What does the confederate flag mean to you? (1 Viewer)

[tdoss]

The UCI thing was pretty short-lived. It was overturned by the student executive committee almost immediately. It didn't represent a majority of students, or even a significant minority. A few bozos in the social ecology department that got on the legislative council. Not the proudest moment for my alma mater, but the conservative press, led by Fox News, went bat#### crazy and really made a mountain out of a molehill.

Sure...I was only citing it as an example for how the American flag is being deemed more and moreso as some antagonistic, offensive banner.

Does it not make you scratch your head even for a moment that public schools have banned it?

I'm just saying it's a very strange, weird time we live in...

Everyone is seemingly offended ALL the time...about everything.

I really think people need to unplug for a few days a week...just to disconnect from all of the outrage and constant disturbing imagery and discussions that make people fly off the hinges over something that otherwise common sense would've reigned supreme over.

It just seems like there's no reasoned discussion about things anymore...just flying off the handle, pissed off...0-100mph hair triggers over everything.

People can't possibly stay in this constant state of agitation without something breaking.

The end product will be the same as it always is: reason will win out, the lines will be drawn where they should be drawn. The American flag will continue to fly pretty much everywhere.

Except a growing number of public schools in CA, that is...Knee-jerk reactionism is currently winning out over reason.

Well then I guess I must have missed the story. I know about one case, which dealt with American flag t-shirts. What other districts have adopted similar measures? Who has banned flying the flag itself?

So you can somehow brush off an entire district banning it? You know how big these districts are out here?And I cited two schools my own kids go to as further examples...we're nowhere near that district that made it official.

Hell...Murrieta is the town that stopped the immigration buses in their tracks...but the schools banned the American Flag during month of May.

I don't brush it off. I'm wondering why you said "growing number" and why you suggested that the American flag cannot "fly" there as I had stated. I absolutely may have missed something, even though I googled it and still didn't find anything close to what you describe.

Generally, however, I've seen enough complaining about isolated instances of PC overreach over the years to not worry about it too much. We've been hearing these melodramatic "this country is going to hell in a handbasket!" overreactions to them for at least 20 years, yet somehow the world keeps on turning. Sure, I suppose I wish every student could wear an American flag t-shirt (I also wish teenagers weren't antagonizing ####bags who wore American flags in an effort to taunt Latinos, but clearly that's a pipe dream). But there are literally thousands of more pressing problems facing our country. Let me know when any U.S. government at any level tells people they can't fly an American flag (or even a Confederate flag) on their property and I'll come running to help with the cause.

Apologies...I never said fly...you changed it to that distinction.Secondly...I said growing number because there's a full district that has banned it...AND now my own kids schools who are not in that district...that'd be the very definition of growing.

I'm not really sure why I've got to restate things over and over to get my point across but so be it.

Your condescending tone, needling every point and then exclaiming you'll be there when the govt bans it from our homes (nice diversion/change of direction/strawman...by the way) only further proves what I said that you are in fact brushing it off.

I think we would've all been better served had you simply said something like, "good points...that is troubling...I hope that trend does not continue" rather than dig in your heels and try to change the argument simply for the sake of continuing said argument or to somehow claim a moral victory simply by wearing down the opponent with subterfuge.

You know...there's absolutely nothing wrong with hearing someone's side of a discussion and then conceding they may have a point. It doesn't lessen you as a man or cause you to lose any supposed board cred.

Or you could've simply stated what I'm picking up as your true feelings as being, "big deal...who cares?" As a more valid response.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Apologies...I'm gonna need that link to where I said the flag can't fly there.

link

Me: "The end product will be the same as it always is: reason will win out, the lines will be drawn where they should be drawn. The American flag will continue to fly pretty much everywhere."

You: "Except in a growing number of public schools, that is."

Sure sounds like you are saying "in a growing number of American public schools, the American flag will not continue to fly." That's how I read your reply. If you actually meant to say something like "reason will not win out and the lines will not be drawn where they should be in a growing number of American schools," then we simply crossed wires; I misinterpreted your statement and you missed the point of my post, which was that there will always be isolated instances of overreach but ultimately that's all they are, isolated. Reason will always win out and the lines will be drawn where they should be drawn on the larger scale.

Your condescending tone, needling every point and then exclaiming you'll be there when the govt bans it from our homes (nice diversion/change of direction/strawman...by the way) only further proves what I said that you are in fact brushing it off.

I think we would've all been better served had you simply said something like, "good points...that is troubling...I hope that trend does not continue" rather than dig in your heels and try to change the argument simply for the sake of continuing said argument or to somehow claim a moral victory simply by wearing down the opponent with subterfuge.

