was the state georgia pro slaves?
594185
Yes, Georgia was pro-slavery.
931760
U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Bowers v. Hardwick upheld Georgia's law against oral and anal sex, under which Hardwick had been arrested. Most states, however, including Georgia have repealed their sodomy laws. In fact, Georgia's own Supreme Court struck down the state's so-called sodomy law, noting, "We cannot think of any other activity that reasonable persons would rank as more private and more deserving of protection from government interference than consensual, private, adult sexual activity."\n\nSo the answer is, "Yes," but most of the time they won't and shouldn't. It is up to us as conscientious voters to make sure that remains true.
519300
Got me there, need to ask the State of Georgia about that.
266678
If you mean opposing slavery as in "abolitionism," then the links included int he "sources" box should be of some help. Also, you can try google searches on "slavery" and should also be able to find tons of stuff at your local library or from local or online book sellers. Hope this helps.
95905
the plantation owners or the slaves?
158821
Try this site for Georgia trivia\n\nhttp://ngeorgia.com/gatrivia.html\n\nAnd take your pick!
169690
Quite, solely comiting, follower...\n\nMarry me ATL GA
1137286
Georgia - http://www.acluga.org/\n\nMain site - http://www.aclu.org/
454899
Are you kidding? Republicans did not free the slaves. Check your history... And I know Lincoln was a Republican, but he did not free the slaves. Read a book.
223621
In the 1840s things started heating up between North and South over general states' rights against the rights of the federal government. The issues adressed generally dealt immediatly with slaves. New states admitted to the Union had to be judged as "slave states" (slaves allowed) or "free states" (slavery prohibited). \n\nBoth sides wanted new states to be whichever side they favored because it would give them more legislative power in the US Congress. This led to bloodshed in many areas, particularly in Kansas, which became known as "Bloody Kansas". \n\nIn 1861, South Carolina seceded from the Union (said they werent part of the US any more) and started seizing federal property, including arms and munitions. \n\nOther states started seceding as well. Soon the seceded states formed what they called the "Confederate States of America", which came to be headed by Jefferson Davis as President. They attacked Fort Sumner in South Carolina and seized the fort, capturing it's inhabitants. This was treason.\n\nAbraham Lincoln (President of the US) immediatly called for 75,000 troops to put down the uprising. Then the Civil War started, eventually involving millions of troops. 600,000 men eventually died in the conflict, and the US was shattered for decades after the war. Remember, this war was fought to unite the Union, NOT for slavery. In fact, slavery was only addressed in 1862 when Lincoln set forth the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing all slaves in the Confederate states. By 1863 there were armed black soldiers in Union armies, serving with distinction. In 1865 the CSA tried to use black troops, but they were destroyed before the plan could be implemented.\n\nIn 1865 the final Confederate forces surrendered (General Johnston was the last to surrender, but with the surrender of General Robert E. Lee the war was pretty much over). Richmond, VA, the Confederate capital, was seized. \n\nLincoln began steps to rebuild and reunite the US. He planned to be kind to the newly reunited South and not punish them for seceding. Before he could start, he was killed by a man named John Wilkes Booth. \n\nThe years following became years of anger and hate for Southerners. The North oppressed and punished Southern insurrection with high taxes and legal oversight. This period became known as Reconstruction, and it really only ended around the 1970s, one century after it started.\n\nHope I helped,\nThe Wise One\n\nP.S. For more information check out http://www.wikipedia.com\nThey are pretty good, but it's better to read books...however that takes more time than I think you want to spend.
394025
Somebody had to do something. The federal government is all talk and no action. Do you have a link to these new laws? I haven't read them yet. Georgia was the perfect state to do something because no one can say this state was stolen from mexicans.
682262
No... He WAS a white American who freed the slaves
228999
In the South, the economy was based on agriculture, and the chief crop was cotton, which depended heavily on labor to produce it. Slaves were an important source of labor in the farming industries.
465023
1861-1865 \nThe civil war was about the state right.
1175788
If I knew it was going to be like this, I would not have purchased slaves from the BLACK Africans who were selling their brothers and sisters for profit.  But since I am a conservative Repbulican, and NOT a Democrat "party of the old south slave owners " Look at the history of the Republican Party vs the Democrat Party, it was the southern Dems that WANTED TO KEEP SLAVERY(States rights) and the Republican party was formed to STOP slavery.  Slavery is STILL going ON today, in \nAfrica, and the Arab "states".  So, I agree, why are they all whining and expecting a hand out??  \n\nAnd yes, I would and STILL pick my own cotton!
483256
here are several:\nhttp://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=slv3&p=Georgia%27s+discovery
327460
Unfortunately, slavery was a vital institution for the economic well being of the South. Whenever the issue of slavery came up during the drafting of the Constitution, arguments between North and South arose, which was one of the precursors to the Civil War. The Missouri Compromise, the 2/3 Compromise, both dealt with the issue of slavery and how far north it could extend. Southerners referred to it as a "necessary evil", a bad thing, but nevertheless it was vital to the South's economy, and also the nation as a whole.