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 06-11-2017, 11:08 PM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,309 posts, read 5,984,470 times
Reputation: 4350

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Why should we even been honoring Confederates in the first place?
Because they were Americans welcomed back into the fold after the Civil War. And because their descents have contributed greatly to this country and have fought in our many wars since and have otherwise made this country what it is. The war ended. The US welcomed them back, their descendants raised monuments to their fallen dead. They stood for 100 plus years. Now it's a controversy. Why? A lot of us are sick and tired of the PC crap. And aren't listening to it any more. And the slippery slope problem is real: if you take their monuments you take the founding fathers and many heros since.

We aren't interested in that.

Last edited by MUTGR; 06-11-2017 at 11:25 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-12-2017, 08:16 AM
 
6,057 posts, read 6,906,776 times
Reputation: 4751
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
the City of St. Louis:

Feared removal of Texas hero's statue prompts armed protest | Fox News

We might have one of these shooting matches again. The lines will be different I'm sure.
This says a lot about the times we are living in.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 08:45 AM
 
1,400 posts, read 691,836 times
Reputation: 812
One has to wonder what is the goal of the people that want to remove these monuments. If the goal is to stir up racial tension and strife, then they are doing a great job no doubt.

I think one of the benefits to having these Civil War monuments is that they are a reminder of how far we have come as a country. Unfortunately, politicians will stop at nothing to score a few points.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 08:56 AM
 
3,713 posts, read 2,686,910 times
Reputation: 2952
Everything was fine when the oppressed underclass quietly wasted away in obscurity, but now they're stirring things up with talk of rights and respect!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 10:50 AM
 
58,133 posts, read 50,690,878 times
Reputation: 17794
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
Because they were Americans welcomed back into the fold after the Civil War. And because their descents have contributed greatly to this country and have fought in our many wars since and have otherwise made this country what it is. The war ended. The US welcomed them back, their descendants raised monuments to their fallen dead. They stood for 100 plus years. Now it's a controversy. Why? A lot of us are sick and tired of the PC crap. And aren't listening to it any more. And the slippery slope problem is real: if you take their monuments you take the founding fathers and many heros since.

We aren't interested in that.
Correction. They were traitors who got off easy. The truth is under normal circumstances, they would have been tried and possibly executed for treason. They might have been good American soldiers at one point, but once the likes of Lee, Jackson, and Davis chose the Confederacy over the USA, they became traitors. They are lucky.

Yes, those statues stood for 100 years. 100 years too long. They should have never gone up in the first place. They were erected as a assertion of "we do Jim Crow here, we hate the U.S. government, and we honor the Confederate cause, even if we can't have as much of it anymore". The Confederate cause is an inherently dishonorable cause. The evidence shows that the main goal was to keep and expand slavery. That cannot be refuted. Honoring Confederate soldiers means honoring the Confederate cause. The Confederate cause is inherently a threat to me. Call taking those statues PC all you want. I'm glad they're coming down. They have no place in 2017. Taking those statues down is saying "look, the South lost, get over it or leave".

And comparing the Confederates to the founding fathers of this country is inherently false. Their causes were far different from the Confederates. That is why the Founding Fathers won't come down. Most people understand the difference.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 10:52 AM
 
58,133 posts, read 50,690,878 times
Reputation: 17794
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
Everything was fine when the oppressed underclass quietly wasted away in obscurity, but now they're stirring things up with talk of rights and respect!
And those statues represent the idea of "Blacks should know their place". That is why said statues were erected throughout the South. It was done as an affront to equal rights. It was done as an affront to the DC government. It was done as a way of saying "we do things differently in the South".
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 10:55 AM
 
58,133 posts, read 50,690,878 times
Reputation: 17794
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1grin_g0 View Post
One has to wonder what is the goal of the people that want to remove these monuments. If the goal is to stir up racial tension and strife, then they are doing a great job no doubt.

I think one of the benefits to having these Civil War monuments is that they are a reminder of how far we have come as a country. Unfortunately, politicians will stop at nothing to score a few points.
The truth is, anything related to the Confederacy is a sore spot with Blacks. The racial tensions were already there. Stirring up racial tensions was not the goal. Taking the statues down only showed how divided of a society we have ALWAYS been. This society has always been divided with racial tensions.

There is a difference between a Civil War monument and honoring Confederates. Confederates should never be honored. The Confederate cause was and is a dishonorable one. Period. Confederate tributes needed to stop, period. If there are those who haven't gotten over the South losing, now is past the time to get over it.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 11:16 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,309 posts, read 5,984,470 times
Reputation: 4350
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Correction. They were traitors who got off easy. The truth is under normal circumstances, they would have been tried and possibly executed for treason. They might have been good American soldiers at one point, but once the likes of Lee, Jackson, and Davis chose the Confederacy over the USA, they became traitors. They are lucky.

Yes, those statues stood for 100 years. 100 years too long. They should have never gone up in the first place. They were erected as a assertion of "we do Jim Crow here, we hate the U.S. government, and we honor the Confederate cause, even if we can't have as much of it anymore". The Confederate cause is an inherently dishonorable cause. The evidence shows that the main goal was to keep and expand slavery. That cannot be refuted. Honoring Confederate soldiers means honoring the Confederate cause. The Confederate cause is inherently a threat to me. Call taking those statues PC all you want. I'm glad they're coming down. They have no place in 2017. Taking those statues down is saying "look, the South lost, get over it or leave".

And comparing the Confederates to the founding fathers of this country is inherently false. Their causes were far different from the Confederates. That is why the Founding Fathers won't come down. Most people understand the difference.
They were talking about it on KMOX radio this morning on Charlie Brennan's show. Several callers made the same point I have: the focus of the new mayor should be on fighting crime, not 100 year old statutes. Apparently I'm not alone in that regard.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 11:22 AM
 
58,133 posts, read 50,690,878 times
Reputation: 17794
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
They were talking about it on KMOX radio this morning on Charlie Brennan's show. Several callers made the same point I have: the focus of the new mayor should be on fighting crime, not 100 year old statutes. Apparently I'm not alone in that regard.
And if you want to talk about that, a separate thread would be a better idea. If you know anything about me, you know I've discussed crime issues. This thread is not the time or the place to do this. Different thread for a different time. Instead of deflecting from the topic, perhaps it would better to admit that maybe many people have a very good reason for wanting those statues down, despite you calling it "PC".
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2017, 11:42 AM
 
1,400 posts, read 691,836 times
Reputation: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
And if you want to talk about that, a separate thread would be a better idea. If you know anything about me, you know I've discussed crime issues. This thread is not the time or the place to do this. Different thread for a different time. Instead of deflecting from the topic, perhaps it would better to admit that maybe many people have a very good reason for wanting those statues down, despite you calling it "PC".
This may not be the thread to have an in depth discussion about crime, but it is certainly appropriate to point out the priorities of the STL city government. The money that would be spent on removing the monument could instead go to fighting crime, so in that way the issues are connected. The money could undoubtedly be spent on something more effective, something that could actually improve the lives of St. Louisans.

Case in point:

St. Louis police warn of 'mass exodus,' but numbers are anecdotal | Law and order | stltoday.com
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.

© 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