You know...there's absolutely nothing wrong with hearing someone's side of a discussion and then conceding they may have a point. It doesn't lessen you as a man or cause you to lose any supposed board cred.

Except that I don't really think you have a point, because I consider these anecdotes of PC overreach- which have been around forever- isolated and not at all meaningful. I kind of think you're being way too dramatic about what it means in the bigger picture, similar to our friend Allen here. By the way, that's the sort of response I think of when I think of a "condescending tone and needling every point." I was actually going for a kinder, friendlier tone. Guess I didn't get it done, so sorry about that. I'll try to do better in the future.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

poor cooter

 

[CBusAlex]

Except a growing number of public schools in CA, that is...

Knee-jerk reactionism is currently winning out over reason.

Well then I guess I must have missed the story. I know about one case, which dealt with American flag t-shirts. What other districts have adopted similar measures? Who has banned flying the flag itself?

There used to be zero. Now there is... well, still zero, but closer to one. It's growing exponentially!

 

[tdoss]

Apologies...I'm gonna need that link to where I said the flag can't fly there.

link

Me: "The end product will be the same as it always is: reason will win out, the lines will be drawn where they should be drawn. The American flag will continue to fly pretty much everywhere."

You: "Except in a growing number of public schools, that is."

Sure sounds like you are saying "in a growing number of American public schools, the American flag will not continue to fly." That's how I read your reply. If you actually meant to say something like "reason will not win out and the lines will not be drawn where they should be in a growing number of American schools," then we simply crossed wires; I misinterpreted your statement and you missed the point of my post, which was that there will always be isolated instances of overreach but ultimately that's all they are, isolated. Reason will always win out and the lines will be drawn where they should be drawn on the larger scale.

Your condescending tone, needling every point and then exclaiming you'll be there when the govt bans it from our homes (nice diversion/change of direction/strawman...by the way) only further proves what I said that you are in fact brushing it off.

I think we would've all been better served had you simply said something like, "good points...that is troubling...I hope that trend does not continue" rather than dig in your heels and try to change the argument simply for the sake of continuing said argument or to somehow claim a moral victory simply by wearing down the opponent with subterfuge.

You know...there's absolutely nothing wrong with hearing someone's side of a discussion and then conceding they may have a point. It doesn't lessen you as a man or cause you to lose any supposed board cred.

Except that I don't really think you have a point, because I consider these anecdotes of PC overreach- which have been around forever- isolated and not at all meaningful. I kind of think you're being way too dramatic about what it means in the bigger picture, similar to our friend Allen here. By the way, that's the sort of response I think of when I think of a "condescending tone and needling every point." I was actually going for a kinder, friendlier tone. Guess I didn't get it done, so sorry about that. I'll try to do better in the future.

So...in other words..."no big deal" right?

Seemed like a much easier and concise response than this tact.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Apologies...I'm gonna need that link to where I said the flag can't fly there.

link

Me: "The end product will be the same as it always is: reason will win out, the lines will be drawn where they should be drawn. The American flag will continue to fly pretty much everywhere."

You: "Except in a growing number of public schools, that is."

Sure sounds like you are saying "in a growing number of American public schools, the American flag will not continue to fly." That's how I read your reply. If you actually meant to say something like "reason will not win out and the lines will not be drawn where they should be in a growing number of American schools," then we simply crossed wires; I misinterpreted your statement and you missed the point of my post, which was that there will always be isolated instances of overreach but ultimately that's all they are, isolated. Reason will always win out and the lines will be drawn where they should be drawn on the larger scale.

Your condescending tone, needling every point and then exclaiming you'll be there when the govt bans it from our homes (nice diversion/change of direction/strawman...by the way) only further proves what I said that you are in fact brushing it off.

I think we would've all been better served had you simply said something like, "good points...that is troubling...I hope that trend does not continue" rather than dig in your heels and try to change the argument simply for the sake of continuing said argument or to somehow claim a moral victory simply by wearing down the opponent with subterfuge.

You know...there's absolutely nothing wrong with hearing someone's side of a discussion and then conceding they may have a point. It doesn't lessen you as a man or cause you to lose any supposed board cred.

Except that I don't really think you have a point, because I consider these anecdotes of PC overreach- which have been around forever- isolated and not at all meaningful. I kind of think you're being way too dramatic about what it means in the bigger picture, similar to our friend Allen here. By the way, that's the sort of response I think of when I think of a "condescending tone and needling every point." I was actually going for a kinder, friendlier tone. Guess I didn't get it done, so sorry about that. I'll try to do better in the future.

So...in other words..."no big deal" right?

Seemed like a much easier and concise response than this tact.

Brevity has never been my thing. Another personal improvement project I guess.

