Rationalizing the Antislavery Movement
...ain inalienable rights,” while, in reality, they were withholding these rights and freedoms from slaves. The American Antislavery Society, in its Constitution, explained their plan to convince American citizens that “Slaveholding is a heinous crime in the sight of God” and for “the best interests of all concerned,” it should be immediately abandoned without hesitation. In the “Particular Instructions” to Theodore Weld, this society took their movement a step further by demanding “immediate abolition” of slavery or they would go forth with their mission to overthrow American slavery, themselves. They believed it to be “the most atrocious and oppressive system of bondage that [had] existed in any country.” For many reasons, they understood it to be a sin; it contradicted the main principles of religion, morality, and humanity. Women even had a part in the antislavery movement. Angelina and Sarah Grimké held antislavery lectures in their home in New England which always aroused opposition because most wealthy men believed that women had no place in such a movement. As they were women, moreover, they attracted large audiences, playing an essential part within this movement. Their participation in antislavery and moral reform eventually led to the fight for women’s rights. In addition to the antislavery movement, many abolitionists began to demand racial equality. In the “Fourth of July Oration,” Peter Williams, a pastor at St. Phillips Episcopal Church in New York, defended his race by explaining how they were “natives” of America and that they had “toiled to cultivate ...