Reply to Union Station smells like urine, has a homeless problem, and is half deserted.

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Union Station smells like urine, has a homeless problem, and is half deserted. "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I took a train from Union Station yesterday.  First time in a while.  I was stunned at the homeless encampment in the circle out front.  Stunned.  WTH??  Why is the city letting an essential traveler/tourist site turn into homeless village in plain site?

[/quote]

I’m curious. I always thought US was federal land.  [b]When Ashcroft was US Attorney General, he required or demanded that the statutes removed and redone with covering shields[/b]. He was offended by their nudity. If he had the authority to revive and replace artifacts like that, it would seems yhst is federal property and not DC or private property. Maybe you are blaming the wrong overseer [/quote]

I despised John Ashcroft but this is not true.[/quote]

Yeah, that's not true. They've had the "modesty shields" since they were installed in the early 20th century:

https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/roman-legionnaire-modesty-shields#:~:text=The%2046%20Roman%20legionnaire%20statutes,stand%20in%20the%20loggia%20arches.[/quote]

Meanwhile, let's not mind that statues in America are being melted down, not just having parts covered, because they 'offend'.[/quote]

Every human has anatomy.  Pointless and stupid to be "offended" over that.  Whereas, it was a choice to be a racist, slave-supporting Confederate general, whereas it is today a choice to remain racist and to glorify those Confederates with statues and we are right to be offended by that.[/quote]

Censorship, rather than educating around an issue, will ALWAYS be controversial. And while the type of offense may not be the same, the effect of erasure--versus moving them or putting an explanatory plaque--is the same. Melting down/destroying/defacing these statues is not the answer to being offended by them. It's exactly the same uninformed response as pasting on a leaf.[/quote]

The history belongs in textbooks.  What's the point of keeping the statues and monuments to bad guys?  The only thing that serves is to validate evil people like Dylann Roof.[/quote]

Oh the history books will be erased next. Where do you think the evidence comes from to 'write history'--from artifacts. Maybe it will be good that the evil of slavery etc. is eventually forgotten about?[/quote]

Your slippery slope is broken.  "Next" is not a logical followon in this case.  The people who want to remove confederate statues are NOT the ones erasing history books.  The ones who want to erase history books are the neoconfederates who instead of actual history want to teach fiction about "happy slaves" and "the war of Northern Aggression" that "wasn't about slavery."  Also, a huge percentage of confederate statues aren't even worthy of being called "artifacts" - many were cheaply mass-produced (with interchangeable CSA vs USA) and installed between the 1920s and 1950s, long after the actual Civil War.  [/quote]

Now ..not erasing history books now ..they won't erase them completely. They will revise it from time to time.into something that will benefit the power structure [/quote]

Nope.  Right now it's the right wing who is banning books right and left.  Spare us your pathetic BS.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics