Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/4/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Wow, twice in like 3 days that bob and I couldn't agree more.

Damn. Sad thing is there's been a few others, too. Like you said blind monkeys and apologists and nuts and screws.

So the other time we agreed was on the electoral college matter? Is that right?
I'm so opposed to eliminating that I can't spout it articulately enough.

On this team "nickname" so-called issue. In all fairness I must admit to being from Arizona where we've had loony politicians for EVER! AND, a few years back we had one/some (including a Gov.) who went about trying to "officially" change names on Mtn. Pks, freeways, etc in a misguided effort to eliminate "offensive" terms from being used in our colloquialisms, maps, and such. So, there went Squaw Peak, and the Squaw Peak Freeway, although we still have numerous Squaw Peaks, Squaw Pk, Drives, Lanes, etc. Not to mention Sally's nipple, Fern's *** (can we say that?) Miners *****, **** Rock (a GREAT campsite that I won't reveal any more info about regarding it's location!!) and all sorts of Indian heads from Mazatzal to Cochise, to Geronimo. Plus we celebrate cliffs with names that denote horrid historical events like Apache Leap (check out what supposedly happened their!) and have a High School named after Cortez for goodness sake!!

IMO, it's stupid to even go there. You can't (and shouldn't!!) sanitize history, It is what it is. Human behavior. Thus, looking backwards, all sorts of atrocities are seen, worrying about the name of some particularly memorable rock structure is just bordering on lunacy.

Argue/debate important stuff, not the trivial. Try debating the importance of the 9th Amendment instead......... or (actually) ANY of the 1st ten!
That's possibly worthwhile.
But, no matter what someone else things of that particular mountain in Phoenix, to me it's always gonna be Squaw Peak.
Janet Napolitano can bite my hind end on that issue!

I'm sure Janet will be thrilled about that, Bob!!

My view on all the PC **** is we have taken it way to far. Maybe the Washington Redskins should change their team name, but Colonials??? Give me a break! Who, exactly does that offend? And whoever it is, needs to get a life. I think there are more important things to worry about then some team being called the Colonials.

Personally, I don't care if people in the south hang confederate flags. It is part of their heritage. Not a part I would be proud of, but that is just me. I don't care if there are statues of Robert E Lee or Jefferson Davis. If it really bothers someone, than don't go to the south.

I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place.

just shows how stupid the KKK can be. How is a statue going to keep anyone in their place? if a statue would do that, then practically anything would do it.

Really? You don't think that a statue glorifying people who may have held your ancestors in bondage isn't dehumanizing?

If you were raped, would you want your rapist to have a statue glorifying him in the city?

let me know when a city puts up a statue of a rapist and I will consider answering a very dumb question.

You would be fine with that?

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 6:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):
"I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place."

Must not have worked very well. They's all over the place.

What was the statute of Pancho Villa in Tucson supposed to do for me? If I remember correctly the steed he's astride has no balls.
The mexicans all claim this is BS, false. The great Villa would NEVER ride a mare............. they're wrong, like most who just believe the latest scuttle...... in reality Villa's favorite horse was a mare, he named it Siete Laguas (7 leagues) supposedly for how far it could traverse in a day.

Bit of a border legend 'ol Doroteo Arango as he was born. Robin Hood to some. A terror to others.

I meant emotionally. Many statues were built by white supremacists in the 1920's and 60's, times of uprising in the black communities. Statues serve as a constant reminder of the subjucation of the black communities.

In addition, statues glorify people. They are NOT how we view history. When you build a confederate statue, you are glorifying someone who fought for the institution of slavery.

I would suggest moving these statues to museums and graveyards.

Not sure about whether the statues are glorifying someone who fought for slavery. Many men and women who fought in the Vietnam war were against the war, but that is what their country asked them to do. Is a statue of a Vietnam vet glorifying that stupid war?
Personally I have no idea why the people in the south built statues of confederate ware soldiers. Neither do you, as I doubt you were there at the time.

Putting up a statue of a Vietnam vet (USA) in Vietnam would be a bit strange. You are glorifying someone who fought against your people.

But the Vietnam War and the Civil War are not equivalent. The civil war was about slavery. As a whole, the south was fighting to keep the institution of slavery. Regardless of how unjust the war in Vietnam was, slavery trumps just about anything.

And we do know why many of the statues were built. Many were built by the KKK in the early 1900's and there was also a spike in the 50's and 60's.

