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.
If your life is on the line in the middle of the night do you REALLY want the police officer who arrives to be someone who exhibits this sort of a lack of judgement? In my view this really calls his judgement into question.d t
Everybody "understands" your "point". You are making the slippery slope argument that we hear all the time about practically everything. There is nothing "high level" about the slippery slope argument.
Your alcohol analogy is silly because alcohol isn't a representative item. That is a flag's sole purpose. To represent some sort of group and with that group an ideology which that group espouses.
And the issue isn't about whether or not people should be able to display the battle flag. It is about whether the flag should be flown on public grounds.
Serving alcohol in a public institution is nowhere near the same as displaying an emblem that represents open rebellion against the United States, represents institutionalized enslavement of human beings no matter how much you want to think it does. I suppose if a country forced everybody to drink and drive or drink and beat up their spouse then you might have a solid analogy, but until then...............not so much.
Well, to you, the alcohol issue is silly because you apparently didn't lose a loved one to a drunk driver, saw a loved one/family member drink themselves to death, didn't have a dad that beat your mom when he drank and got violent, etc. To some people who have been through that, seeing an open bottle of alcohol served in public will indeed open those wounds to more than a few so why should it be allowed to be served in public if it will offend/bring bad emotions to some? And yes, that visual element of an alcohol bottle is indeed "representative" to an ugly chapter in some people's lives. It's the same rationale/logic you are using with the visual element of a confederate flag. See, you made my point ....your point is coming from a "me me me" centric, what's important to you/what's offensive and what needs banning inside your own world view and that is to be pushed on everyone else as a result.
I'm trying to get you to understand we each have our own beliefs in what's offensive and what's not and it flew right over your head. But thank you for making the point I was making even more solid.
So do we then ban serving alchohol in public buildings and spaces because it will symbolize to millions of recovering alchohlics bad memories, family members killed in drunk driving accidents, etc.? Should unhealthy junk food be banned because of all the health problems/suffering it has caused in families and reminding people of that when they smell/see it walking past a restaurant or grocery store?
With all due respect, I think you are missing the point.
If there was a flag symbolizing drunk drivers running people down (or one symbolizing junk food), I'd be opposed to flying that on state property, too.
If somebody wants to run up a flag like that on their own property, so be it. But it has no place flying over state property.
Results are from before last week.. But, if we changed everything at the drop of a hat..
I actually believe that where it is.. Is appropriate, at a memorial.. But.. Outside of spite to the outsiders speaking on the subject.. I wouldn't have a major issue with it coming down. There's other banners that could be placed that still respect the soldiers.. Or.. Is the memorial itself enough.. Does it need any flag flying with it? I don't think so.
Remember.. Confederate Soldiers are legally considered US Veterans. If there were any left alive today, they would receive the same benefits as a soldier who served in Afghanistan. We are obligated to respect them the same as veterans from any other time in US History. We don't show respect for what the government represented, but to those soldiers for fighting for their state/country. Most of those soldiers, like most of the citizenry in the south during the civil war, were not slave owners. Taking down a flag is not disrespecting them. Tearing down the monuments is.
Of course, it depends on how dumb the arguments are from either side as to which way i'll argue.
Everybody "understands" your "point". You are making the slippery slope argument that we hear all the time about practically everything. There is nothing "high level" about the slippery slope argument.
Your alcohol analogy is silly because alcohol isn't a representative item. That is a flag's sole purpose. To represent some sort of group and with that group an ideology which that group espouses.
And the issue isn't about whether or not people should be able to display the battle flag. It is about whether the flag should be flown on public grounds.
Serving alcohol in a public institution is nowhere near the same as displaying an emblem that represents open rebellion against the United States, represents institutionalized enslavement of human beings no matter how much you want to think it does. I suppose if a country forced everybody to drink and drive or drink and beat up their spouse then you might have a solid analogy, but until then...............not so much.
Some of these public grounds were built by slaves, i.e. White House. What about these gigantic crosses, whose followers seem that their purpose these days is to judge that the Supreme Court was wrong, and gay people should not be allowed to marry. We are forced to see those as well.
Instead of living in America, where we have the right to speak, and freedom to be who and what we want, we are going to live in a generic society where houses, clothes, cars, everything is a neutral color because something offends someone.
False. Black folks wanted the flags removed long ago but it was tyranny of the majority that prevailed. Hopefully, the treasonous hateful symbols will be vanquished forever.
Well there's that and the fact that the battle flag didn't even go up until the early '60s in a blatant attempt to defy the federal government to give African Americans equal rights in the south.
Finally, why in the world is the Battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia the flag they chose instead of say the Secessionist flag of South Carolina? The reason is that the Battle Flag had been adopted by the Dixiecrat movement in 1948 which was the wing of the southern democratic party that were upset that northern democrats weren't supportive of segregation.
So essentially, the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia has stood for segregation since at least 1948 in the modern era.
Well, to you, the alcohol issue is silly because you apparently didn't lose a loved one to a drunk driver, saw a loved one/family member drink themselves to death, didn't have a dad that beat your mom when he drank and got violent, etc. To some people who have been through that, seeing an open bottle of alcohol served in public will indeed open those wounds to more than a few so why should it be allowed to be served in public if it will offend/bring bad emotions to some? And yes, that visual element of an alcohol bottle is indeed "representative" to an ugly chapter in some people's lives. It's the same rationale/logic you are using with the visual element of a confederate flag. See, you made my point ....your point is coming from a "me me me" centric, what's important to you/what's offensive and what needs banning inside your own world view and that is to be pushed on everyone else as a result.
I'm trying to get you to understand we each have our own beliefs in what's offensive and what's not and it flew right over your head. But thank you for making the point I was making even more solid.
It's going to be an endless argument, until more things are taken away. The "me centric" is a perfect analogy, what offends some, won't offend others. At the rate we're going, everyone who feels offended by an atrocity wants something banned, there won't be anything left. That is indeed a "slippery slope."
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.
