New Names for George Mason HS are Sad (FCCPS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Matt went against the law and hid his crime. George Mason hid nothing. Why? Because it wasn't against the law at the time. We can say the law was wrong and even say we don't want to honor people who allowed it or encouraged it on our school buildings. All of that is fine. But to say these are bad people because they did something that was lawful at the time that we now think is wrong is judging the person unfairly. 200 years from now someone will judge you for something you are doing now that is lawful. That doesn't make you a bad person. You are working with the law of the land at this time.

Please. Lawful does not equal moral, and plenty of people were saying it was wrong at the time. Enslaving people does in fact make you a bad person.

No they weren't. I'm sure some were but there weren't many at all. George Mason wouldn't have written the bill of rights which then became the basis for our current bill of rights if plenty of people were saying it was wrong. Slavery has gone on since the beginning of time and still goes on today.

Are you justifying slavery? It's reprehensible, no matter when it occurs. And the language of the Bill of Rights is contradictory to the reality of how enslaved people were treated, and many of them acknowledged the hypocrisy and it troubled them. They knew very well that it was wrong.

And they thought they were in a minority and wanted to create a bill of rights to start the process of freedom. And then had a war to fight for independence and a country to set up. They were under English rule for goodness sake when the bill of rights was drawn up? All with little medicine and technology. What did you do today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Matt went against the law and hid his crime. George Mason hid nothing. Why? Because it wasn't against the law at the time. We can say the law was wrong and even say we don't want to honor people who allowed it or encouraged it on our school buildings. All of that is fine. But to say these are bad people because they did something that was lawful at the time that we now think is wrong is judging the person unfairly. 200 years from now someone will judge you for something you are doing now that is lawful. That doesn't make you a bad person. You are working with the law of the land at this time.

Please. Lawful does not equal moral, and plenty of people were saying it was wrong at the time. Enslaving people does in fact make you a bad person.

No they weren't. I'm sure some were but there weren't many at all. George Mason wouldn't have written the bill of rights which then became the basis for our current bill of rights if plenty of people were saying it was wrong. Slavery has gone on since the beginning of time and still goes on today.

Are you justifying slavery? It's reprehensible, no matter when it occurs. And the language of the Bill of Rights is contradictory to the reality of how enslaved people were treated, and many of them acknowledged the hypocrisy and it troubled them. They knew very well that it was wrong.

And they thought they were in a minority and wanted to create a bill of rights to start the process of freedom. And then had a war to fight for independence and a country to set up. They were under English rule for goodness sake when the bill of rights was drawn up? All with little medicine and technology. What did you do today?

So yes, you are making excuses for slavery and slave owners. They were too busy and they worried that what was right might not be popular. Got it.

The deeper we go into these issues, the clearer it becomes where those of you in opposition to something as innocuous as changing the name of a school are really coming from. You want to keep things the same for the very reason they need to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Matt went against the law and hid his crime. George Mason hid nothing. Why? Because it wasn't against the law at the time. We can say the law was wrong and even say we don't want to honor people who allowed it or encouraged it on our school buildings. All of that is fine. But to say these are bad people because they did something that was lawful at the time that we now think is wrong is judging the person unfairly. 200 years from now someone will judge you for something you are doing now that is lawful. That doesn't make you a bad person. You are working with the law of the land at this time.

Please. Lawful does not equal moral, and plenty of people were saying it was wrong at the time. Enslaving people does in fact make you a bad person.

No they weren't. I'm sure some were but there weren't many at all. George Mason wouldn't have written the bill of rights which then became the basis for our current bill of rights if plenty of people were saying it was wrong. Slavery has gone on since the beginning of time and still goes on today.

Are you justifying slavery? It's reprehensible, no matter when it occurs. And the language of the Bill of Rights is contradictory to the reality of how enslaved people were treated, and many of them acknowledged the hypocrisy and it troubled them. They knew very well that it was wrong.

And they thought they were in a minority and wanted to create a bill of rights to start the process of freedom. And then had a war to fight for independence and a country to set up. They were under English rule for goodness sake when the bill of rights was drawn up? All with little medicine and technology. What did you do today?