The civil war was about the south fighting to preserve what was an accepted way of life for them. Yes, slavery is despicable, but that is what was accepted back then. Is it acceptable now? No. Was it right back then? No, but it was an accepted way of life in the south.

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/4/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Wow, twice in like 3 days that bob and I couldn't agree more.

Damn. Sad thing is there's been a few others, too. Like you said blind monkeys and apologists and nuts and screws.

So the other time we agreed was on the electoral college matter? Is that right?
I'm so opposed to eliminating that I can't spout it articulately enough.

On this team "nickname" so-called issue. In all fairness I must admit to being from Arizona where we've had loony politicians for EVER! AND, a few years back we had one/some (including a Gov.) who went about trying to "officially" change names on Mtn. Pks, freeways, etc in a misguided effort to eliminate "offensive" terms from being used in our colloquialisms, maps, and such. So, there went Squaw Peak, and the Squaw Peak Freeway, although we still have numerous Squaw Peaks, Squaw Pk, Drives, Lanes, etc. Not to mention Sally's nipple, Fern's *** (can we say that?) Miners *****, **** Rock (a GREAT campsite that I won't reveal any more info about regarding it's location!!) and all sorts of Indian heads from Mazatzal to Cochise, to Geronimo. Plus we celebrate cliffs with names that denote horrid historical events like Apache Leap (check out what supposedly happened their!) and have a High School named after Cortez for goodness sake!!

IMO, it's stupid to even go there. You can't (and shouldn't!!) sanitize history, It is what it is. Human behavior. Thus, looking backwards, all sorts of atrocities are seen, worrying about the name of some particularly memorable rock structure is just bordering on lunacy.

Argue/debate important stuff, not the trivial. Try debating the importance of the 9th Amendment instead......... or (actually) ANY of the 1st ten!
That's possibly worthwhile.
But, no matter what someone else things of that particular mountain in Phoenix, to me it's always gonna be Squaw Peak.
Janet Napolitano can bite my hind end on that issue!

I'm sure Janet will be thrilled about that, Bob!!

My view on all the PC **** is we have taken it way to far. Maybe the Washington Redskins should change their team name, but Colonials??? Give me a break! Who, exactly does that offend? And whoever it is, needs to get a life. I think there are more important things to worry about then some team being called the Colonials.

Personally, I don't care if people in the south hang confederate flags. It is part of their heritage. Not a part I would be proud of, but that is just me. I don't care if there are statues of Robert E Lee or Jefferson Davis. If it really bothers someone, than don't go to the south.

I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place.

just shows how stupid the KKK can be. How is a statue going to keep anyone in their place? if a statue would do that, then practically anything would do it.

Really? You don't think that a statue glorifying people who may have held your ancestors in bondage isn't dehumanizing?

If you were raped, would you want your rapist to have a statue glorifying him in the city?

let me know when a city puts up a statue of a rapist and I will consider answering a very dumb question.

You would be fine with that?

of course not, but it will ever happen. That was my point. Also , as I have pointed out, slavery was an accepted way of life in the south at the time (not saying it was right, it is just the way things were). Where is rape an accepted way of life?

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 6:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):
"I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place."

Must not have worked very well. They's all over the place.

What was the statute of Pancho Villa in Tucson supposed to do for me? If I remember correctly the steed he's astride has no balls.
The mexicans all claim this is BS, false. The great Villa would NEVER ride a mare............. they're wrong, like most who just believe the latest scuttle...... in reality Villa's favorite horse was a mare, he named it Siete Laguas (7 leagues) supposedly for how far it could traverse in a day.

Bit of a border legend 'ol Doroteo Arango as he was born. Robin Hood to some. A terror to others.

I meant emotionally. Many statues were built by white supremacists in the 1920's and 60's, times of uprising in the black communities. Statues serve as a constant reminder of the subjucation of the black communities.

In addition, statues glorify people. They are NOT how we view history. When you build a confederate statue, you are glorifying someone who fought for the institution of slavery.

I would suggest moving these statues to museums and graveyards.

Not sure about whether the statues are glorifying someone who fought for slavery. Many men and women who fought in the Vietnam war were against the war, but that is what their country asked them to do. Is a statue of a Vietnam vet glorifying that stupid war?
Personally I have no idea why the people in the south built statues of confederate ware soldiers. Neither do you, as I doubt you were there at the time.

Putting up a statue of a Vietnam vet (USA) in Vietnam would be a bit strange. You are glorifying someone who fought against your people.

