new evidence found at Monticello that suggests that sally Hemmings was NOT Mr Jefferson's mistress....she was his slave, and he raped her. Don't take my word for it.....google and read the article. So let me pose this question....if Charlottesville wants to remove a Robert E Lee statue because he used to own slaves but freed them before the war then what in the hell are they going to do about the saintly founding father and rapist Mr Jefferson? Does signing the constitution give you the right to own slaves and rape them.?......if black lives are supposed to matter what about good ole sally?.........ok my liberal compatriots............give me hell
From today's Staunton Misleader thru the Washington Post
- Thread starter Snow Sled Baby
- Start date
Yeah, the problem with that whole rape scenario starts from the premise that any sexual relations between owner and slave had to be rape. And don't be conflating issues here: First of all, the slaves Lee inherited from his father-in-law were not "freed before the war," they weren't freed until 1863, and then only because Mr. Custis's will required him to do so ... but the will also said they couldn't be freed until the estate was brought to such a financial condition that he could pay a $10,000 legacy to each of his grand-daughters -- and the money could only be raised by keeping the slaves on to work the three estates that Custis owned when he died.
People keep yakking about slavery, but the bigger issue is statues to men who betrayed the country and led armies bent on destroying it.
People keep yakking about slavery, but the bigger issue is statues to men who betrayed the country and led armies bent on destroying it.
both Jefferson and Lee owned slaves........one is revered and the other is reviled.......where is the logic there?....that's all I'm trying to say....more liberal bias....THEY get to choose who's right and who's wrong...to hell with real history
One is revered for what he did FOR the country, the other is reviled for what he did TO the country. Despite owning slaves himself, Jefferson wanted to include a paragraph about the slave trade in the Declaration of Independence, but was told the Southern representatives in the Continental Congress would shoot it down, so he left it out. Lee led an army that fought the United States to protect the right to buy and sell other human beings and keep them in chains.
I honestly don't understand why easy concepts like what you expressed perfectly is so lost on wignuts.
On the subject of the archaeological find at Monticello, it is fascinating. As it pertains to Civil War monuments, this is the second time on this board i have written that i am against removal of historical markers or monuments. I am against the display of the Confederate flag as unfortunately some use it as a racial declaration and has ruined the history of it. Furthermore, all Americans should be proud and display only one Country flag even if they sometimes find it embarrassing to do so under certain political circumstances.
Read the article...can't find the new evidence that is suggested that there was a relationship versus he raped her.
I didn't read the article mentioned in op but i have read and seen a lot on this subject. Most historians believe Jefferson's relationship with Sally was a loving one.
True, however Lee was not motivated by the notion of the Confederate States, it was more about loyalty to his home state. Many of those that fought in the Civil War fought not out of a desire to maintain slavery, but because of simply where they were born and raised.
My wife and I recently went on a tour of Monticello. What a bunch of bullsh*t. As I so adroitly do to many on this board....I had the guide all twisted into knots by the end of the tour......The last we saw of her she was walking away muttering to herself.
Last edited:
I can't imagine why you would do something like that. I've been to Monticello several times and have loved it everytime.
Last week, I visited Benjamin Harrison's home in downtown Indianapolis as my wife has family walking distance to it. Was very good tour but I would have done anything to get away from family at the time.
We did enjoy the grounds and the history. Our tour guide was over the top. On your tours....did they mention how prolific a reader Jefferson was?
Sorry, but Virginia made common cause with slavery in its ordinance of secession:
The people of Virginia, in their ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America, adopted by them in Convention, on the 25th day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eight-eight, having declared that the powers granted them under the said Constitution were derived from the people of the United States, and might be resumed whensoever the same should be perverted to their injury and oppression, and the Federal Government having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern slaveholding States.
Exactly how was Lincoln supposed to respond to terrorist attacks on U.S. ships and installations? And don't give me that tired old crap about the individual states -- that concept was tried under the Articles of Confederation, which failed so spectacularly that after only four years we had to replace them with the Constitution. It's too bad that the Southern states thought we were still Germany or Italy with our loose collection of petty little countries, even as they railed about Lincoln's violating the Constitution.
did they tell you during your tour that Jefferson cut and pasted the Bible?........he read only the passages that he agreed with.........the first cut and paste liberal....he has relatives on this board yet today :scream:
I don't understand your point, as this has NOTHING to do with my comment.
Personal motivation that led men to fight in the war varied from individual to individual.
It has everything to do with your comment. You said "Lee was not motivated by the notion of the Confederate States, it was more about loyalty to his home state." His home state seceded to join with the states in rebellion against the lawfully constituted government of the United States in order to protect slavery. Even you should be able to make the connection there. It wasn't "his home state" but the United States that educated him and gave him the career that allowed him to feed and clothe his family, but he turned his back on the United States and violated his oath to support and defend the Constitution, by leading an army in rebellion against that country and that Constitution.