 

[Mjolnirs]

What's funny about this is that if SC wanted to commemorate their history in the CW they could have just flown their state flag, which they do everywhere, instead of the battle flag. In 2000 so many SC Democrats, and Democrats nationally supported moving the flag to the front of the capitol... because it was coming off the dome. They could have switched flags at the same time.

Agreed. Someone else mentioned it a few pages back and I agree that when (and I do mean when) the flag comes down, they should replace it with the state flag. I also made this suggestion to the commander of my SCV camp last night.

Well, my state flag (Virginia) shows both nudity and death. No one seems upset by either.

Don't forget sic semper tyrannis ... Booth supposedly said it when he shot Lincoln. Pull it down!

Did anyone mention blowing up mount rushmore for the slave owners on there?

What about sandblasting Stone Mountain! If they need help, I hear ISIS is pretty good at that type of thing.

 

[matttyl]

What about sandblasting Stone Mountain! If they need help, I hear ISIS is pretty good at that type of thing.

A bit off the point (maybe), but that wasn't nearly as impressive as I thought it would be. But if we're to remove all traces of the Confederacy and it's Generals, I guess it would have to go....

For those who don't know of Stone Mountain, it's a Mount Rushmore type stone carving in the side of a mountain, depicting Lee, Jackson and Jefferson Davis - each on horseback.

On a somewhat related note of monuments of Confederates, the Jefferson Davis statue on Monument Ave. in Richmond, VA was vandalized last night / this morning.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I do not hold with desecration of monuments, flags, or statues. I can support removal or relocation from off public grounds of those items that can be removed without damaging them. Such items can be placed in private museums or collections for appropriate display and study. Those items which can not be moved absent injury to the item should remain. I would not mess with Stone Mountain, Mt. Rushmore, or the facades of the Supreme Court Chambers.

In removing items I would be respectful of the treatment of those items. I know history has seen statues toppled, and insignia and emblems blown off of buildings. That would not be my method. I do not believe that hearts and minds can be changed or wiped clean by destruction, rather I believe destructive acts harden hearts and resolve. Absent no other choice I prefer to exercise options.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

A few pages back Tim and Bob threw in the ol' hand grenade about how the confederacy = x, y & z, and so inevitably the next question is well if it was so horrid how we could allow any signs of it to stand. Those statements were made without examples. Given examples of what would stay and what would go that was called 'slippery slope' even as one of the proponents, Tim, shouted 'this is just about the flag and nothing else!' Well that's where we are as this has gone past the flag to monuments, street names, bridges, games, toys, ebay, etc. This is where the argument is. I'd like to know if the commenters here are dealing with this directly in their area and if so if they are seeing discord on just that subject.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Private ownership or display of items or materials should be up to the private individual. the tricky line for me is when display on private property also displays beyond the confines of that property.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I've never been to Mt. Rushmore or to Stone Mountain. I might have to do something about that some day.

 

[TobiasFunke]

A few pages back Tim and Bob threw in the ol' hand grenade about how the confederacy = x, y & z, and so inevitably the next question is well if it was so horrid how we could allow any signs of it to stand. Those statements were made without examples. Given examples of what would stay and what would go that was called 'slippery slope' even as one of the proponents, Tim, shouted 'this is just about the flag and nothing else!' Well that's where we are as this has gone past the flag to monuments, street names, bridges, games, toys, ebay, etc. This is where the argument is. I'd like to know if the commenters here are dealing with this directly in their area and if so if they are seeing discord on just that subject.

I'm not sure there's any argument about games, toys and ebay, is there? I assume everyone agrees that (1) private companies should be able to do anything they damn well please within the confines of the law; and (2) people should be able to make fun of them, or boycott them, or support them, or ignore them completely, or do anything else they please within the confines of the law.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Private ownership or display of items or materials should be up to the private individual. the tricky line for me is when display on private property also displays beyond the confines of that property.

You mean like a flag on a flagpole in someone's yard? See the OP.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Ok skip the games & toys, right issues about monuments and street names etc. are popping up around the country.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Private ownership or display of items or materials should be up to the private individual. the tricky line for me is when display on private property also displays beyond the confines of that property.

You mean like a flag on a flagpole in someone's yard? See the OP.

Precisely. In cases such as that I defer to the property right of the individual. I would not have government interfere or prohibit. I do not consider the Courts balancing interests of such parties with the interests of other parties to be prohibiting or interfering.

