U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > St. Louis
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-07-2017, 11:21 PM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,305 posts, read 5,983,744 times
Reputation: 4350

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
But this discussion is about the Confederates and why we shouldn't have Confederate monuments. And that alone. I called them traitors because that is what they are. Wage war against one's own country, that is being a traitor. Flag burning, as despicable as it is, is protected in the Constitution. Waging war against the USA, however, is treason. Leaving the U.S. Army to fight for an enemy combatant (that is what Robert E. Lee did) is a treason offense.

I suspect you only brought up the two groups to deflect from why there is such a disdain for Confederates. If you want to talk about BLM and Antifa, a separate thread would suffice.
You didn't respond to this part of my post, which is the part I'm most interested in hearing your response:

"I posted previously I have a relative who fought and died in the civil war and he considered the Confederates "rebels" and "traitors." Yet they were welcomed back after the war, those that lived, as Americans. They were no longer traitors. As long as they turned in their guns and said their oath, they were Americans. And their offspring fought and died for the USA in our many wars since: Spanish American war, WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, etc. et al.

I'm wondering why 150 years later they are traitors again."

Why, exactly, are we fighting that war again?

The timing of all of this is suspicious.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2017, 11:32 PM
 
58,133 posts, read 50,685,302 times
Reputation: 17793
Quote:
I posted previously I have a relative who fought and died in the civil war and he considered the Confederates "rebels" and "traitors." Yet they were welcomed back after the war, those that lived, as Americans. They were no longer traitors. As long as they turned in their guns and said their oath, they were Americans. And their offspring fought and died for the USA in our many wars since: Spanish American war, WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, etc. et al.

I'm wondering why 150 years later they are traitors again.
I'm not here to talk about what they were "considered". I am here for the bottom line. That matters to me more than anything else, period. The fact is, the Confederates were Americans that fired on/declared war against their own country. The CSA was never formally recognized by any nation, especially not the USA. These were U.S. states in rebellion against the USA. They fired AGAINST the USA, they were enemy combatants that technically belonged to the USA, while declaring themselves part of the CSA.

Of course they were welcomed back. Here is the thing. It doesn't change what they did. It does not change anything. What they still did was treasonous. Under normal circumstances, in accordance to the Constitution, a punishment would be in order.

The Confederacy called themselves rebels. Fire against you own country, that is a traitor act. Robert E. Lee swore an oath to this nation. He turned his back on it for the enemy.

I look at the bottom line, period.

And aside from being people who fired against this country, why were the Confederates firing against this country? They wanted secession so bad. Why? Because they feared an end to slavery. This is noted many times in the Articles of Secession. People writing and openly admitting that if the South couldn't keep slaves, then the South was doomed. It didn't matter that Lincoln didn't plan on abolishing slavery. Many people weren't thinking rationally. When the Confederate Constitution was drafted, it was written to protect the right to own slaves. It was explicit about that. The stars and bars of the Confederate flag, William Tappan Thompson came up with that. His words below.

Quote:
As a people, we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause.[5]… Such a flag…would soon take rank among the proudest ensigns of the nations, and be hailed by the civilized world as THE WHITE MAN'S FLAG

As a national emblem, it is significant of our higher cause, the cause of a superior race, and a higher civilization contending against ignorance, infidelity, and barbarism. Another merit in the new flag is, that it bears no resemblance to the now infamous banner of the Yankee vandals.
Again, why should we, in 2017, be paying tribute to Confederates?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 11:33 PM
 
58,133 posts, read 50,685,302 times
Reputation: 17793
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
You didn't respond to this part of my post, which is the part I'm most interested in hearing your response:

"I posted previously I have a relative who fought and died in the civil war and he considered the Confederates "rebels" and "traitors." Yet they were welcomed back after the war, those that lived, as Americans. They were no longer traitors. As long as they turned in their guns and said their oath, they were Americans. And their offspring fought and died for the USA in our many wars since: Spanish American war, WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, etc. et al.

I'm wondering why 150 years later they are traitors again."

Why, exactly, are we fighting that war again?

The timing of all of this is suspicious.
I just did. You added more and I didn't notice until it was too late, hence I put that part of your post in quotes.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 12:01 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,305 posts, read 5,983,744 times
Reputation: 4350
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
I just did. You added more and I didn't notice until it was too late, hence I put that part of your post in quotes.
Okay, thanks. A very interesting response. Thank you.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 12:04 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,305 posts, read 5,983,744 times
Reputation: 4350
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
I'm not here to talk about what they were "considered". I am here for the bottom line. That matters to me more than anything else, period. The fact is, the Confederates were Americans that fired on/declared war against their own country. The CSA was never formally recognized by any nation, especially not the USA. These were U.S. states in rebellion against the USA. They fired AGAINST the USA, they were enemy combatants that technically belonged to the USA, while declaring themselves part of the CSA.