But the Vietnam War and the Civil War are not equivalent. The civil war was about slavery. As a whole, the south was fighting to keep the institution of slavery. Regardless of how unjust the war in Vietnam was, slavery trumps just about anything.

And we do know why many of the statues were built. Many were built by the KKK in the early 1900's and there was also a spike in the 50's and 60's.

The civil war was about the south fighting to preserve what was an accepted way of life for them. Yes, slavery is despicable, but that is what was accepted back then. Is it acceptable now? No. Was it right back then? No, but it was an accepted way of life in the south.

Their way of life revolved around slavery. The south was fighting for slavery.

once again, looking back now we can say it was despicable, but it was an accepted way of life in the south at the time. That doesn't make it right, but does explain the south's viewpoint a bit.

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/4/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Wow, twice in like 3 days that bob and I couldn't agree more.

Damn. Sad thing is there's been a few others, too. Like you said blind monkeys and apologists and nuts and screws.

So the other time we agreed was on the electoral college matter? Is that right?
I'm so opposed to eliminating that I can't spout it articulately enough.

On this team "nickname" so-called issue. In all fairness I must admit to being from Arizona where we've had loony politicians for EVER! AND, a few years back we had one/some (including a Gov.) who went about trying to "officially" change names on Mtn. Pks, freeways, etc in a misguided effort to eliminate "offensive" terms from being used in our colloquialisms, maps, and such. So, there went Squaw Peak, and the Squaw Peak Freeway, although we still have numerous Squaw Peaks, Squaw Pk, Drives, Lanes, etc. Not to mention Sally's nipple, Fern's *** (can we say that?) Miners *****, **** Rock (a GREAT campsite that I won't reveal any more info about regarding it's location!!) and all sorts of Indian heads from Mazatzal to Cochise, to Geronimo. Plus we celebrate cliffs with names that denote horrid historical events like Apache Leap (check out what supposedly happened their!) and have a High School named after Cortez for goodness sake!!

IMO, it's stupid to even go there. You can't (and shouldn't!!) sanitize history, It is what it is. Human behavior. Thus, looking backwards, all sorts of atrocities are seen, worrying about the name of some particularly memorable rock structure is just bordering on lunacy.

Argue/debate important stuff, not the trivial. Try debating the importance of the 9th Amendment instead......... or (actually) ANY of the 1st ten!
That's possibly worthwhile.
But, no matter what someone else things of that particular mountain in Phoenix, to me it's always gonna be Squaw Peak.
Janet Napolitano can bite my hind end on that issue!

I'm sure Janet will be thrilled about that, Bob!!

My view on all the PC **** is we have taken it way to far. Maybe the Washington Redskins should change their team name, but Colonials??? Give me a break! Who, exactly does that offend? And whoever it is, needs to get a life. I think there are more important things to worry about then some team being called the Colonials.

Personally, I don't care if people in the south hang confederate flags. It is part of their heritage. Not a part I would be proud of, but that is just me. I don't care if there are statues of Robert E Lee or Jefferson Davis. If it really bothers someone, than don't go to the south.

I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place.

just shows how stupid the KKK can be. How is a statue going to keep anyone in their place? if a statue would do that, then practically anything would do it.

Really? You don't think that a statue glorifying people who may have held your ancestors in bondage isn't dehumanizing?

If you were raped, would you want your rapist to have a statue glorifying him in the city?

let me know when a city puts up a statue of a rapist and I will consider answering a very dumb question.

You would be fine with that?

of course not, but it will ever happen. That was my point. Also , as I have pointed out, slavery was an accepted way of life in the south at the time (not saying it was right, it is just the way things were). Where is rape an accepted way of life?

You are missing the point. Regardless of how accepted it was, it is still wrong. These people not only practiced slavery, but fought for it. Not only that, they betrayed the USA.

If someone who fought to own my family was memorialized and glorified, I would be disgusted.

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 6:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):
"I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place."

Must not have worked very well. They's all over the place.

What was the statute of Pancho Villa in Tucson supposed to do for me? If I remember correctly the steed he's astride has no balls.
The mexicans all claim this is BS, false. The great Villa would NEVER ride a mare............. they're wrong, like most who just believe the latest scuttle...... in reality Villa's favorite horse was a mare, he named it Siete Laguas (7 leagues) supposedly for how far it could traverse in a day.

