t have to pay his debts if greedy gets killed). The easiest to exploit is the foolish man who goes to fight for glory in war William Tecumseh Sherman once said “there is no glory in war is hell” For this reason the foolish men looking for glory were the ones who mostly deserted when they found no glory on the field. Never the less they fought and after 600,000 dead one side was beaten. Sherman also said “one class of man starts the war and leaves the rest to fight it” Think on that.
ReplyDeleteBoth the North and South justified killing another man surprisingly enough with religious opinion. The North believed that slavery was a dark sin that no man should be allowed to commit in "‘the last best hope of earth’" or the United States of America. The South however justified that they “invoked the notion of divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders.” Along with this the South was fighting in a defensive war on their land, and the North was fighting to hold together the greatest Union in the world.
ReplyDeleteWhile I feel each at that time each had a somewhat justified argument the truth is that only the North had god behind them. Slavery still today goes down as the worst and darkest sin this country has ever committed and had the North not fought this evil time there is no telling what this nation would be today. The Union truly had god behind them, and for that reason my opinions stand by what is right.
In response to Golight
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand your point I have to disagree with what you are saying. Yes, the South had a justified reason to leave the Union and what they did at that time made sense to that economy. However when the colonies originally broke away from Great Britain there was a great war between the early colonists and the British army in order to regain control. Yet it seems to me that you feel the North had less of a reason to fight then the British. The North was fighting to rebuild a great Union, and the British were fighting to regain control over the people they were able to steal from. The North had every reason and right to start the Civil War. To compare the two just doesn’t serve justice to what the North was forced to do.
Just as “Civil War Americans worked to construct Good Deaths for themselves and their comrades” (30) they worked to create means to justify killing. The North and South had similar thoughts on how to go about this remarkably complex aspect of the war. The two sides “invoked and explored the traditional ‘just war’ doctrine, emphasizing that killing was not merely tolerated but required in God’s service” (33). The idea of killing for God made the thought of committing murder on the battlefield endurable for Civil War soldiers. However, as any divided nation would, the North and South had their differentiating views as well. The North “fought to save a nation that represented ‘the last best hope of earth’” (33). The last best hope of earth being the hope to end slavery. “Northerners increasingly cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence” (34). Even though the North had a seemingly moral rationale, the South’s validation was self-defense. “Southerners most often appealed to self-defense against invasion as the source of the war’s justness” (33). The south didn’t make arguments on who was sinning what; they had an aspiration and would fight for the protection of it.
ReplyDeleteIn my eyes, self-preservation outweighs the excuse of who is committing the uglier sin when justifying murder. Hence I lean more toward the South‘s justification of the mass destruction of the Civil War. They didn’t disguise murder as righteousness as the North did. The South saw a powerful troupe impending them and their beliefs and made a decision that would protect them both.
RE: Sarah
ReplyDeleteYou say that “This war fought for the African American lives, the North fought for their freedom.” The South was also fighting for a freedom; its own free will. They felt oppressed by the North and the new systems and laws being thrust upon them. Slavery was the only way of life the Southerners had come to know and the North was attempting to disrupt it. How would you feel if a people with greater authority, capital, and numbers than you were trying to change your way of life? You would defend it. You would fight for your freedom just as the South did.
During the Civil War, both the North and the South looked for reasons to justify the war and for killing. For the North, their reason was basically that they were fighting to keep their nation together, and, later on, to abolish slavery. The South, on the other hand, were fighting to defend themselves.
ReplyDeleteI cannot agree with either side more than the other. Both sides had reasons for fighting that I both understand, and, I myself would use either excuse if I were ever in such a situation as the Civil War.
However, because slavery is wrong, I would have to side with the North more than the South.
Jared Jeselnick
ReplyDeleteYour reasoning for siding with the North was fabulous. It is true that this country was founded on freedom and 'all men are created equal'. I totally agree with you.
The North and the South justified killing in many terms, one example would have to be religion.The North was fighting to save the nation and later on during the war they added that they wanted to abolish slavery, and this was used to give a moral boost to the Northern states and it worked well. The South was fighting to defend their newly found nation, rights, and lifestyle. The south knew the north threatend them so they made the first move and attacked fort Sumter and the American Civil War erupted.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion i agree with the South. Im not saying was good , it was a very bad thing in U.S. history. The thing is the South actually had a better reasson to fight than the North.
In response to Baker
ReplyDeleteI do agree with your opinion on how the south was fighting to defend everything they had and that the North was threatening their way of life in the South. An yes slavery was bad but like you said that was how they worked in the South during that time.