 

[Fennis]

A few pages back Tim and Bob threw in the ol' hand grenade about how the confederacy = x, y & z, and so inevitably the next question is well if it was so horrid how we could allow any signs of it to stand. Those statements were made without examples. Given examples of what would stay and what would go that was called 'slippery slope' even as one of the proponents, Tim, shouted 'this is just about the flag and nothing else!' Well that's where we are as this has gone past the flag to monuments, street names, bridges, games, toys, ebay, etc. This is where the argument is. I'd like to know if the commenters here are dealing with this directly in their area and if so if they are seeing discord on just that subject.

so you think once you give on the removing the flag from public capitol buildings the next logical step is blowing up Stone Mountain?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Ok skip the games & toys, right issues about monuments and street names etc. are popping up around the country.

I think most people saw that coming, it was almost inevitable once the flag stuff kicked in. I just don't think there's a rule you can apply across the board. The depth of the connection to the Confederacy is different with each of them, as is the cost of changing each of them.

 

[matttyl]

In my "area" of Virginia, I'm seeing it nearly hour by hour at this point. A few days ago the governor said that the Confederate flag should be removed from license plates here in the Commonwealth. This is interesting because just a few days ago the SCOTUS said that the state of Texas could restrict those plates as they are "public property", which contridicts an older decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, which found that the plates are "private speech." I myself have a personalized plate here in VA that has absolutely nothing to do with the Confederacy (rather my make of car) and I think of it very much as my "free speech". Anyway, the state would like to continue to offer the plate with the line "Sons of Confederate Soldiers" on the bottom, but without the flag insignia on the side - and to replace the ones currently in use that have that insignia.

Next are the statues in Richmond on Monument Ave. I've run by them countless times with 10Ks, half marathons and full marathons over the years. From time to time they are vandalized, as Davis' was last night/this morning.

And now the question on if the Jefferson Memorial in Dc should remain. I mean, really?

I think the next thing to go, or at least be fought over, will be the battlefields themselves. Why leave all that prime real estate that could be developed in Manassas just because a "battle about slavery" was fought there over 150 years ago?

 

[TobiasFunke]

In my "area" of Virginia, I'm seeing it nearly hour by hour at this point. A few days ago the governor said that the Confederate flag should be removed from license plates here in the Commonwealth. This is interesting because just a few days ago the SCOTUS said that the state of Texas could restrict those plates as they are "public property", which contridicts an older decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, which found that the plates are "private speech." I myself have a personalized plate here in VA that has absolutely nothing to do with the Confederacy (rather my make of car) and I think of it very much as my "free speech". Anyway, the state would like to continue to offer the plate with the line "Sons of Confederate Soldiers" on the bottom, but without the flag insignia on the side - and to replace the ones currently in use that have that insignia.

Next are the statues in Richmond on Monument Ave. I've run by them countless times with 10Ks, half marathons and full marathons over the years. From time to time they are vandalized, as Davis' was last night/this morning.

And now the question on if the Jefferson Memorial in Dc should remain. I mean, really?

I think the next thing to go, or at least be fought over, will be the battlefields themselves. Why leave all that prime real estate that could be developed in Manassas just because a "battle about slavery" was fought there over 150 years ago?

People who want to push for either of these things are idiots. I have complete faith in the American people to quickly dismiss these suggestions if/when they're raised on a larger scale. If I'm wrong about either of them I might have to consider moving to another country.

 

[TheIronSheik]

And now the question on if the Jefferson Memorial in Dc should remain. I mean, really?

This is a perfect example of people wanting to compare people from the past against our current culture. It just shows the stupidity of most people today. It's sickening.

 

[matttyl]

A few pages back Tim and Bob threw in the ol' hand grenade about how the confederacy = x, y & z, and so inevitably the next question is well if it was so horrid how we could allow any signs of it to stand. Those statements were made without examples. Given examples of what would stay and what would go that was called 'slippery slope' even as one of the proponents, Tim, shouted 'this is just about the flag and nothing else!' Well that's where we are as this has gone past the flag to monuments, street names, bridges, games, toys, ebay, etc. This is where the argument is. I'd like to know if the commenters here are dealing with this directly in their area and if so if they are seeing discord on just that subject.

so you think once you give on the removing the flag form public capitol buildings the next logical step is blowing up Stone Mountain?

Well, yeah (with maybe a few steps in between). It's a monument to the Confederacy, is it not? In the last week (isn't today the 1 week anniversary of the tragedy?) there have been numerous vandalisms of monuments/statues relating to the Confederacy, or the calls of their removal.

This one in Richmond, VA. These two in Charleston, SC. This one in Forest Park, Missouri. This one in Baltimore, Maryland. Three different ones at the University of Texas, Austin. While not vandalized (yet) the Mayor of New Orleans wants this one gone, same with this one at Ole Miss, or this (the oldest in Texas) in Grayson County, Texas. Or this one in Manatee County, Florida.

