Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
so because its not honoarable you want to take the statues and erase history has it never happen, and replace it with what. even thought it might not be honorable, you still honor your relative for standing up.
if you not southerner it might be hard for you to understand, we live history daily. The town I live in is named after a confederate general, so am i now from nowhere to keep 11% of the population happy.
why dont the southern keep their statues and those from up north stay out of it and yall can do what ever you want with your statues
Actually, it is not honorable to honor a cause that you know is wrong. No one is telling you to erase history like it never happened. Erasing history is writing things in textbooks like "the war was not about slavery". You can keep that history in museums. I don't honor someone for "standing up to something". I honor someone for standing up for what is right. I care whether it is right or wrong. One cannot talk about honor without talking about right and wrong. It is irrational to honor something that has been proven to be morally wrong.
I live in the South. I was technically born in the South(only lived in my birth place for 6 months though). I despise anything related to the Confederacy. I'm glad to see it removed. Telling me about "living history daily". Honoring a cause rooting in slavery and White supremacy is what it is. It is a horrible cause and should never be honored. That is what the CSA stood for. That what original documents and editorials have shown. If you cannot refute the information being presented, explain honoring something that isn't honorable.
The last statement pretty much shows a lack of rational thinking. It shows petulant behavior. Just because you're free to do something doesn't mean you should. Can and should are two different things. I can call someone a racial slur. Should I? No. And I won't. I know right from wrong. This Confederate issue is the same way. Yes, you can honor Confederate soldiers. Should they be honored? No. Why? They fought for a broader cause that was very wrong. We know slavery is wrong. We know bigotry is wrong. Why honor a cause that was rooted in both?
And explain 11% of the population?
Last edited by green_mariner; 01-02-2016 at 06:59 PM..
FACT is these memorials aren't alive and aren't actually hurting anyone at all...people are choosing to be offended by them rather than thinking "yeah that's something/someone that happened to get to the point of ME EXISTING HERE TODAY". History is ugly folks, but it's ours and it all got us here didn't it?
Offence is probably not the best gauge of anything given how easily and often people get offended.
FACT: The CSA wanted desperately to keep slavery around, that is sought to secede.
Based on that, why should we make monuments to those who fought for that cause? Yes, we need to learn history. It doesn't mean we should make monuments to those that fought for morally horrible things.
Sorry my liberal brothers, but you cannot have it both ways. You cannot eliminate someones culture just because you find what it stands for (in your mind) just because you find it offensive. That is not what America is all about. Tolerance comes in all colors.
There he goes again. Lumping all liberals together. I'm a liberal (compared to you), and I have no desire to have these statues taken down, no does any liberal I personally know.
Thanks for the assist in translation, I appreciate. The entire post had my NY BS detector bleeping off the charts!
See what I mean? Although he does admit something is not honorable? Somehow something dishonorable should be honored if a family member is involved?
& sadly, the logic breaks down even further & the BS piles up even more. How is asking folks to consider moving a Memorial honoring an (admitted) White Supremacist Insurrection to a Confederate Museum around the block 'erasing history?' (specifically the 'Battle of Liberty Place' monument)
& where does he pull the 11% from?
Oh I give up. It's too ridiculous.
Knowing something is wrong and still trying to justify honoring it , that is irrational. If you look at it closer, it is an oxymoron. Honoring the dishonorable. Ignorance is not knowing better. Knowing better and still choosing to do wrong, that is stupidity.
Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
Knowing something is wrong and still trying to justify honoring it , that is irrational. If you look at it closer, it is an oxymoron. Honoring the dishonorable. Ignorance is not knowing better. Knowing better and still choosing to do wrong, that is stupidity.
Thanks for the assist in translation. It IS oxymoronic! Also nearly indecipherable as it makes no logical sense & also I decided I'd rather not consider where he's pulling this stuff from.
Thanks for the assist in translation. It IS oxymoronic! Also nearly indecipherable as it makes no logical sense & also I decided I'd rather not consider where he's pulling this stuff from.
No problem. One can understand ignorance, as that implies not knowing better. One can understand being brainwashed. Indecipherable can be used to describe knowing better but refusing to change. That is beyond reason. No rational thinking.
Having lived around such types, I don't even want to discuss such topics with them. Presenting the facts does not help. Part of it is not wanting to be told "this is wrong" or "what you are doing is wrong ".
We can't be loyal to the mistakes of of ancestors. We can learn from them, but we need to look at what is right and what is wrong.
After over 400 posts, I'm actually beginning to wonder if a very few of our fellow-posters want to go back to owning Black slaves if they could. I just can't see any other reason for the obsession.
After over 400 posts, I'm actually beginning to wonder if a very few of our fellow-posters want to go back to owning Black slaves if they could. I just can't see any other reason for the obsession.
I think it comes down to some people thinking the entirety of the Confederacy and the Civil War was "we want to keep black slaves" and that everyone involved is only being judged by that one particular idea. And since they lost and are considered "bad" by todays standards we need to eliminate all visual references or anything that might make someone seem important in any way.
Of course no event or person is ever condensed down to a single simple idea like that but it is SO MUCH EASIER to make something a target if you do. And it's completely necessary today since there isn't anything going on in modern times to target since the world is now perfect.
All of these 408 and counting posts, including the ones from pseudo-historians, have bloviated repeatedly about the Articles of Confederation, black ancestors, hate for the Confederate battle flag, hate for the southern soldiers and other ad nauseam hates, but never once has any pseudo-historian or other pseudo-intellectual addressed the question as to just why droves of poor southern farmers fought for the Confederacy. They didn't own slaves and surely had no desire to give up their lives so the rich plantation owners could keep theirs. 1 January 1863 is also ignored. All of this crap about hatred, which is repeated countless times (and by some of the same folks) does nothing to foster a real understanding of the events of 1861-1865 (a period I chose to call The War of Northern Aggression...MY OPINION... for you folks who desire to stifle my First Amendment right of free speech).
I challenge the intellectuals/pseudo intellectuals here to address those concerns. Probably won't happen since all of you have ignored it before.
Yes, because they all remained in the Union, except WV which seceded from VA and joined the Union.
Specifically:
WV seceded from VA at the Second Wheeling Convention (8/20/1861) and was admitted to the Union on 6/20/1863.
At the Missouri State Convention (2/28/1861), MO elected to remain in the Union.
The MD General Assembly, meeting on 4/29/1861 at Frederick, voted 53-13 against secession, thus remaining in the Union.
The KY General Assembly twice (12/27/1860 and 5/27/1861) declined to initiate a convention for secession, thus, it remained in the Union.
Just a slight correction. WV never seceded from Virginia, it was dismembered from Virginia by the Federal government, less than 24% of WV voters favored the new state. The Union government in WV was never supported by a majority of the people of the state. Most of the state consists of counties that voted for the Confederacy along with the rest of Virginia in 1861. Voting was conducted under military occupation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes.
