Confederate Battle Flag

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

I respect the legitimacy of victors' justice, of course, but "traitors" is a bridge too far. Whether the Constitution allowed for secession was an open question until it was settled by Justices Sherman and Grant, who put broad swathes of the South to the torch. Not that in some ways they didn't have it coming, of course.

It's not a matter of "victor's justice". When they attacked Fort Sumter, the issue was decided. They went to war against America.

That doesn't make them "traitors," although I would concede it makes them "foolish."

I think that launching armed rebellion against your government is pretty much the textbook definition of being a "traitor". If you win, you get to describe yourself as freedom fighters in your own history books. But unfortunately for the Confederates, they lost. I don't see a reason to sugar coat the acts of treason that launched the Civil War.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

I respect the legitimacy of victors' justice, of course, but "traitors" is a bridge too far. Whether the Constitution allowed for secession was an open question until it was settled by Justices Sherman and Grant, who put broad swathes of the South to the torch. Not that in some ways they didn't have it coming, of course.

It's not a matter of "victor's justice". When they attacked Fort Sumter, the issue was decided. They went to war against America.

That doesn't make them "traitors," although I would concede it makes them "foolish."

How many ways can you sugar coat an act of war?

I don't deny it was an act of war. It clearly was.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

I respect the legitimacy of victors' justice, of course, but "traitors" is a bridge too far. Whether the Constitution allowed for secession was an open question until it was settled by Justices Sherman and Grant, who put broad swathes of the South to the torch. Not that in some ways they didn't have it coming, of course.

It's not a matter of "victor's justice". When they attacked Fort Sumter, the issue was decided. They went to war against America.

That doesn't make them "traitors," although I would concede it makes them "foolish."

I think that launching armed rebellion against your government is pretty much the textbook definition of being a "traitor". If you win, you get to describe yourself as freedom fighters in your own history books. But unfortunately for the Confederates, they lost. I don't see a reason to sugar coat the acts of treason that launched the Civil War.

That whole line of argument begs the question of whether it was still "their" government. That was an open question until settled by force of arms. I mean, you can name call if you want, but at the time states were viewed as sovereign entities and the issue was not black and white.

And I'm not sugar coating anything, I mean, fighting to defend slavery is way worse than being a "traitor."

[Anonymous]

If certain S. Carolinians want to continue their "quest for independence" today, they can always leave and move to another country (not to sound too jingoistic but this is a load of tripe).

The war's been over for 150 years. They lost. The cause was not just to the extent it was about owning other people. Get over it or if it's still so hard to live with (losing the Civil War), go start your own country somewhere else or move somewhere where they treat people as chattels.

[Anonymous]

It was and remains today the ultimate symbol of treason!

[Anonymous]

In the decision, it actually said that the state couldn't speak for SCV (the plaintiff) - this immediately led me to think of Taxation Without Representation and whether this ruling could open the door for a DC resident to challenge this being on their license plate without having to pay a fee.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:In the decision, it actually said that the state couldn't speak for SCV (the plaintiff) - this immediately led me to think of Taxation Without Representation and whether this ruling could open the door for a DC resident to challenge this being on their license plate without having to pay a fee.

Why wouldn't you want that on your plate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

I respect the legitimacy of victors' justice, of course, but "traitors" is a bridge too far. Whether the Constitution allowed for secession was an open question until it was settled by Justices Sherman and Grant, who put broad swathes of the South to the torch. Not that in some ways they didn't have it coming, of course.

It's not a matter of "victor's justice". When they attacked Fort Sumter, the issue was decided. They went to war against America.

That doesn't make them "traitors," although I would concede it makes them "foolish."

I think that launching armed rebellion against your government is pretty much the textbook definition of being a "traitor". If you win, you get to describe yourself as freedom fighters in your own history books. But unfortunately for the Confederates, they lost. I don't see a reason to sugar coat the acts of treason that launched the Civil War.

That whole line of argument begs the question of whether it was still "their" government. That was an open question until settled by force of arms. I mean, you can name call if you want, but at the time states were viewed as sovereign entities and the issue was not black and white.

And I'm not sugar coating anything, I mean, fighting to defend slavery is way worse than being a "traitor."

I guess by that logic Al Qaeda was on a quest for regional independence, although one must concede that the decision to blow up WTC was not well thought through.

[Anonymous]

The flag is still flying mainly because symbolism is much more important to the people who want to fly the flag than to everyone else. The leaders of the groups that would oppose the Confederate flag are focused on real issues and policies that affect the people they represent, so they do not want to waste their financial and political capital on a fight that would generate a lot of passion, but not much else.

There also is a strange phenomenon among white Southerners where the great majority never think about the Confederate flag or other symbols of the old South until someone tries to ban them, and then they defend the flag/symbols for a brief period until the issue is pulled from the agenda.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

If you look REALLY close, you can see images of slaves stitched in

To liberals, EVERYTHING makes southerners seem like a bunch of racists. Read DCUM.

I'm no longer engaging the crazy. It's an activist game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

If you look REALLY close, you can see images of slaves stitched in

To liberals, EVERYTHING makes southerners seem like a bunch of racists. Read DCUM.

I'm no longer engaging the crazy. It's an activist game.

You deep fry turkeys and I don't hold that against you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

If you look REALLY close, you can see images of slaves stitched in

To liberals, EVERYTHING makes southerners seem like a bunch of racists. Read DCUM.

I'm no longer engaging the crazy. It's an activist game.

You deep fry turkeys and I don't hold that against you.

I'm a northern girl from MA. And a vegetarian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

If you look REALLY close, you can see images of slaves stitched in

To liberals, EVERYTHING makes southerners seem like a bunch of racists. Read DCUM.

I'm no longer engaging the crazy. It's an activist game.

You deep fry turkeys and I don't hold that against you.

I'm a northern girl from MA. And a vegetarian.

So.... they deep fry turkeys and I don't hold that against them

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm not engaging the crazy.

I'm sorry, I am not going to allow you to accuse me of racism and then refuse to support it. Any such posts will be removed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flag is a symbol, and as such, has different meanings to different people.

I get the same feeling when I see the Confederate flag as I have when I see someone burning the flag of the US - I think it is sad. But, I believe that people have the right to fly the Confederate flag just as people have the right to burn the US flag. I would never do either.

As an AA woman, I agree that people should be able to fly whatever flag they wish. However, I feel differently about the State of South Carolina.

Well, that State doesn't represent you or me, but the citizens actually living and voting there.

So if we find some citizens of South Carolina that agree with me that it is inappropriate for the state to fly that flag, then....?

If the majority of people living there wanted to change their THEIR flag, I expect that they would. Unless selecting state flags becomes federal business, I am not sure why we're discussing this, honestly.

I agree that all indications suggest that the majority of people living in South Carolina are content to be represented by a flag that was flown by those in armed rebellion against the Government of the United States (i.e. traitors) in defense of slavery. What I don't understand is why that majority doesn't seem to understand why this makes them look like a bunch of racists.

If you look REALLY close, you can see images of slaves stitched in

To liberals, EVERYTHING makes southerners seem like a bunch of racists. Read DCUM.

I'm no longer engaging the crazy. It's an activist game.

I mean you DO realize that it was the battle flag of the Conservative states, right? These states left the union Because of the desire to own other human beings as chattel. This is not in dispute. Let's read the words of South Carolina's own constitution:

"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth..."