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.
You have the right to bawl about it. You don't have the right to make others get rid of it.
- All people have the right to their own beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to make others change their beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to demand that others must obey their beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to demand that something that offends them must be removed.
These two statements show the absurdity of demands to remove offending items:
- "I am offended by those who want everything that offends them removed."
- If everything that offends someone is removed, there will be nothing left.
People are demanding that street names must be changed. They do not understand how much it costs someone living on a street when government changes the name of a street. The people making the demand should be made to pay for the expenses the people living on the street must pay.
The ultimate case if this is one where a former property owner had a nice carved stone inscription of the address built into a stone house when he built it here. After the property was sold to a new owner, the city decided to change the name of the street. Now the city and the post office are demanding that the new owner of the house must change the inscription to show the new name of the street (a very large expense).
Robert E Lee did not own any slaves, and was offered commissions to lead both the North and the South armies. He chose the South solely because all of his land was in territory held by the South. If he had chosen the North, his property would have been confiscated by the South government. When the war ended, the North confiscated his land. It is now Arlington Cemetery.
Yet all of the BLMers are screaming that all of the statues of LEE must be taken down because he "fought for slavery". Waaaah! They don't even know his history. And after the war, he helped found Washington and Lee University.
And these screamers are demanding that many of the founding fathers be "removed from history" because they owned slaves. What these boneheads do not know is that EVERYONE who had any money before 1830 owned slaves. Slavery was the main "welfare system" for centuries. People who could not pay their debts sold themselves to pay the debts. It goes all the way back to Hammurabi.
Others making unreasonable demands:
- Making demands on others about COVIDE-19
- Demanding that people must disobey their own religions
- Demanding that religions must change their beliefs
- Demanding that people must obey your beliefs
- Forcing political beliefs on others
- Forcing YOUR solution to scientific problems onto others
- Using bad science to get your way
- Expecting to get something for nothing
You have the right to bawl about it. You don't have the right to make others get rid of it.
- All people have the right to their own beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to make others change their beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to demand that others must obey their beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to demand that something that offends them must be removed.
These two statements show the absurdity of demands to remove offending items:
- "I am offended by those who want everything that offends them removed."
- If everything that offends someone is removed, there will be nothing left.
People are demanding that street names must be changed. They do not understand how much it costs someone living on a street when government changes the name of a street. The people making the demand should be made to pay for the expenses the people living on the street must pay.
The ultimate case if this is one where a former property owner had a nice carved stone inscription of the address built into a stone house when he built it here. After the property was sold to a new owner, the city decided to change the name of the street. Now the city and the post office are demanding that the new owner of the house must change the inscription to show the new name of the street (a very large expense).
Robert E Lee did not own any slaves, and was offered commissions to lead both the North and the South armies. He chose the South solely because all of his land was in territory held by the South. If he had chosen the North, his property would have been confiscated by the South government. When the war ended, the North confiscated his land. It is now Arlington Cemetery.
Yet all of the BLMers are screaming that all of the statues of LEE must be taken down because he "fought for slavery". Waaaah! They don't even know his history. And after the war, he helped found Washington and Lee University
And these screamers are demanding that many of the founding fathers be "removed from history" because they owned slaves. What these boneheads do not know is that EVERYONE who had any money before 1830 owned slaves. Slavery was the main "welfare system" for centuries. People who could not pay their debts sold themselves to pay the debts. It goes all the way back to Hammurabi.
Others making unreasonable demands:
- Making demands on others about COVIDE-19
- Demanding that people must disobey their own religions
- Demanding that religions must change their beliefs
- Demanding that people must obey your beliefs
- Forcing political beliefs on others
- Forcing YOUR solution to scientific problems onto others
- Using bad science to get your way
- Expecting to get something for nothing
Robert E. Lee chose to fight for the South which wanted to continue enslaving other human beings. It was a stark moral choice and he chose wrong. Stop whining about his statues coming down.
Robert E. Lee chose to fight for the South which wanted to continue enslaving other human beings. It was a stark moral choice and he chose wrong. Stop whining about his statues coming down.
Yes and no. He fought for the Confederacy because he was loyal to his home state of Virginia. Robert E Lee inherited slaves from his father, which he freed before the Emancipation Proclamation, as he didn't believe in slavery. And the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery, so I'm not sure what "moral choice" he made, especially considering he freed slaves he inherited.
On another note, why is this posted in the Election sub-forum?
Yes and no. He fought for the Confederacy because he was loyal to his home state of Virginia. Robert E Lee inherited slaves from his father, which he freed before the Emancipation Proclamation, as he didn't believe in slavery. And the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery, so I'm not sure what "moral choice" he made, especially considering he freed slaves he inherited.
On another note, why is this posted in the Election sub-forum?
What you are trying to do is distort history to suit your preconceived ideas. The South seceded because it wanted the freedom to preserve slavery in its own territories as well as introduce it into new states. However many other reasons there may be, ultimately it was a fight over Slavery. And Lee chose wrong. His statues should never have gone up in the first place.
What you are trying to do is distort history to suit your preconceived ideas. The South seceded because it wanted the freedom to preserve slavery in its own territories as well as introduce it into new states. However many other reasons there may be, ultimately it was a fight over Slavery. And Lee chose wrong. His statues should never have gone up in the first place.