During the Civil War, the North and South justified killing in a few ways. They both thought that by killing you are claiming a human right, and achieving manhood. They each had different reasons aside from this one shared. The North justified killing with the goal of "overturning the wrong of slavery." "Northerners increasingly sited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence." Whereas southerners claimed self-defense from the invading Union as justification for killing. Some southerners also felt they were "Confederate crusaders" in a "holy war."
ReplyDeleteBoth the North and the South had very good reason for killing during the war, but I agree more with the North. To me the North had a more righteous justification, than the South. Self-defense does not seem good enough to me, when comparing against abolishing slavery to kill. I believe more with the North in "overturning the wrong of slavery," and it was all for the good of the country.
Matt Coen,
ReplyDeleteThat was very well said. I like how you said "the South's defiance and selfishness led to arrogance with the hope of acquiring personal gain." This is a different view than anyone else and it really makes me think. Also, how you said the North fought to reunite the country, this is very true in my eyes.
I agree with Kristine Ayre. I believe the North had a better justification than the South. I am not just saying this because I wanted the North to win. Just like Kristine said the self-defense is not a good enough reason for war. Although I disagree with when Kristine said that the North fought for slavery. That is true but that is not why the war began. There was an economic difference between the North and the South. They also had different beliefs about how laws should be.
ReplyDeleteThe north and the south both had very diverse ways to justify killing. The main problem with killing that both sides saw was that it was not morally or religiously right to kill another human being. The north “cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification.” They thought that since the south was committing, in my own opinion, a very terrible sin, they could commit a terrible sin of their own. The south justified killing by saying that they only did it in self defense. I agree with the north’s justifications. I’m glad that the northerners fought to abolish slavery. The southerners, although their reason was valid, was just not as good as the north’s reason to fight.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Mark Miller
ReplyDeleteI disagree that the south had a better reason for fighting. The north wanted to help all the blacks that were enslaved by the southerners, and although it threatened the southern lifestyle, I think it was the right thing to do. Also, the north found a way to live without slaves, and the south would have been able to do the same thing.
During the Civil War, both the North and the South had their reasons to justify killing. I think they needed something to justify the killing of innocent human beings for peace of mind. The South's reason was that of self defense and religion. On page 33, Faust states that "While southerners most often appealed to self-defense against invasion as the source of the war's justness, they invoked as well the notion of divine sanction for a holy war in which they served as Confederate crusaders.", Whereas "northerners increasingly cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification" and "concluding that the goal of overturning the wrong of slavery made the conflict a righteous one and its carnage justifiable."
ReplyDeleteI think I would have to agree with the North's point of view. I don't think that many things justify the killing of tens of thousands of people. However, the cause to free an entire race from an awful, undeserved fate to a better life seems to be a good reason to go to war.
Mary Harris-
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your post, and it was very well written. You made a good point when you said that although the north thought the south was committing a sin they thought it was okay to commit one of their own. I also agree with you that both sides had justifiable reasons but that the North had a better reason than the South.
During the Civil War, both the North and South side had very justifiable (in my opinion) reason for killing one another. The North's basis for killing men of the South was that they were sinners for having kept slaves. Their justification for this was that "men were exempt from the commandment not to kill 'when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes.'"
ReplyDeleteThe South's justification for killing was purely self-defense. To be quite honest, I believe that the South did indeed have a slightly better reason than that of the North. Sure, the North did have an exceptionally noble cause, one worthy of admiration. But I, myself, am a martial artist and I simply cannot see a better reason for fighting than in self-defense. I believe that if you are attacked in any way, for any reason, you should have the right to defend yourself by all means necessary.
-Anna R. Gibson
Baker
ReplyDeleteWhile you make a valid argument about how Southerner’s were just trying to preserve their way of life, I do not think anyone would agree that the enslavement of African Americans was something worth preserving. Also, while the initial purpose of fighting the war for the North was certainly preserving the Union, as the war progressed the abolishment of slavery also became a central goal of the North. You and I will just have to agree to disagree because I do not see how the lives claimed by the South were justified by trying to defend the atrocity that was slavery.
Both the North and the South clearly knew that their religion stated that killing was sinning and, therefore, searched for different ways to justify their fatal actions in this civil war. The North felt that their killings were directly justified by the sin the South was commiting for having slaves and these northerners claimed they were fighting to abolish this cruel act of inhumanity. It is also implified in the book that the North believed America was better as a whole united nation instead of a big piece of land divided by two and were also fighting for this belief. The south, meanwhile, was justifying their proceedings in this gruesome war by saying they were fighting only as a sort of self-defense, because it was them who was invaded for the most part. Some southerners were even recorded to believe to be "confederate crusaders" in a war which to them was "holy".