I'm sure there are quite a few that I've missed as well. Those are each monuments or statues of individuals connected to the Confederacy. Why is Stone Mountain any different? It's not - other than the fact that it's far larger and is seen by far more people. It is in fact a very large park that hosts concerts and such. You think it won't come under immense scrutiny next week when it does it's annual 4th of July laser light show right on top of the engravings?

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

The Stone Mountain sculptures should have never been put up IMO. Not sure there's anything we can/should do about it now.

Except maybe carve "LOSERS" across the top.

 

[Henry Ford]

The Stone Mountain sculptures should have never been put up IMO. Not sure there's anything we can/should do about it now.

Except maybe carve "LOSERS" across the top.

Or draw genitals on their faces and #YOLO

 

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

In my "area" of Virginia, I'm seeing it nearly hour by hour at this point. A few days ago the governor said that the Confederate flag should be removed from license plates here in the Commonwealth. This is interesting because just a few days ago the SCOTUS said that the state of Texas could restrict those plates as they are "public property", which contridicts an older decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, which found that the plates are "private speech." I myself have a personalized plate here in VA that has absolutely nothing to do with the Confederacy (rather my make of car) and I think of it very much as my "free speech". Anyway, the state would like to continue to offer the plate with the line "Sons of Confederate Soldiers" on the bottom, but without the flag insignia on the side - and to replace the ones currently in use that have that insignia.

Next are the statues in Richmond on Monument Ave. I've run by them countless times with 10Ks, half marathons and full marathons over the years. From time to time they are vandalized, as Davis' was last night/this morning.

And now the question on if the Jefferson Memorial in Dc should remain. I mean, really?

I think the next thing to go, or at least be fought over, will be the battlefields themselves. Why leave all that prime real estate that could be developed in Manassas just because a "battle about slavery" was fought there over 150 years ago?

Amen brother

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

A few pages back Tim and Bob threw in the ol' hand grenade about how the confederacy = x, y & z, and so inevitably the next question is well if it was so horrid how we could allow any signs of it to stand. Those statements were made without examples. Given examples of what would stay and what would go that was called 'slippery slope' even as one of the proponents, Tim, shouted 'this is just about the flag and nothing else!' Well that's where we are as this has gone past the flag to monuments, street names, bridges, games, toys, ebay, etc. This is where the argument is. I'd like to know if the commenters here are dealing with this directly in their area and if so if they are seeing discord on just that subject.

so you think once you give on the removing the flag form public capitol buildings the next logical step is blowing up Stone Mountain?

Well, yeah (with maybe a few steps in between). It's a monument to the Confederacy, is it not? In the last week (isn't today the 1 week anniversary of the tragedy?) there have been numerous vandalisms of monuments/statues relating to the Confederacy, or the calls of their removal.

This one in Richmond, VA. These two in Charleston, SC. This one in Forest Park, Missouri. This one in Baltimore, Maryland. Three different ones at the University of Texas, Austin. While not vandalized (yet) the Mayor of New Orleans wants this one gone, same with this one at Ole Miss, or this (the oldest in Texas) in Grayson County, Texas. Or this one in Manatee County, Florida.

I'm sure there are quite a few that I've missed as well. Those are each monuments or statues of individuals connected to the Confederacy. Why is Stone Mountain any different? It's not - other than the fact that it's far larger and is seen by far more people. It is in fact a very large park that hosts concerts and such. You think it won't come under immense scrutiny next week when it does it's annual 4th of July laser light show right on top of the engravings?

I never thought about Stone Mountain, and to my surprise apparently John Lewis has said nothing about it. However all it takes is for someone to mention it on the wind and it will take flight.

In NO, well it turns out that two of the monuments at least are on the National Register of Historic Places. The Lee Monument was put there by a former mayor, who happens to be a black Democrat (no, not Nagin), and as it turns out that means that there are all sorts of rules about what must be done to tear them down. It would cost lots of money.

Turns out Stone Mountain (looks to me...) is on the National Register too, along with some other interesting sites.

http://dekalbhistory.org/documents/HANDOUTNationalRegister.pdf

 

[matttyl]

I never thought about Stone Mountain, and to my surprise apparently John Lewis has said nothing about it. However all it takes is for someone to mention it on the wind and it will take flight.

Yup, and I'm calling after the fourth of July "laser light show" they will have each night over next weekend. Someone will bring up "Why is the American flag being superimposed over top of 3 Confederates who fought to leave that Union?" It is kinda strange when you think about it.

 

[Statcruncher]

1. Buy up the five flags domain names

2. ???

