3 Whisky Happy HourThe Ricochet PodcastGLoP CultureBeyond the Polls with Henry OlsenGray MattersDaily SignalThe Erick Erickson ShowGiving VenturesMom Wars3 Martini LunchChicks on The RightParsing Immigration PolicyFederalist Radio HourWhat the Hell Is Going OnFreedom to LearnThe Learning CurveThe Conservative Woman’s GuideHeritage ExplainsNot Dead YetWho Funds that?The Radio Free Hillsdale HourThe Glenn ShowFirst Things PodcastCall Me Back - with Dan SenorHillsdale DialoguesLaw Talk with Epstein, Yoo & CookeThe LibertarianThe Report Card with Nat MalkusThe Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’ConnorThe American IdeaMadison’s NotesConservative Crossroads with Henry OlsenThe Back of the BookMartini ShotThe Dave Carter ShowThe Powerline ShowIn DissentHeard at HeritageSmart Girl PoliticsJames Lileks’ The DinerCase in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and CultureJobMakersOne on One with Robert DoarHomeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeHubwonk

Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

  1. Podcasts/
  2. Heard at Heritage/
  3. Slavery and the Constitution
September 30, 2020
September 30, 2020The Heritage Foundation

Slavery and the Constitution

Subscribe to Heard at HeritageSubscribe
There is an ongoing debate about the relationship between the Constitution and slavery prior to the 13th Amendment. On the one hand, the words “slave” and “slavery” do not appear in the document. On the other, there was no explicit federal ban of this evil practice until 1865. Some view this omission as a covert way of preserving slavery while shrouding the Founders’ hypocrisy. Others, such as Frederick Douglass, consider the Constitution to be an “anti-slavery” document because a “plain and common-sense reading of the Constitution” clearly prohibits slavery. Still others see it as a compromise, delicately omitting the word “slave” to avoid the implication that there could be “property in men,” but conceding its permissibility, with the hope that it would become extinct. Please join us for a thoughtful discussion about these rival conceptions of the Constitution with our distinguished historians and constitutional scholars.

See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Trending

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Join Ricochet

Get the Ricochet app

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play
  • •
  • •