Bit of a border legend 'ol Doroteo Arango as he was born. Robin Hood to some. A terror to others.

I meant emotionally. Many statues were built by white supremacists in the 1920's and 60's, times of uprising in the black communities. Statues serve as a constant reminder of the subjucation of the black communities.

In addition, statues glorify people. They are NOT how we view history. When you build a confederate statue, you are glorifying someone who fought for the institution of slavery.

I would suggest moving these statues to museums and graveyards.

Not sure about whether the statues are glorifying someone who fought for slavery. Many men and women who fought in the Vietnam war were against the war, but that is what their country asked them to do. Is a statue of a Vietnam vet glorifying that stupid war?
Personally I have no idea why the people in the south built statues of confederate ware soldiers. Neither do you, as I doubt you were there at the time.

Putting up a statue of a Vietnam vet (USA) in Vietnam would be a bit strange. You are glorifying someone who fought against your people.

But the Vietnam War and the Civil War are not equivalent. The civil war was about slavery. As a whole, the south was fighting to keep the institution of slavery. Regardless of how unjust the war in Vietnam was, slavery trumps just about anything.

And we do know why many of the statues were built. Many were built by the KKK in the early 1900's and there was also a spike in the 50's and 60's.

The civil war was about the south fighting to preserve what was an accepted way of life for them. Yes, slavery is despicable, but that is what was accepted back then. Is it acceptable now? No. Was it right back then? No, but it was an accepted way of life in the south.

Those statues weren’t put up during the war. They were put up 100 years later. We knew better then and we know better now. The memorials need to go.

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/4/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Wow, twice in like 3 days that bob and I couldn't agree more.

Damn. Sad thing is there's been a few others, too. Like you said blind monkeys and apologists and nuts and screws.

So the other time we agreed was on the electoral college matter? Is that right?
I'm so opposed to eliminating that I can't spout it articulately enough.

On this team "nickname" so-called issue. In all fairness I must admit to being from Arizona where we've had loony politicians for EVER! AND, a few years back we had one/some (including a Gov.) who went about trying to "officially" change names on Mtn. Pks, freeways, etc in a misguided effort to eliminate "offensive" terms from being used in our colloquialisms, maps, and such. So, there went Squaw Peak, and the Squaw Peak Freeway, although we still have numerous Squaw Peaks, Squaw Pk, Drives, Lanes, etc. Not to mention Sally's nipple, Fern's *** (can we say that?) Miners *****, **** Rock (a GREAT campsite that I won't reveal any more info about regarding it's location!!) and all sorts of Indian heads from Mazatzal to Cochise, to Geronimo. Plus we celebrate cliffs with names that denote horrid historical events like Apache Leap (check out what supposedly happened their!) and have a High School named after Cortez for goodness sake!!

IMO, it's stupid to even go there. You can't (and shouldn't!!) sanitize history, It is what it is. Human behavior. Thus, looking backwards, all sorts of atrocities are seen, worrying about the name of some particularly memorable rock structure is just bordering on lunacy.

Argue/debate important stuff, not the trivial. Try debating the importance of the 9th Amendment instead......... or (actually) ANY of the 1st ten!
That's possibly worthwhile.
But, no matter what someone else things of that particular mountain in Phoenix, to me it's always gonna be Squaw Peak.
Janet Napolitano can bite my hind end on that issue!

I'm sure Janet will be thrilled about that, Bob!!

My view on all the PC **** is we have taken it way to far. Maybe the Washington Redskins should change their team name, but Colonials??? Give me a break! Who, exactly does that offend? And whoever it is, needs to get a life. I think there are more important things to worry about then some team being called the Colonials.

Personally, I don't care if people in the south hang confederate flags. It is part of their heritage. Not a part I would be proud of, but that is just me. I don't care if there are statues of Robert E Lee or Jefferson Davis. If it really bothers someone, than don't go to the south.

I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place.

just shows how stupid the KKK can be. How is a statue going to keep anyone in their place? if a statue would do that, then practically anything would do it.

Really? You don't think that a statue glorifying people who may have held your ancestors in bondage isn't dehumanizing?

If you were raped, would you want your rapist to have a statue glorifying him in the city?

let me know when a city puts up a statue of a rapist and I will consider answering a very dumb question.

You would be fine with that?

of course not, but it will ever happen. That was my point. Also , as I have pointed out, slavery was an accepted way of life in the south at the time (not saying it was right, it is just the way things were). Where is rape an accepted way of life?