3. Profit

 

[moleculo]

A few pages back Tim and Bob threw in the ol' hand grenade about how the confederacy = x, y & z, and so inevitably the next question is well if it was so horrid how we could allow any signs of it to stand. Those statements were made without examples. Given examples of what would stay and what would go that was called 'slippery slope' even as one of the proponents, Tim, shouted 'this is just about the flag and nothing else!' Well that's where we are as this has gone past the flag to monuments, street names, bridges, games, toys, ebay, etc. This is where the argument is. I'd like to know if the commenters here are dealing with this directly in their area and if so if they are seeing discord on just that subject.

so you think once you give on the removing the flag form public capitol buildings the next logical step is blowing up Stone Mountain?

Well, yeah (with maybe a few steps in between). It's a monument to the Confederacy, is it not? In the last week (isn't today the 1 week anniversary of the tragedy?) there have been numerous vandalisms of monuments/statues relating to the Confederacy, or the calls of their removal.

This one in Richmond, VA. These two in Charleston, SC. This one in Forest Park, Missouri. This one in Baltimore, Maryland. Three different ones at the University of Texas, Austin. While not vandalized (yet) the Mayor of New Orleans wants this one gone, same with this one at Ole Miss, or this (the oldest in Texas) in Grayson County, Texas. Or this one in Manatee County, Florida.

I'm sure there are quite a few that I've missed as well. Those are each monuments or statues of individuals connected to the Confederacy. Why is Stone Mountain any different? It's not - other than the fact that it's far larger and is seen by far more people. It is in fact a very large park that hosts concerts and such. You think it won't come under immense scrutiny next week when it does it's annual 4th of July laser light show right on top of the engravings?

I never thought about Stone Mountain, and to my surprise apparently John Lewis has said nothing about it. However all it takes is for someone to mention it on the wind and it will take flight.

In NO, well it turns out that two of the monuments at least are on the National Register of Historic Places. The Lee Monument was put there by a former mayor, who happens to be a black Democrat (no, not Nagin), and as it turns out that means that there are all sorts of rules about what must be done to tear them down. It would cost lots of money.

Turns out Stone Mountain (looks to me...) is on the National Register too, along with some other interesting sites.

http://dekalbhistory.org/documents/HANDOUTNationalRegister.pdf

well, they are historic.

I think it's not appropriate to destroy anything considered historic. It is appropriate to re-consider history, and that's ok. The answer, I think, is to change the wording on plaques, add some additional signs explaining why certain people have been memorialized.

At Stone Mountain, for example, have some exhibits about all of the KKK activities that occurred there and remember the atrocities committed. At the Strom Thurmond statue, include how hard he fought against civil rights.

it's important to remember all of our history, not just white-wash it.

 

[Franknbeans]

Beers and queers

 

[Buckfast 1]

A few pages back Tim and Bob threw in the ol' hand grenade about how the confederacy = x, y & z, and so inevitably the next question is well if it was so horrid how we could allow any signs of it to stand. Those statements were made without examples. Given examples of what would stay and what would go that was called 'slippery slope' even as one of the proponents, Tim, shouted 'this is just about the flag and nothing else!' Well that's where we are as this has gone past the flag to monuments, street names, bridges, games, toys, ebay, etc. This is where the argument is. I'd like to know if the commenters here are dealing with this directly in their area and if so if they are seeing discord on just that subject.

so you think once you give on the removing the flag form public capitol buildings the next logical step is blowing up Stone Mountain?

Well, yeah (with maybe a few steps in between). It's a monument to the Confederacy, is it not? In the last week (isn't today the 1 week anniversary of the tragedy?) there have been numerous vandalisms of monuments/statues relating to the Confederacy, or the calls of their removal.

This one in Richmond, VA. These two in Charleston, SC. This one in Forest Park, Missouri. This one in Baltimore, Maryland. Three different ones at the University of Texas, Austin. While not vandalized (yet) the Mayor of New Orleans wants this one gone, same with this one at Ole Miss, or this (the oldest in Texas) in Grayson County, Texas. Or this one in Manatee County, Florida.

I'm sure there are quite a few that I've missed as well. Those are each monuments or statues of individuals connected to the Confederacy. Why is Stone Mountain any different? It's not - other than the fact that it's far larger and is seen by far more people. It is in fact a very large park that hosts concerts and such. You think it won't come under immense scrutiny next week when it does it's annual 4th of July laser light show right on top of the engravings?

I never thought about Stone Mountain, and to my surprise apparently John Lewis has said nothing about it. However all it takes is for someone to mention it on the wind and it will take flight.

In NO, well it turns out that two of the monuments at least are on the National Register of Historic Places. The Lee Monument was put there by a former mayor, who happens to be a black Democrat (no, not Nagin), and as it turns out that means that there are all sorts of rules about what must be done to tear them down. It would cost lots of money.

