Timeline for Was the Emancipation Proclamation an Executive Order that bypassed Congress and freed 3 million slaves?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 28, 2017 at 3:08 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | Nancy Pelosi quoted Ronald Reagan as a legitimate source? | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 17:53 | vote | accept | Larian LeQuella | ||
| Nov 24, 2014 at 23:17 | comment | added | ChrisW | @Bobson It's "trying to answer" by only presenting the evidence I have, i.e.: it is called a proclamation; and IMO it is (or it 'includes') a proclamation and an order. It take it that the president issues "proclamations" to the people, and issues "orders" to the army and the executive branch of government. In this one he is doing both. | |
| Nov 24, 2014 at 21:47 | comment | added | Bobson | Maybe it's just me, but I can't tell whether this is trying to answer the original question in the affirmative ("Executive Order + Public Proclamation") or the negative ("a public proclamation which gave orders, but not really an Executive Order"). | |
| Nov 23, 2014 at 2:44 | comment | added | ChrisW | It's "an image making the rounds on Facebook": that's notable enough. | |
| Nov 23, 2014 at 2:15 | comment | added | user5341 | Also, if you disconnect the question from the context of Pelosi or Obama, frankly, there's ZERO reason for it to be on this site. Is there any reason to care whether Emansipation Proclamation was or was not Executive Action outside that context? Is there any notability to that claim outside that context? | |
| Nov 23, 2014 at 2:14 | comment | added | user5341 | @ChrisW - "sincerely believed to be an act of justice" is precisely the motivation part :). Whether that sincerety was actual or made up is... debatable shall we say (the Southern-states-only scope is an argument for the latter) | |
| Nov 23, 2014 at 2:04 | comment | added | ChrisW | @DVK Motive is usually off-topic on Skeptics; and the question doesn't mention Pelosi or Obama, so I won't bring them into the answer: next week, next month, next year, no-one will associate this question with current events. As for "Lincoln treating this as an act of war", that may be true but I was also really admiring the way he claimed to believe and recommend it as an act of justice: "And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God." | |
| Nov 23, 2014 at 1:54 | comment | added | user5341 | @ChrisW - I meant precisely that quote, but coupled with explaining what that specific quote means in terms of making the Pelosi comparison useless (IOW, Lincoln treated Emansipation Proclamation as an act of war - which was fully under his purvue as CiC, not as a legislative act). | |
| Nov 23, 2014 at 1:51 | comment | added | ChrisW | @DVK I quote "by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority". Is there something else I should add as "context"? | |
| Nov 23, 2014 at 1:48 | comment | added | user5341 | You might want to add some context about the fact that the justification/origin for Lincoln's action was a rebellion/cesession going on and that was exactly why he claimed he had the power to issue it since the Emancipation Proclamation exclusively applied to the Confederate states. IOW, as many political "facts", it's true in the letter bit false in the spirit of how it's being used. | |
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:46 | history | edited | ChrisW | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:41 | comment | added | ChrisW | Yes that's clear in context. I can't think of an idiom for it at the moment. | |
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:40 | history | edited | ChrisW | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1307 characters in body
|
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:34 | comment | added | David Mulder | Great, normally I am able to figure out which language it is by trying it in all three, and choosing the one that sounds most natural, but in this case it sounded weird in all 3 somehow (which was why I made the remark...) ... probably must be Dutch then. Either way, just meant to say that I was reading it subjectively/with my own assumptions affecting what I was reading. | |
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:31 | comment | added | ChrisW | That ain't an English proverb ("Seeing through rose-tinted glasses" is an English idiom but means something different). | |
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:20 | comment | added | David Mulder | Ah, I skimmed your answer with my own glasses on (wow, sometimes I hate being trilingual, I forget which proverb is from which language... that's english right?), so I somehow thought you actually concluded the same thing I did. Either way, I wouldn't call "the same force" "the same", though I definitely agree that they are similar indeed. Just not technically the same. | |
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:16 | comment | added | ChrisW | Never mind. Your answer is a bit different from mine, because you're suggesting that they're not the same, whereas I'm using the same source to claim that they're similar. Go diversity! | |
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:10 | comment | added | David Mulder | Ah, just saw you beat me to the answer by a whole minute and found out the possible original source for the claim. Go you! :D | |
| Nov 22, 2014 at 23:07 | history | edited | ChrisW | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1205 characters in body
|
| Nov 22, 2014 at 22:58 | history | answered | ChrisW | CC BY-SA 3.0 |