• doctordevice@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I’m not. I’m objecting to your saying the clause was racist when its very purpose was anti-slavery. Slavery is the thing that is racist.

    I think a Civil War era leader on abolitionism and civil rights would know what he’s talking about when he describes the clause as supporting his cause.

      • doctordevice@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think you should read it again. He’s saying even taking the worst possible interpretation, the clause promotes freedom for slaves.