Turns out Stone Mountain (looks to me...) is on the National Register too, along with some other interesting sites.

http://dekalbhistory.org/documents/HANDOUTNationalRegister.pdf

well, they are historic.

I think it's not appropriate to destroy anything considered historic. It is appropriate to re-consider history, and that's ok. The answer, I think, is to change the wording on plaques, add some additional signs explaining why certain people have been memorialized.

At Stone Mountain, for example, have some exhibits about all of the KKK activities that occurred there and remember the atrocities committed. At the Strom Thurmond statue, include how hard he fought against civil rights.

it's important to remember all of our history, not just white-wash it.

It always found it somewhat odd at the Stone Mountain laser show when the lasers lit up Stonewall Jackson, Robert E. Lee, and Jefferson Davis and their horses marched across the mountain with a Confederate flag waiving in the background while "Dixie" played and the crowd went wild cheering and hootin' and hollerin'. To Stone Mountain's credit, they stopped using the Confederate flag imagery at some point back in the 90's.

 

[matttyl]

It always found it somewhat odd at the Stone Mountain laser show when the lasers lit up Stonewall Jackson, Robert E. Lee, and Jefferson Davis and their horses marched across the mountain with a Confederate flag waiving in the background while "Dixie" played and the crowd went wild cheering and hootin' and hollerin'. To Stone Mountain's credit, they stopped using the Confederate flag imagery at some point back in the 90's.

(interesting trivia of the day) -You mean the song written by a northerner and first performed in New York City? The one that was taught to the supposed writer by a family of free blacks? The one that Lincoln asked the military band to play when the South surrendered at Appomattox, as it was a favorite of his? I just find it to be an interesting example of how the perception of things can change drastically over time.

 

[Gawain]

It would cost lots of money.Turns out Stone Mountain (looks to me...) is on the National Register too, along with some other interesting sites.

http://dekalbhistory.org/documents/HANDOUTNationalRegister.pdf

Forget about costing money, Stone Mountain is (was) money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Mountain_Memorial_half_dollar

 

[timschochet]

I heard a great suggestion for South Carolina on the radio: replace the Confederate flag with the Palmetto flag.

The Palmetto flag embodies all of the stuff defenders of the battle flag claim to care about: pride in state and southern heritage, etc. And it has nothing to do with slavery or secession; its a revolutionary war flag.

 

[TheIronSheik]

I heard a great suggestion for South Carolina on the radio: replace the Confederate flag with the Palmetto flag.

The Palmetto flag embodies all of the stuff defenders of the battle flag claim to care about: pride in state and southern heritage, etc. And it has nothing to do with slavery or secession; its a revolutionary war flag.

Offensive to the British.

 

[matttyl]

I heard a great suggestion for South Carolina on the radio: replace the Confederate flag with the Palmetto flag.

The Palmetto flag embodies all of the stuff defenders of the battle flag claim to care about: pride in state and southern heritage, etc. And it has nothing to do with slavery or secession; its a revolutionary war flag.

Not entirely true, Tim. The Palmetto itself wasn't added until 1861 (guess what happened that year). Direct from wiki - "Following its declaration of secession from the Union, the newly independent state of South Carolina considered many designs for its national flag, and selected an existing unofficial state flag with an upward facing gorget on a blue field, modifying it by adding a palmetto at the center of the field. Less than three months later, a variation of the palmetto flag unfurled over Fort Sumter on April 14, 1861, the day it was surrendered to Confederate General Beauregard, making it likely the first Confederate flag flown over captured United States' territory"

Perhaps you/they meant the Moultrie flag.

 

[Chadstroma]

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

 

[matttyl]

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

Not with today's media.

 

[Chadstroma]

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

Not with today's media.

How many in the media are boned up on their civil war history enough to know the difference?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

Not with today's media.

That darn news media, always ruining things by educating people about things they previously may not have known about.

 

[Slapdash]

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

Not with today's media.

That darn news media, always ruining things by educating people about things they previously may not have known about.

You're the guy who posted a WaPo article that incorrectly identified the battle flag as the Stars and Bars last week...

 

[TobiasFunke]

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

Not with today's media.

That darn news media, always ruining things by educating people about things they previously may not have known about.

You're the guy who posted a WaPo article that incorrectly identified the battle flag as the Stars and Bars last week...

Well then good news, guys! Go ahead and make the switch. I'm sure it will go well.

 

[moleculo]

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

Not with today's media.

That darn news media, always ruining things by educating people about things they previously may not have known about.

You're the guy who posted a WaPo article that incorrectly identified the battle flag as the Stars and Bars last week...

Lol..."No way should the Stars and Bars be flying there."