ReplyDeleteI agree more with the North because I, too, feel that slavery is something brutal that should have never taken place anywhere on Earth, and especially in a great country like this one.
Mikayla,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about this country not being what it is today if it were not for the North's desire to unite the nation, and I also feel the same way about the judgement and maltreatment of people solely because of the color of their skin. These two rigid reasons are not enough to justify the act of taking away another's life but they were definately enough to get the northerner's adrenaline pumping and for them to want to go into battle and fight to end such discrimination and lack of union.
Response to BAKER:
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Baker when he says; "it was a way of life for the southern people to have slaves. this does not make it right but if someone were to threaten our way of life we would want to defend our rights." The Southerners grew up knowing only what they were taught, so when the Northerners came telling them what they had been doing for their entire life was wrong, how would you expect them to react? It would be like telling us, of the modern day, that the use of a cell phone is a sin.
The North and South both had different justifications for fighting in the war, and both are understandable, although i agree with the North. The North was fighting to abolish slavery, which i completely agree with. The South was fighting to defend their country and what they believed in. Also, I find the North's want to keep the nation together very noble and selfless because not only did they help our country in the end, they were fighting for the slaves to be freed.
ReplyDeleteBoth the southerners and the northerners shared common justifications for killing each other. They both saw it as acting in self-defense when they killed the opposing soldiers. Also, it was pointed out by religious publications of the time "killing was not merely tolerated, but required in God's service." (33) Soldiers believed that when they killed their enemies on the battlefield, they were acting on behalf of God and on behalf of their country. As said on page 33, "When lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes," the soldiers were considered "exempt from the commandment not to kill."
ReplyDeleteAlthough some of their justifications for killing each other in war were common, there were also very diverse reasons for this. It was said that southerners felt that their homeland and way of life were being invaded, so they "most often appealed to self-defense" to justify their kills. It is said "northerners increasingly cited the sin of slavery as a religious justification for the use of violence." (33-34).
Personally, I agree with the northerner’s justification for killing during the Civil War. Although the southerner’s make a good point of killing in self-defense, what they are truly defending is not acceptable. They were defending their way of life, which, at the time, was focused around slavery. Therefore, I believe that the northerner’s were not only killing because of their cause to end slavery, but also to emancipate thousands of slaves from their owners.
In response to Erick:
ReplyDeleteWhen you said "Both the North and the South clearly knew that their religion stated that killing was sinning and, therefore, searched for different ways to justify their fatal actions in this civil war.", I fully agree with you. As if the Civil War wasn't enough, there was the added element of both the North and the South trying to justify their own actions, which was a war within itself. It was as if the North and the South were fighting in a battle of justifications, attempting to prove their own justification to be true. The conflict of the different justifications was the backbone of the Civil War, what caused so many Americans to die in this bloody battle.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBoth the north and the south shared similar justifications for killing. They both saw it as defending themselves and their country. However, they both went different ways about justifying the killing. The North stated it was to protect "the last best hope on earth" and to completely abolish slavery. The South on the other hand, made it religious and pointed out technicalities in verses from the Old Testament. These technicalities pointed out that under lawful war the slaying of their foes was necessary.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the Northerners justifications. I agree with them because a war is necessary to free an entire race of people. African Americans stuck in the south were still slaves. I found that this was a legitimate reason raise a war.
The whole disagreement between the North and South was just that, a disagreement. The south did not like what it was being told to do, much like a teenager with his/her parents. Rather than working to resolve the issue, the South rebelled. Im in complete agreement with the North because of their views on slavery and the fact that they were trying to fix everything, whereas the South was just instigating.
ReplyDeleteIn response to BAKER
ReplyDeleteI disagree with your statement, "The war was not fought over just slavery that didnt even come up until the emancipation proclamation," True, the war was not directly fought over slavery, but one of the main reasons the South seceded was because they were worried slavery would be abolished by the North. The seceding of the South led to the Civil War, so slavery played a large part in the Civil War.
Katie-
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement, "I find the North's want to keep the nation together very noble and selfless..." This is true because although the death tolls were high, they helped free slaves and reunite a country.
Sevan,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your opinion. Despite other reasons, slavery was definitely a legitimate reason "for raising a war." A good modern day example of this is the liberation of the Iraqi people. Though they aren't slaves, they were still being treated unfairly and we sided to help "free" them.