So yes, you are making excuses for slavery and slave owners. They were too busy and they worried that what was right might not be popular. Got it.

The deeper we go into these issues, the clearer it becomes where those of you in opposition to something as innocuous as changing the name of a school are really coming from. You want to keep things the same for the very reason they need to change.

No, you are being ridiculous. The colonists couldn't even make their own rules at the time of the declaration of independence. They had to fight to even have their own country. Have you never heard the term Rome wasn't built in a day? Making a new free country is a process. One where many people died for freedom both in the revolutionary war, war of 1812, civil war, and others. People in this country died for the idea of freedom including for slaves. It just took time and still is taking time to make a freer society. The pursuit of happiness. If people now still have issues, I'm not surprised George Mason thought it wasn't the best time to work on freeing slaves while starting a war for independence while making sure no new slaves came to America which he had some ability to govern on.

[Anonymous]

I also have no issue with changing the name. I just think calling George Mason an evil person is wrong. He was not evil and did great things for America. You can change the name because you like the name West End better for all I care. I don't live in Falls Church City. If you wanted to fix the issue of slavery bringing people into poverty though, everyone knows the real issue is the incorporation of a city that excluded poor people. Un-incorporate if you really want to affect change. I've never heard of someone deciding not to move into Falls Church City because of the high school name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we renaming George mason?

He owned over 100 slaves. Unlike some of the other Founders, he did not free them and make provisions for them in his will.

... Like George Washington?

Mason wrote the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which the US Bill of Rights was based upon. Seems like a keeper to me. But what do I know?

More than two thirds of FCC residents agreed with you and overwhelming voted to keep the names (for both George Mason and Thomas Jefferson elementary) in a public survey but the school board decided to overrule them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Little City High

Falls Church City High School

These were both on the original list of possibilities and got eliminated. I heard anything with Falls Church in it was eliminated because they were worried people would confuse it with Falls Church HS, but admit I didn’t listen to the school board meeting. In my opinion Little City High is too cringy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Little City High

Falls Church City High School

These were both on the original list of possibilities and got eliminated. I heard anything with Falls Church in it was eliminated because they were worried people would confuse it with Falls Church HS, but admit I didn’t listen to the school board meeting. In my opinion Little City High is too cringy.

they’re reserving this as a possible replacement name for Thomas Jefferson elementary

[Anonymous]

Little City is a stupid slogan for the City and even worse name for a school.

[Anonymous]

We’re Liberty, Independence, and Freedom all taken?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also have no issue with changing the name. I just think calling George Mason an evil person is wrong. He was not evil and did great things for America. You can change the name because you like the name West End better for all I care. I don't live in Falls Church City. If you wanted to fix the issue of slavery bringing people into poverty though, everyone knows the real issue is the incorporation of a city that excluded poor people. Un-incorporate if you really want to affect change. I've never heard of someone deciding not to move into Falls Church City because of the high school name.

Exactly. Performative nonsense by Grade A hypocrites who live in a tiny little white city so they can avoid minorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’re Liberty, Independence, and Freedom all taken?

I was thinking Independence HS too. It still gives a nod to the positive contribution of George Mason, without offending anyone. Plus, FCC is an independent city surrounded by big FFX Co. Kinda fits nicely.

Why was that one off the table?

[Anonymous]

If you want to refer to its independence from the surrounding county, Segregation High would be more appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you want to refer to its independence from the surrounding county, Segregation High would be more appropriate.

I bet the the schools in Falls Church City are more diverse than neighboring McLean/Longfellow/Haycock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to refer to its independence from the surrounding county, Segregation High would be more appropriate.

I bet the the schools in Falls Church City are more diverse than neighboring McLean/Longfellow/Haycock.

How much? George Mason is 64.4% White, compared to 52.2% at McLean, 49.3% at Longfellow, and 48.5% at Haycock.

- DP

[Anonymous]

Anti-federalist trash. Wasn't as horrible as Patrick Henry, but certainly isn't someone to celebrate.