Confederate Flag

  • Thread starter MoparMan69
  • 196 comments
  • 9,811 views
Did I hear correctly that they are thinking of classifying the shooting as terrorism?
Are they stupid there is no need to think about it.

In my mind it is terrorism along with any of those shootings.

A terrorist is not a arabic person killing people, but any person instilling terror and killing people due to their hatred of said people.
 
It's little different from the couple year period where all of the TV networks viciously scrubbed all evidence that the Twin Towers ever existed in New York from everything they showed. It'll be back on TV as soon as the shooting goes out of memory.
 
I think it's funny people get so upset over a few multicolored dyed strings woven together and hung on a stick.
 
Do you know where your simplistic rationale could logically devolve to? What about simple coloured threads that depict an American soldier's head on a stick? Decidedly hilarious!!
I think most people can decide for themselves what is funny and what isn't.
 
Do you know where your simplistic rationale could logically devolve to? What about simple coloured threads that depict an American soldier's head on a stick? Decidedly hilarious!!
south-park-s04e08c01-racist-flag-16x9.jpg
 
I think most people can decide for themselves what is funny and what isn't.
And you think that people getting upset about the head on a stick depiction would be funny, right? Unless you are going to differentiate in some other way, I can only assume so.
 
And you think that people getting upset about the head on a stick depiction would be funny, right? Unless you are going to differentiate in some other way, I can only assume so.
No I wouldn't think that but I would like to think people know how to use discretion. There's a difference between a flag and someone's depicted life.
 
No I wouldn't think that but I would like to think people know how to use discretion. There's a difference between a flag and someone's depicted life.
Ok, so you're now using something else to differentiate, and recognised that it's not as simple as your initial criteria dismissively suggested.

Though it's not really flag vs life. It's image vs image.
 
Ok, so you're now using something else to differentiate, and recognised that it's not as simple as your initial criteria dismissively suggested.

Though it's not really flag vs life. It's image vs image.
Pretty much what I was getting at.
 
History is written by the victors. And the victors have been pencil-in-hand for 150 years now..
 
Thinking of ordering the DVD box set this weekend, then I won't have to worry if it isn't on TV anymore.
 
John Tyler was the only President whose coffin was draped with a flag other than the flag of the United States. His coffin was draped with the flag of the Confederate States. I believe that it was the red and white bars with the circle of stars, and not the saltire battle flag of Virginia.

He, after leaving office, supported the Confederates and was actually elected to the Confederate Congress but never served.
 
No longer flying the Confederate flag by government buildings is fine, but taking the Dukes of Hazzard off TV is overkill. I have many family members from the South who grew up watching the Dukes of Hazzard and none of them were ever accused of being racist. Airing and watching TV has no effect on what occurred during the Civil War, therefor should not be negatively effected by one crazy person who supports the Confederacy.
 
John Tyler was the only President whose coffin was draped with a flag other than the flag of the United States. His coffin was draped with the flag of the Confederate States. I believe that it was the red and white bars with the circle of stars, and not the saltire battle flag of Virginia.

He, after leaving office, supported the Confederates and was actually elected to the Confederate Congress but never served.

Your wish is my command. A brief explanation as to why the Confederate flag that we recognize as the Confederate flag today is not really the Confederate flag at all:



To really put the dagger into the "assumption" that the Civil War was fought over Slavery should really think again. The whole war was fought over the state's right to leave the United States if they are unhappy with the way things are run. 13 states said yes, and as a result a war was fought over the issue. Also a key factor to consider that in the 1860's, the Republican party, despite being just formed from the offshoot of the Whig party, is considered liberal. Abraham Lincoln, the party's first President, decided that once your state joins the United States, there is no getting out of it, and used force to bring the 13 "rogue" states back into the Union just outside Richmond, VA. The Union lost that battle, and as a result, was drawn into a long war.

It was at Gettysburg that Lincoln decided that the Union needed something to fight for, and at the address (and later actions), declared all slaves free. Once in Washington, he issued standing orders that if any troops see a slave, they are to free them at once.

That is how the Civil War, an issue of States rights, turned into one of Slavery.
 
To really put the dagger into the "assumption" that the Civil War was fought over Slavery should really think again. The whole war was fought over the state's right to leave the United States if they are unhappy with the way things are run. 13 states said yes, and as a result a war was fought over the issue. Also a key factor to consider that in the 1860's, the Republican party, despite being just formed from the offshoot of the Whig party, is considered liberal. Abraham Lincoln, the party's first President, decided that once your state joins the United States, there is no getting out of it, and used force to bring the 13 "rogue" states back into the Union just outside Richmond, VA. The Union lost that battle, and as a result, was drawn into a long war.

I'm not really sure how you're drawing the conclusion the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery. Sure, states rights played a large role in it, but one of the biggest reasons the states were unhappy was that they wanted to own slaves.
 
Uhhh...from that very link
The Civil War started because of uncompromising differences between the free and slave states over the power of the national government to prohibit slavery in the territories that had not yet become states.
 
A flag is nothing more than a symbol of a nation, and if people don't like it, then they shouldn't say anything about it (just my 2 cents).
 
o really put the dagger into the "assumption" that the Civil War was fought over Slavery should really think again.

That's an old, fatuous rejoinder. The Allies in WWII weren't fighting against the Holocaust, rather to preserve the integrity of free nations. That doesn't mean that the Swastika won't always be a reminder of it despite its history having begun far away.
 
now if you really want to see a flag(or flags) that symbolize some of the worst in human history, then the union jack or american flag are better candidates.

You probably mean the Union Flag not Union Jack, it is called the Union Jack when displayed from a ship, it's a common mistake, but know what you mean, not having a go at you it's just the whole Union Flag having to be British not English is a bug bear of mine.

That's an old, fatuous rejoinder. The Allies in WWII weren't fighting against the Holocaust, rather to preserve the integrity of free nations. That doesn't mean that the Swastika won't always be a reminder of it despite its history having begun far away.

In England the swastika isn't banned because of it's use with religions, the swastika is banned when displayed in a white circle on a red background.
Sorry gone off topic.
 
Back