Re the pyramid argument, a pyramid is not a monument to a person. The White House was also built by slaves?

B_L, stop pretending like you could possibly know every member of the confederate armies heart. You have no idea if each individual soldier was pro/anti-slavery. You also don't know there motives for fighting. You have a bad habit of making generalities that simply aren't true.

Posted by tangplay on 1/30/2019 12:41:00 PM (view original):
Re the pyramid argument, a pyramid is not a monument to a person. The White House was also built by slaves?

So now we are cherry picking what is and isn't offensive? See what I mean? Slippery slope. I like your idea of local voting to determine the outcomes.

Yes, that is the problem. We obviously are not going to remove everything in the country that a minority is offended by. Who gets to decide which "offensive " material should be removed?

To me, the sadder issue is that we have people in this country who are actually offended by inanimate objects. We live in a very cissified society and it's only getting worse.

I struck out once and I am traumatized by your user name.

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/30/2019 1:28:00 PM (view original):
Yes, that is the problem. We obviously are not going to remove everything in the country that a minority is offended by. Who gets to decide which "offensive " material should be removed?

To me, the sadder issue is that we have people in this country who are actually offended by inanimate objects. We live in a very cissified society and it's only getting worse.

So do you agree with the local election idea?

I would be offended if the Nazi Party erected a statue of Adolf Hitler in a Jewish community.

I don't see why black people should not be offended by a statue of a confederate soldier that was erected by the KKK.

Because people shouldn't be offended by things that just sit there motionless, breathless, harmless. The only possible way that statue could do anyone any possible harm is if it fell over on someone or if a piece flew off in wind gust and hit someone. Stealing B_L's favorite line, "that's ridiculous".

Posted by kermit on 1/30/2019 1:37:00 PM (view original):
I struck out once and I am traumatized by your user name.

Lol. Too funny. We should hold a vote to have it removed.

Posted by tangplay on 1/30/2019 1:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/30/2019 1:28:00 PM (view original):
Yes, that is the problem. We obviously are not going to remove everything in the country that a minority is offended by. Who gets to decide which "offensive " material should be removed?

To me, the sadder issue is that we have people in this country who are actually offended by inanimate objects. We live in a very cissified society and it's only getting worse.

So do you agree with the local election idea?

I would be offended if the Nazi Party erected a statue of Adolf Hitler in a Jewish community.

I don't see why black people should not be offended by a statue of a confederate soldier that was erected by the KKK.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article222782640.html

LOL

Sometimes statues just send a message.

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/30/2019 1:21:00 PM (view original):
B_L, stop pretending like you could possibly know every member of the confederate armies heart. You have no idea if each individual soldier was pro/anti-slavery. You also don't know there motives for fighting. You have a bad habit of making generalities that simply aren't true.

I'm not pretending to know what was in anyone's heart. The South seceded to protect slavery. The states were 100% clear on this in their secession documents. Anyone who fought with the Confederacy was literally fighting to preserve slavery.

If you want to give low-level guys who really didn't have a say in it a pass, whatever. But I'm certainly not giving a pass to Lee. Dude didn't have to fight. He chose to.

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/30/2019 1:28:00 PM (view original):
Yes, that is the problem. We obviously are not going to remove everything in the country that a minority is offended by. Who gets to decide which "offensive " material should be removed?

To me, the sadder issue is that we have people in this country who are actually offended by inanimate objects. We live in a very cissified society and it's only getting worse.

It seems pretty cut and dry. Confederate soldiers, Confederate leaders, etc., shouldn't be memorialized. They were traitors.

It's sad that people are offended by this simple correction.

Very few people are offended by your correlation. I'm sure there are uneducated extremists who would be, but that's the fringe. Multitudes of leftists are offended by statues, logos, posters, (fill in the blank) all the time. This is where the difference lies.

And yes, they should be memorialized. Memorialized simply means "to have a memory of". The definition is in the root word. By not memorializing them, we essentially erase them from history. This is the left's objective and it's dangerous.

When Virginia declared its secession from the Union in April 1861,Lee chose to follow his home state, despite his desire for the country to remain intact and an offer of a senior Union command. During the first year of the Civil War, Lee served as a senior military adviser to Confederate President Jefferson Davis.

He was indeed a traitor but had the South won he would have been deemed a hero. Sons of Liberty were "traitors" too. Victors always write history.

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/30/2019 1:45:00 PM (view original):
Because people shouldn't be offended by things that just sit there motionless, breathless, harmless. The only possible way that statue could do anyone any possible harm is if it fell over on someone or if a piece flew off in wind gust and hit someone. Stealing B_L's favorite line, "that's ridiculous".

Fine, you may feel that way. I disagree. If I was raped I wouldn't want to drive by a statue of my rapist every day.

But a vote is the best option. I feel like a majority here agree with that.