Of course they were welcomed back. Here is the thing. It doesn't change what they did. It does not change anything. What they still did was treasonous. Under normal circumstances, in accordance to the Constitution, a punishment would be in order.

The Confederacy called themselves rebels. Fire against you own country, that is a traitor act. Robert E. Lee swore an oath to this nation. He turned his back on it for the enemy.

I look at the bottom line, period.

And aside from being people who fired against this country, why were the Confederates firing against this country? They wanted secession so bad. Why? Because they feared an end to slavery. This is noted many times in the Articles of Secession. People writing and openly admitting that if the South couldn't keep slaves, then the South was doomed. It didn't matter that Lincoln didn't plan on abolishing slavery. Many people weren't thinking rationally. When the Confederate Constitution was drafted, it was written to protect the right to own slaves. It was explicit about that. The stars and bars of the Confederate flag, William Tappan Thompson came up with that. His words below.



Again, why should we, in 2017, be paying tribute to Confederates?
Why should we pay tribute to anyone pre-civil war who owned slaves, including founding fathers? Why should we pay tribute to Lincoln whose solution was to send freed black slaves back to Africa? Almost everyone historically will come up short when judged by the lens of what is acceptable today.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 12:10 AM
 
1,400 posts, read 691,734 times
Reputation: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
But this discussion is about the Confederates and why we shouldn't have Confederate monuments. And that alone. I called them traitors because that is what they are. Wage war against one's own country, that is being a traitor. Flag burning, as despicable as it is, is protected in the Constitution. Waging war against the USA, however, is treason. Leaving the U.S. Army to fight for an enemy combatant (that is what Robert E. Lee did) is a treason offense.

I suspect you only brought up the two groups to deflect from why there is such a disdain for Confederates. If you want to talk about BLM and Antifa, a separate thread would suffice.
At the time of the Civil War secession was not illegal. Not until after the war was it ruled illegal. Slavery was legal per the Constitution. If the North wanted to end slavery as new states were admitted, then what side was not defending the Constitution? And if the North was not defending the Constitution, then were they traitors?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 12:17 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,305 posts, read 5,983,744 times
Reputation: 4350
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Again, why should we, in 2017, be paying tribute to Confederates?
I don't think we should today. I'm just not sure taking down historical monuments are the best answer. Again, I've lived here my whole life and never laid eyes on the deal in Forest Park.

I'm more concerned about what comes next. We have a lot of confederate gave sites around here, memorials to individual soldiers. Do those get dug up? How about their descendents? How about the people who funded the confederate memorial in 1914? They are obviously suspect.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 07:16 AM
 
208 posts, read 205,931 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Well, I'm going to enlighten you on something. Democrats are more likely to pander to feminists, LGBT, and Blacks, in that order. Republicans are more likely to pander to White conservatives. In particular, there is an appeal among those who feel like they're being taken over by minorities and immigrants.
Thank you for the enlightenment. Good points. I'll expand on that.

For the past 50+ years, this country has based public policy on the premise that whites and blacks MUST live in the same society. In fact, the cultural zeitgeist that exists today in western societies (Europe and European derived countries), rests on that premise. Europeans and Africans must, at all costs, live in the same society. It has become the supreme moral imperative. The moral imperative above all others.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 08:07 AM
 
3,713 posts, read 2,686,443 times
Reputation: 2952
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthCitySam View Post
Do you mean examples?
How about data? An "example" of a black guy getting an advantage doesn't prove anything, any more than helium balloons prove gravity is fake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthCitySam View Post
For the past 50+ years, this country has based public policy on the premise that whites and blacks MUST live in the same society. In fact, the cultural zeitgeist that exists today in western societies (Europe and European derived countries), rests on that premise. Europeans and Africans must, at all costs, live in the same society. It has become the supreme moral imperative. The moral imperative above all others.
"Love other people as you love yourself" has been a supreme moral imperative for a lot longer than 50 years. The only new part is considering blacks to be people.

Africans and Europeans living in the same society has also been a thing since longer than the US has existed. It's even mentioned in the Constitution (something about a 3/5ths rule)!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1grin_g0 View Post
At the time of the Civil War secession was not illegal. Not until after the war was it ruled illegal.
Secession's legality was not firmly established one way or the other before the war, but shooting at Fort Sumter was definitely illegal.

As a point of clarification, SCOTUS didn't rule it illegal until later, but it's not as though SCOTUS ruled it legal at any time before the war, it simply didn't have the opportunity to comment one way or the other. It's not unusual for SCOTUS to declare something illegal years after the crime occurred; it would be more unusual to declare someone a criminal before they've done anything.

Last edited by FrankMiller; 06-08-2017 at 09:07 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2017, 10:47 AM
 
1,400 posts, read 691,734 times
Reputation: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
Secession's legality was not firmly established one way or the other before the war, but shooting at Fort Sumter was definitely illegal.
The South had seceded and was no longer subject to the laws of the Union, therefore Fort Sumter was not illegal, but an act of war.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > St. Louis

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:11 AM.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top