Anonymous
12/11/2018 08:18
Subject: Washington-Loving
Let’s try and get some support for Washington-Lafayette. Booker T Washington and James Armistead Lafayette.
That should prevent any controversy in the future over the name. Because GW and Robert E Lee didn’t have much different values. Sooner or later human rights activists will be making a stink about the school being named after GW too.
That should prevent any controversy in the future over the name. Because GW and Robert E Lee didn’t have much different values. Sooner or later human rights activists will be making a stink about the school being named after GW too.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 07:38
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:No because that proves they knew what they were doing is wrong.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:James Armistead lafayette and Booker T Washington. No white supremacist criminals there and we still retain W and L.
Love this. I’m ok with GW but this is better.
Why?
We would likely have no USA without George Washington. Slavery was wrong, but he was much more than a slaveowner. You do know there were slaves for centuries? We can be grateful that the country was set up with a Constitution which (though slowly) enabled us to get rid of that practice?
Do you know that there are still slaves in Africa today?
Our founders had flaws. Slavery was a major one. But, they set up a country that is like no other. Can't we honor that?
What they basically did was said I’m going to enslave, beat, rape, and murder these people my whole life in order to establish economic gain for me and my family but this is wrong and people in the future shouldn’t do because it’s wrong.
What made them superior human beings? It was not ok for them to treat other humans this way.
What? What on earth are you talking about? Black people were subhuman. The founders ( mostly) had no issue enslaving them , because they didn’t view them as human. You can’t look at it with modern eyes.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 07:37
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:James Armistead lafayette and Booker T Washington. No white supremacist criminals there and we still retain W and L.
Love this. I’m ok with GW but this is better.
Why?
We would likely have no USA without George Washington. Slavery was wrong, but he was much more than a slaveowner. You do know there were slaves for centuries? We can be grateful that the country was set up with a Constitution which (though slowly) enabled us to get rid of that practice?
Do you know that there are still slaves in Africa today?
Our founders had flaws. Slavery was a major one. But, they set up a country that is like no other. Can't we honor that?
These people have already been honored. Some people are offended by them and are saying they shouldn’t have been honored.
Let’s honor some other people who have done great things now.
Exactly. I still like GW but he is everywhere. There is room for Booker.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 06:50
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:James Armistead lafayette and Booker T Washington. No white supremacist criminals there and we still retain W and L.
Love this. I’m ok with GW but this is better.
Why?
We would likely have no USA without George Washington. Slavery was wrong, but he was much more than a slaveowner. You do know there were slaves for centuries? We can be grateful that the country was set up with a Constitution which (though slowly) enabled us to get rid of that practice?
Do you know that there are still slaves in Africa today?
Our founders had flaws. Slavery was a major one. But, they set up a country that is like no other. Can't we honor that?
These people have already been honored. Some people are offended by them and are saying they shouldn’t have been honored.
Let’s honor some other people who have done great things now.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 06:23
Subject: Washington-Loving
For those of you who do not like Washington-Loving, please please please write to the school board and tell them so. They meet on 12/20 to listen to the committee present their first two choices (which now appear to be the only choices), Washington-Loving and Washington-Liberty. They vote on the name 1/10. This is all going to be done quickly and while most people are distracted by the holidays. Gee, wonder if that’s on purpose....So do not delay and write the SB!
Anonymous
12/11/2018 06:21
Subject: Washington-Loving
No because that proves they knew what they were doing is wrong.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:James Armistead lafayette and Booker T Washington. No white supremacist criminals there and we still retain W and L.
Love this. I’m ok with GW but this is better.
Why?
We would likely have no USA without George Washington. Slavery was wrong, but he was much more than a slaveowner. You do know there were slaves for centuries? We can be grateful that the country was set up with a Constitution which (though slowly) enabled us to get rid of that practice?
Do you know that there are still slaves in Africa today?
Our founders had flaws. Slavery was a major one. But, they set up a country that is like no other. Can't we honor that?
What they basically did was said I’m going to enslave, beat, rape, and murder these people my whole life in order to establish economic gain for me and my family but this is wrong and people in the future shouldn’t do because it’s wrong.