You are missing the point. Regardless of how accepted it was, it is still wrong. These people not only practiced slavery, but fought for it. Not only that, they betrayed the USA.

If someone who fought to own my family was memorialized and glorified, I would be disgusted.

You are missing the point. You are applying today's morals and standards to 150 years ago. Morals and standards were different then. In no way am I defending slavery, but people thought and felt differently back then. (of course some people still feel that way today. hopefully they are in the minority)

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 2:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/4/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Wow, twice in like 3 days that bob and I couldn't agree more.

Damn. Sad thing is there's been a few others, too. Like you said blind monkeys and apologists and nuts and screws.

So the other time we agreed was on the electoral college matter? Is that right?
I'm so opposed to eliminating that I can't spout it articulately enough.

On this team "nickname" so-called issue. In all fairness I must admit to being from Arizona where we've had loony politicians for EVER! AND, a few years back we had one/some (including a Gov.) who went about trying to "officially" change names on Mtn. Pks, freeways, etc in a misguided effort to eliminate "offensive" terms from being used in our colloquialisms, maps, and such. So, there went Squaw Peak, and the Squaw Peak Freeway, although we still have numerous Squaw Peaks, Squaw Pk, Drives, Lanes, etc. Not to mention Sally's nipple, Fern's *** (can we say that?) Miners *****, **** Rock (a GREAT campsite that I won't reveal any more info about regarding it's location!!) and all sorts of Indian heads from Mazatzal to Cochise, to Geronimo. Plus we celebrate cliffs with names that denote horrid historical events like Apache Leap (check out what supposedly happened their!) and have a High School named after Cortez for goodness sake!!

IMO, it's stupid to even go there. You can't (and shouldn't!!) sanitize history, It is what it is. Human behavior. Thus, looking backwards, all sorts of atrocities are seen, worrying about the name of some particularly memorable rock structure is just bordering on lunacy.

Argue/debate important stuff, not the trivial. Try debating the importance of the 9th Amendment instead......... or (actually) ANY of the 1st ten!
That's possibly worthwhile.
But, no matter what someone else things of that particular mountain in Phoenix, to me it's always gonna be Squaw Peak.
Janet Napolitano can bite my hind end on that issue!

I'm sure Janet will be thrilled about that, Bob!!

My view on all the PC **** is we have taken it way to far. Maybe the Washington Redskins should change their team name, but Colonials??? Give me a break! Who, exactly does that offend? And whoever it is, needs to get a life. I think there are more important things to worry about then some team being called the Colonials.

Personally, I don't care if people in the south hang confederate flags. It is part of their heritage. Not a part I would be proud of, but that is just me. I don't care if there are statues of Robert E Lee or Jefferson Davis. If it really bothers someone, than don't go to the south.

I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place.

just shows how stupid the KKK can be. How is a statue going to keep anyone in their place? if a statue would do that, then practically anything would do it.

Really? You don't think that a statue glorifying people who may have held your ancestors in bondage isn't dehumanizing?

If you were raped, would you want your rapist to have a statue glorifying him in the city?

let me know when a city puts up a statue of a rapist and I will consider answering a very dumb question.

You would be fine with that?

of course not, but it will ever happen. That was my point. Also , as I have pointed out, slavery was an accepted way of life in the south at the time (not saying it was right, it is just the way things were). Where is rape an accepted way of life?

You are missing the point. Regardless of how accepted it was, it is still wrong. These people not only practiced slavery, but fought for it. Not only that, they betrayed the USA.

If someone who fought to own my family was memorialized and glorified, I would be disgusted.

You are missing the point. You are applying today's morals and standards to 150 years ago. Morals and standards were different then. In no way am I defending slavery, but people thought and felt differently back then. (of course some people still feel that way today. hopefully they are in the minority)

Even then, people who thought slavery was good around the globe were in a minority.

The Union had it figured out.

The Union had manufacturing figured out.

Posted by bagchucker on 4/5/2019 2:26:00 AM (view original):
3. Robert E Lee fought for Virginia

The general consensus of historical opinion is that Gen. Robert E. Lee made a very difficult decision to support his beloved Virginia. (as Bagchucker states!)
I believe it's fair to conclude that he loved Virginia--- his home (land) more than he did the Union that existed at that time.
As a soldier he did his best when given command of forces in defense of the New Country that the Confederacy viewed themselves.

