Talk:John Quincy Adams and abolitionism
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Quincy Adams and abolitionism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editThe editor who created this page wrote this passage in the article:
"Adams rose again to argue that the right to petition was a universal right granted by God so that those in the weakest positions might always have recourse to those in the most powerful. None agreed with him or joined him.[24]" (Italics added by myself)
24. ^ Miller, ‘’Arguing about Slavery, 270
Let's take a quick look at the source, p. 270, in Miller:
Miller writes that Adams advocated "the universal natural right to petition as a plea from every kind of weakenness to every kind of power, available to American slaves as to the the humblest and least powerful and most aggrieved anywhere."
Neither in Miller's words, nor in the quotations he provides by Adams on the floor of the House of Representatives, is the word "God" used.
Why is the word "God" inserted in the passage when neither Miller or Adams used it in the source provided? This amounts to original research and is not permitted at Wikipedia.
Secondly, on p. 270 Miller says that "William Slade" of Vermont "would have [defended Adams] "and Slade tried to get the floor, but the Speaker of the House did not call upon him."
Thus, Miller provides evidence that Adams had some support, and belies the claim that "None agreed with him", but it fits with the effort by the editor to build a water-tight argument that Adams stood entirely alone. This kind of tendentious writing will not do. The offending sentence has been removed. 36hourblock (talk) 19:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)