What made them superior human beings? It was not ok for them to treat other humans this way.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 06:11
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:James Armistead lafayette and Booker T Washington. No white supremacist criminals there and we still retain W and L.
Love this. I’m ok with GW but this is better.
Why?
We would likely have no USA without George Washington. Slavery was wrong, but he was much more than a slaveowner. You do know there were slaves for centuries? We can be grateful that the country was set up with a Constitution which (though slowly) enabled us to get rid of that practice?
Do you know that there are still slaves in Africa today?
Our founders had flaws. Slavery was a major one. But, they set up a country that is like no other. Can't we honor that?
Anonymous
12/11/2018 03:58
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:James Armistead lafayette and Booker T Washington. No white supremacist criminals there and we still retain W and L.
Love this. I’m ok with GW but this is better.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 03:36
Subject: Washington-Loving
Lafayette-Washington sounds ok and arlingtonians wont need to spend a bunch of extra money. Meant Washington-Lafayette.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 03:32
Subject: Washington-Loving
James Armistead lafayette and Booker T Washington. No white supremacist criminals there and we still retain W and L.
Anonymous
12/11/2018 02:57
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:Why couldn’t they keep “Lee” but have it be after Harry Lightfoot Lee instead?
How long until we remove “Washington” since he owned slaves?
If we do this some people will still think of the white supremacist Robert E Lee
Anonymous
12/10/2018 22:08
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What a dreadful name
+1
My child is headed there next year and it's just such a dumb name.
It's scream "trying to hard to prove we are so liberal"
Woke High.
Anonymous
12/10/2018 21:38
Subject: Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:What a dreadful name
+1
My child is headed there next year and it's just such a dumb name.
It's scream "trying to hard to prove we are so liberal"
Anonymous
12/10/2018 21:07
Subject: Washington-Loving
Why couldn’t they keep “Lee” but have it be after Harry Lightfoot Lee instead?
How long until we remove “Washington” since he owned slaves?
How long until we remove “Washington” since he owned slaves?
Anonymous
12/10/2018 21:02
Subject: Re:Washington-Loving
Anonymous wrote:The right thing to do is to remove the name of both white supremacists the school is currently named after.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why? The school has been named after those two horrible white supremacists for for almost 100 years. Now they want to name it after people with A background which is more progressive for all and people are making all these excuses to prevent that from happening.Anonymous wrote:There are three high schools in this somewhat strange county. I hereby proposing naming them High Schools 1, 2, and 3. Wakefield will be 1.
I never knew there were so many supporters of white supremacy in Arlington until now.
George Washington is horrible? GTFOH.
GTFOH? He was beyond horrible. That white supremacist POS used and abused 316 slaves. He is not what we consider progressive in today’s world.
I'm going to ignore your comments about George Washington and focus on the highlighted portion of your comment.
If you want to name schools based on people or even concepts that are considered "progressive in today's world," then we will be changing school names constantly because what is considered progressive is constantly evolving and changing. And as previous posters have said, who knows what we may learn 20, 30, 50 years from now about some objectionable conduct that one of the Lovings may have participated in, because no one is perfect.
I think the committee's second preferred name, Washington-Liberty, is a better choice for now and 20, 30, 50 years from now - and, one could argue, easily represents what the Lovings fought for. It may not be what I'd come up with on my own but these are the two names the SB will focus on.
Very true. That is obviously the better choice, and would be the preferred option but for the fact that the renaming committee likely is an echo chamber where the members compete with each other for “most woke” and, in the process, set aside their common sense.
Feel free to move to China where there are no white supremacists but they get to decide what is progressive without your input and put you in jail if you disagree. The guy led the war to allow this free nation, was a visionary who helped develop its laws, and then ran it as a startup till it got its feet off the ground and became profitable. If that isn't progressive enough, than I don't know what is. How can someone can say some current progressive hanging onto the coattails of whatever new protest of the day, has a better resume and is more progressive than George Washington is? A very immature perspective IMO.