As someone with family roots in Missouri. A state wherein the citizens were literally divided in two by the "notion" of blacks as "free" men. (Few people even gave a thought to the Black women!) By that I mean frequent occurrences of families divided with brother(s) vs. brother(s) all over the issue of "southern" secession and the right of the Confederacy to live freely by their own rules and ways------I can safely say that highly educated, well respected men like Gen. Lee didn't make such decisions frivolously nor did they take pleasure at the reality of taking up "arms" against their own friends, neighbors and (sometimes) family members. Don't they teach the Civil war in Kansas Tangy? hell, watch Outlaw Josey wales, you'll get just a small taste of the treachery committed by (in that case) the Union forces.

one o my grandads born in Coffeyville Kansas

hard split there too



i don know if they still have it but the gunfighter museum there a mess of black and white pictures of guys in coffins with holes in their heads

Like I said tang is picking and choosing. If Lee was evil then people could argue that Jefferson was as well.

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 2:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 2:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/5/2019 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/4/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Wow, twice in like 3 days that bob and I couldn't agree more.

Damn. Sad thing is there's been a few others, too. Like you said blind monkeys and apologists and nuts and screws.

So the other time we agreed was on the electoral college matter? Is that right?
I'm so opposed to eliminating that I can't spout it articulately enough.

On this team "nickname" so-called issue. In all fairness I must admit to being from Arizona where we've had loony politicians for EVER! AND, a few years back we had one/some (including a Gov.) who went about trying to "officially" change names on Mtn. Pks, freeways, etc in a misguided effort to eliminate "offensive" terms from being used in our colloquialisms, maps, and such. So, there went Squaw Peak, and the Squaw Peak Freeway, although we still have numerous Squaw Peaks, Squaw Pk, Drives, Lanes, etc. Not to mention Sally's nipple, Fern's *** (can we say that?) Miners *****, **** Rock (a GREAT campsite that I won't reveal any more info about regarding it's location!!) and all sorts of Indian heads from Mazatzal to Cochise, to Geronimo. Plus we celebrate cliffs with names that denote horrid historical events like Apache Leap (check out what supposedly happened their!) and have a High School named after Cortez for goodness sake!!

IMO, it's stupid to even go there. You can't (and shouldn't!!) sanitize history, It is what it is. Human behavior. Thus, looking backwards, all sorts of atrocities are seen, worrying about the name of some particularly memorable rock structure is just bordering on lunacy.

Argue/debate important stuff, not the trivial. Try debating the importance of the 9th Amendment instead......... or (actually) ANY of the 1st ten!
That's possibly worthwhile.
But, no matter what someone else things of that particular mountain in Phoenix, to me it's always gonna be Squaw Peak.
Janet Napolitano can bite my hind end on that issue!

I'm sure Janet will be thrilled about that, Bob!!

My view on all the PC **** is we have taken it way to far. Maybe the Washington Redskins should change their team name, but Colonials??? Give me a break! Who, exactly does that offend? And whoever it is, needs to get a life. I think there are more important things to worry about then some team being called the Colonials.

Personally, I don't care if people in the south hang confederate flags. It is part of their heritage. Not a part I would be proud of, but that is just me. I don't care if there are statues of Robert E Lee or Jefferson Davis. If it really bothers someone, than don't go to the south.

I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place.

just shows how stupid the KKK can be. How is a statue going to keep anyone in their place? if a statue would do that, then practically anything would do it.

Really? You don't think that a statue glorifying people who may have held your ancestors in bondage isn't dehumanizing?

If you were raped, would you want your rapist to have a statue glorifying him in the city?

let me know when a city puts up a statue of a rapist and I will consider answering a very dumb question.

You would be fine with that?

of course not, but it will ever happen. That was my point. Also , as I have pointed out, slavery was an accepted way of life in the south at the time (not saying it was right, it is just the way things were). Where is rape an accepted way of life?

You are missing the point. Regardless of how accepted it was, it is still wrong. These people not only practiced slavery, but fought for it. Not only that, they betrayed the USA.

If someone who fought to own my family was memorialized and glorified, I would be disgusted.

You are missing the point. You are applying today's morals and standards to 150 years ago. Morals and standards were different then. In no way am I defending slavery, but people thought and felt differently back then. (of course some people still feel that way today. hopefully they are in the minority)

Even then, people who thought slavery was good around the globe were in a minority.

let's just agree to disagree. I understand what you are saying, but it was a diffferent time.