During the Civil War, the North and South had similar justifications for killing. Both felt that it was defending there country. The North wanted to completely abolish slavery, while the South made it religious.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the North because, I believe that slavery needed to be abolished. Slaves were stuck in the South and deserved to be set free.
Amy Bowman-
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you wrote about how the north had some good reasons for killing and so did the south.
The justification of killing during the civil war was very different from north and south. "when lawful war calls for the slaying of our country's foes."(pg.33). The southern states justified their actions because of their strong religious beliefs. "religious justification for the use of violence."(pg.34). The northern states, were fighting to preserve the nation the best as they could. I agree with the northern states’ justification because I feel if you need to fight to preserve a nation that you have faith in, you should.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Civil War, both the North and the South each had justifications behind the extreme amount of killing which occurred. The South justified their killing as being "self-defense against invasion" and the North justified their killing as fighting "to save a nation that represented 'the last best hope of earth'", and also later to abolish slavery.
ReplyDeleteI personally agree with the North, because I am strongly against slavery and I believe that fighting for the freedom of the African American people was the right thing to do. To me, nothing can ever justify treating people so terribly, and although killing is wrong, I think it is more justified if it is for something as precious as freedom.
In response to Nick Burns-
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with everything that you stated in your post and I thought that it was extremely well said. I fully agree with your statement that "In my mind, only a few things can justify the killing of other human beings, yet freeing an innocent people from the horrors of slavery is most certainly one of them", for that is the exact way that I feel.
The reasoning for killing between both North and South had their differences and similarities. The North's reason was that they had been fighting to save the nation and keep it together as one. Also, they wanted to abolish slavery. However, the South's reasonwas that they were defending their country, and they wanted slavery.
ReplyDeleteOn this i would have to side with the North's reasoning. This is because the North believed slavary should be abolished. Also, they were fighting for the nation that was created off the belief that all men should be treated equally. The North was fighting for their freedom.
In response to Jacob A.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you that slavery was the worst and darkest sin out nation has ever committed. Abolishing slavery was one of the best things that ever happened to our country.
The North justified killing during the Civil War claiming God for their side as they fought to save a nation that represented “the last best hope on earth.” They also used the sin of slavery to justify the violence. The South justified killing during the Civil War as self-defense against an invasion. They also thought of it as a holy war were they served as Confederate crusaders.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the justifications of both the North and the South, although I agree more with the North. I agree with the North more because they fought against slavery and for the hope for the future. They fought to protect their nation, which I believe was more noble.
Brian-
ReplyDeleteI agree that freeing the slaves was a good reason to start a war, but i dont think that this statement also applies to the modern day war in Iraq..
In response to Anna Gibson,
ReplyDeleteI liked what you said about defending yourself anyone should be allowed the means to do that that is what the 2nd amendment is for. As a way to legitimize violence in war the two warring governments used the threat to one’s family more than anything else. The north had the abolition of slavery on their side a driving force that won the war.
In response to Nick Burns.
ReplyDeleteI disagree that the North's justification was better. However I did agree with the abolishing of slavery. I just felt like the North was kind of being forceful. On the other hand, the South was acting mostly in defense, which I think is really the only good reason to fight in war.
Both the north and the south have their own views on how they justify killing and had their own reasons for it. The north was fighting to stop slavery and keep the union together. The south was fighting a defensive war for their land. Both, in their minds, thought god was on their side but personally I think that, because the north was fighting slavery, god was only with them. Cyrus
ReplyDeleteNick I agree with you that slavery is one of the worst things to have happened in our history. I also agreed when you said that only a few things justify killing and that freeing people from slavery is definitely one of them. This is one of the many reasons that the north won the war because so many things drove them to win
ReplyDeleteThe North and the South justified why the were killing. They justified it in their own reasonings to kill in the war. The South was fighting in defense of the there land. The North was fighting in order to save the nation or land as well as to keep the union in order. The North also wanted to abolish slavery. The North believe that to own another person, slavery, was a sin and in which also justified their killings.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the North's justification. I believe that they had good intentions in mind and were fighting for a cause that certainly needed to be abolished. They were also fighting for the rights as equals and the land they stood upon which gave them even more justice in my eyes.
I agree with Erick. He pointed out that they had justified there reasonings by god and the holy "confederate crusaders". I believe that their is not any reasoning to kill for the holy ones and or have a hatred towards them. This does not in any way reason that you should kill a human being. I also think that slavery could never be justified and is a horrible criminal act no matter how well the slaves are treated. It is wrong to own a person and it can not be justifiyed.
ReplyDelete