Was the three-fifths compromise an acceptable deal on slavery?

  • At that time, it was acceptable.

    While the thought of the three fifths compromise today is abhorrent, the truth is that it was the best that could be done at the time of its passing. Back then, slaves were not even considered people, so to at least consider to them be sixty percent of a person was a huge leap.

  • Yes, because it got the job done.

    Three-fifths compromise was absolutely an acceptable deal on slavery because it got the job done. A group will rarely entirely vote or believe the same thing and it would not be right to have waited for an even bigger majority or whole on this humanity issue. Three-fifths got the job done, and that's what mattered.

  • The three-fifths compromise was not an acceptable deal on slavery.

    No compromise that allowed slavery was acceptable. In the end, the series of compromises, like the Missouri Compromise, and the Compromise of 1850 led to increased tensions that eventually erupted into civil war. No law that allows for the slavery of our fellow human beings can be acceptable because it violates basic human rights.

  • The three-fifths compromise was not acceptable.

    To think that the three-fifths compromise was an acceptable deal in regards to slavery is absurd. Slaves are human beings just like the rest of us, and the three fifths compromise basically stated that 40 percent of a slave is not human and should not be allowed to vote, and that's wrong.

  • The vote of slaves was not counted equally.

    I cannot imagine what the slaves went through to receive freedom from white land owners. The three fifth compromise helped the slaves when it comes to voting, but their vote did not count like a white man's vote. Blacks were still not equal to whites in a lot of ways. It helped the slaves, but it did not solve the problem.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.