The Civil War happened because the northern United States refused to allow the southern states to secede. There is a reason it was called the “War of Northern Aggression”. We can argue all day long over why the southern states seceded, but the war happened because they weren’t allowed to.
Note: Before you accuse me of being a racist, a southern sympathizer, or any of the numerous other terms that tend to come up in this type of conversation, I’m not. I’m simply stating the reality of why there was a Civil War. The south seceded, rightly or wrongly, and the north forced them not to.
The Civil War happened because the northern United States refused to allow the southern states to secede. There is a reason it was called the “War of Northern Aggression”. We can argue all day long over why the southern states seceded, but the war happened because they weren’t allowed to.
Note: Before you accuse me of being a racist, a southern sympathizer, or any of the numerous other terms that tend to come up in this type of conversation, I’m not. I’m simply stating the reality of why there was a Civil War. The south seceded, rightly or wrongly, and the north forced them not to.
It was called the War of the Northern Aggression only in the South because it was an attempt to deflect why the war was really fought. And the South wanted to secede, and WHY??? is ignored. To foster and preserve and continue its slave culture and to introduce it into the new states being formed out west.
You have the right to bawl about it. You don't have the right to make others get rid of it.
- All people have the right to their own beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to make others change their beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to demand that others must obey their beliefs.
- Nobody has the right to demand that something that offends them must be removed.
These two statements show the absurdity of demands to remove offending items:
- "I am offended by those who want everything that offends them removed."
- If everything that offends someone is removed, there will be nothing left.
People are demanding that street names must be changed. They do not understand how much it costs someone living on a street when government changes the name of a street. The people making the demand should be made to pay for the expenses the people living on the street must pay.
The ultimate case if this is one where a former property owner had a nice carved stone inscription of the address built into a stone house when he built it here. After the property was sold to a new owner, the city decided to change the name of the street. Now the city and the post office are demanding that the new owner of the house must change the inscription to show the new name of the street (a very large expense).
Robert E Lee did not own any slaves, and was offered commissions to lead both the North and the South armies. He chose the South solely because all of his land was in territory held by the South. If he had chosen the North, his property would have been confiscated by the South government. When the war ended, the North confiscated his land. It is now Arlington Cemetery.
Yet all of the BLMers are screaming that all of the statues of LEE must be taken down because he "fought for slavery". Waaaah! They don't even know his history. And after the war, he helped found Washington and Lee University.
And these screamers are demanding that many of the founding fathers be "removed from history" because they owned slaves. What these boneheads do not know is that EVERYONE who had any money before 1830 owned slaves. Slavery was the main "welfare system" for centuries. People who could not pay their debts sold themselves to pay the debts. It goes all the way back to Hammurabi.
Others making unreasonable demands:
- Making demands on others about COVIDE-19
- Demanding that people must disobey their own religions
- Demanding that religions must change their beliefs
- Demanding that people must obey your beliefs
- Forcing political beliefs on others
- Forcing YOUR solution to scientific problems onto others
- Using bad science to get your way
- Expecting to get something for nothing
What would liberals do if they could not restrict the individual liberties of other Americans?
Make no mistake of it, liberals are totalitarians and a force of evil in the US who seek subjugation of the populace and miring the nation in misery.
Liberals got their wish and have put liberal policy in place by replacing Trump. I can't help but noticing that since this change, the US is in a far, far worse political and economic state as a result of those changes.
Liberalism destroys everything that is good and beneficial to free citizens.
It was called the War of the Northern Aggression only in the South because it was an attempt to deflect why the war was really fought. And the South wanted to secede, and WHY??? is ignored. To foster and preserve and continue its slave culture and to introduce it into the new states being formed out west.
No, it was called the War of Northern Aggression because it was a war where the North was the aggressor. Had the South been allowed to secede there would have been no war, at least at that time. I’m not ignoring why the South seceded (although claiming it was all about slavery is a specious argument, at best, and proves that most people have no understanding of history). I’m simply stating the actual fact that had the North not decided to force the Southern states to remain in the union there would not have been a Civil War. Similarly, I could say that had Britain not tried to force the colonists to remain a colony there wouldn’t have been a Revolutionary War. Both statements are factual.
The Civil War happened because the northern United States refused to allow the southern states to secede. There is a reason it was called the “War of Northern Aggression”. We can argue all day long over why the southern states seceded, but the war happened because they weren’t allowed to.
Yep, it was Northern Aggression because the war started when the CSA opened fire on the US Army at Fort Sumter.
South Carolina wanted the USA to abandon Sumter. The first shots fired were Citadel cadets in the CSA fired on a supply ship, the Star of the West, that was dropping off food to the fort.
"Northern Aggression" is revisionist history. It was first used in 1956 when the SC Governor said all blacks should evacuate the south. It is a modern term.
The Civil War happened because the northern United States refused to allow the southern states to secede. There is a reason it was called the “War of Northern Aggression”. We can argue all day long over why the southern states seceded, but the war happened because they weren’t allowed to.
Note: Before you accuse me of being a racist, a southern sympathizer, or any of the numerous other terms that tend to come up in this type of conversation, I’m not. I’m simply stating the reality of why there was a Civil War. The south seceded, rightly or wrongly, and the north forced them not to.
Well that is correct except...
The war was fought to preserve the union, unfortunately you left out the fact that the "so call Confederacy", fired the first shots which ignited the war, not the North!
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.
