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.
Why continue to glorify such a horrible time in our history?
So we remember the past, and don't repeat it. Maybe the Feds should learn a bit about not overstepping their bounds. We are a collection of states, remember?
Because to many American conservatives, it is not a lost cause.
"The South shall rise again," is not an empty slogan.
This "statue phase" you are going through only sets your side back decades. You don't seem to comprehend the resentment this cleansing of White symbols is causing. What's next in your cultural shakeup?
Your intentions are clear, and your going to wake up one day and wonder what happened.
This was all settled in the 19th century. Get over it!
This post-Obama surge of "makem pay" won't end well. Very unfortunate.
You're the one proposing it. You tell me which clause in the Constitution this would fall under. Because I see nothing in the Constitution that would give the feds this power. At all.
I guess you never learned about all the battles he won, and how an under dog South kicked the North's ass for much of the war. Who lost more men in the Civil War, the North or the South?
If a person is inspired to look further into history because they saw a statue, or monument somewhere, that is a good thing.
You're the one proposing it. You tell me which clause in the Constitution this would fall under. Because I see nothing in the Constitution that would give the feds this power. At all.
I see nothing in the Constitution that denies them that power.
I see nothing in the Constitution that denies them that power.
You were the one who brought up the Constitution.
So don't expect me to make your argument for you.
I guarantee you that if you asked your congress critter to propose such a bill that the question would come up. If you're serious, you'd better have that answer.
But of course you're not serious, you're just trying to deflect from my question - if a town owns a statue, does it have the right to take it down or not? The answer is plain - it does have that right. And all this outraged ranting about heritage is just so much angry bed wetting.
I guarantee you that if you asked your congress critter to propose such a bill that the question would come up. If you're serious, you'd better have that answer.
My answer is that it is constitutional. There is no reason to think otherwise.
And you have not shown that there is any reason to think otherwise.
Quote:
...if a town owns a statue, does it have the right to take it down or not? The answer is plain - it does have that right.
Not if it's federally protected.
I'm quite sure that the city of Washington, D.C., does not have the right to take down the Washington Monument.
Quote:
And all this outraged ranting about heritage is just so much angry bed wetting.
The angry bed wetting is by people who can't let go of the past and want to re-fight the Civil War even though their side won.
Use your imagination, I am sure you will figure it out.
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.