[Replaces flag with actual Stars and Bars]

 

[trogg78]

Some marine friends on facebook are using the meme we should be more concerned with ISIS than the condederate flag. I don't understand what one has to do with the other. Does anyone know what they mean?

 

[MattFancy]

Some marine friends on facebook are using the meme we should be more concerned with ISIS than the condederate flag. I don't understand what one has to do with the other. Does anyone know what they mean?

Apparently, we're able to multi-task anything else that we do, but when it comes to current events, we can only focus on one issue at a time.

 

[Mjolnirs]

It always found it somewhat odd at the Stone Mountain laser show when the lasers lit up Stonewall Jackson, Robert E. Lee, and Jefferson Davis and their horses marched across the mountain with a Confederate flag waiving in the background while "Dixie" played and the crowd went wild cheering and hootin' and hollerin'. To Stone Mountain's credit, they stopped using the Confederate flag imagery at some point back in the 90's.

(interesting trivia of the day) -You mean the song written by a northerner and first performed in New York City? The one that was taught to the supposed writer by a family of free blacks? The one that Lincoln asked the military band to play when the South surrendered at Appomattox, as it was a favorite of his? I just find it to be an interesting example of how the perception of things can change drastically over time.

Ain't it though. Kind of like how Georgia and Auburn use the Battle Hymn of the Republic as their fight songs.

I heard a great suggestion for South Carolina on the radio: replace the Confederate flag with the Palmetto flag.

The Palmetto flag embodies all of the stuff defenders of the battle flag claim to care about: pride in state and southern heritage, etc. And it has nothing to do with slavery or secession; its a revolutionary war flag.

Not entirely true, Tim. The Palmetto itself wasn't added until 1861 (guess what happened that year). Direct from wiki - "Following its declaration of secession from the Union, the newly independent state of South Carolina considered many designs for its national flag, and selected an existing unofficial state flag with an upward facing gorget on a blue field, modifying it by adding a palmetto at the center of the field. Less than three months later, a variation of the palmetto flag unfurled over Fort Sumter on April 14, 1861, the day it was surrendered to Confederate General Beauregard, making it likely the first Confederate flag flown over captured United States' territory"Perhaps you/they meant the Moultrie flag.

yes, this has been suggested and I think a fitting resolution. I will be flying my flag honoring the Battle of Ft. Sullivan this weekend for Carolina Day,

Just take down the Confederate battle flag and fly the first Confederate flag. If you don't point it out almost no one will realize the actual first Confederate flag is indeed the first Confederate flag and maybe just an early version of the stars and stripes.

This has been suggested before, but is usually shot down because it was the flag of a nation, and that is frowned on as well. As mentioned previously, the Battle Flag by the monument is because it is the flag of the soldiers, and the monument is dedicated to the soldiers.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Some marine friends on facebook are using the meme we should be more concerned with ISIS than the condederate flag. I don't understand what one has to do with the other. Does anyone know what they mean?

Those guys should be out stopping human trafficking and littering.

 

[tdoss]

Some marine friends on facebook are using the meme we should be more concerned with ISIS than the condederate flag. I don't understand what one has to do with the other. Does anyone know what they mean?

I think it's noting how were constantly focused on these shiny objects of misdirection...the political shell game.

We're arguing over a flag...all the while...there are REAL threats out there to be more concerned about.

This flag didn't motivate or cause this nutjob to shoot up that church but as long as it makes people feel like we've done "something"...I guess that's all that matters.

It's like having the "black lives matter" movement/rally anywhere but Chicago first and foremost. Or arguing gun control after this church shooting...again...ignoring what's happening in our inner cities that supposedly have stricter gun control already.

We keep chasing carrots...while plowing the field.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

The Stone Mountain sculptures should have never been put up IMO. Not sure there's anything we can/should do about it now.

Except maybe carve "LOSERS" across the top.

Or draw genitals on their faces and #YOLO

 

[MattFancy]

Some marine friends on facebook are using the meme we should be more concerned with ISIS than the condederate flag. I don't understand what one has to do with the other. Does anyone know what they mean?

I think it's noting how were constantly focused on these shiny objects of misdirection...the political shell game.

We're arguing over a flag...all the while...there are REAL threats out there to be more concerned about.

This flag didn't motivate or cause this nutjob to shoot up that church but as long as it makes people feel like we've done "something"...I guess that's all that matters.

It's like having the "black lives matter" movement/rally anywhere but Chicago first and foremost. Or arguing gun control after this church shooting...again...ignoring what's happening in our inner cities that supposedly have stricter gun control already.

We keep chasing carrots...while plowing the field.

Now I agree that the flag is in the wrong thing to chase here, but it's not like it is something that should just be ignored either. Bigger fish to fry for sure. But why can't the flag be an issue and also stopping ISIS?