New Orleans to Remove Statues
- Thread starter GodIsSalvation
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
gummy bears are chewy. this is a true statement but it's not relevant to this topic
YOUR COMMENTS ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THIS TOPIC....................good grief............is that the best you got?
YOU opened the "reason the Civil War was fought" can of worms, and then when faced with truth, you have to retreat to telling folks their comments aren't relevant? You opened the can of worms by DEFINING the Dixie cult, revealing YOUR bias against Southerners...........but all you can do is say my comments are irrelevant?
YOU opened the "reason the Civil War was fought" can of worms, and then when faced with truth, you have to retreat to telling folks their comments aren't relevant? You opened the can of worms by DEFINING the Dixie cult, revealing YOUR bias against Southerners...........but all you can do is say my comments are irrelevant?
And therein (his comments) is bias defined. Debate, free speech is only recognized by such folks when you agree with them. Civil discourse is not to be tolerated.
what discourse?...and I never said anything against free speech. you are free to voice your opinion. your opinion is wrong but you're still entitled to it
Too, too funny...........and sad........
If the tax paying citizens want them gone then they should go. There should no debate.
no, what is wrong is basing your opinion of a matter completely off a pre-supposed fact instead of actual reality. you libs pre-supposed ideas about us southerners are just wrong. the civil war was based mostly on states rights, with slavery being a issue, but not the issue.
democracy is still "majority rule" - you can debate and try to change opinions, but it still comes down to vote, and people often vote "yes" on issues that debate clearly points to "no" on.
but we don't have democracy - we have a democratic republic, where we by popular vote (not by debate) elect representatives. representatives who still often don't do what reflects majority opinion. if majority opinion was always honored, like Des said - we would have legalized pot, socialized medicine and a higher minimum wage in every state, and congressional term limits, for example. we would never have gone to war in Iraq, or Vietnam, and there would be campaign finance reform, and corporations would not be considered people, if majority opinion and reasoned discourse decided national action.
"we the people" don't decide issues. elected representatives do, and they make decisions based on a lot of influences other than majority opinion or pure reason.
but we don't have democracy - we have a democratic republic, where we by popular vote (not by debate) elect representatives. representatives who still often don't do what reflects majority opinion. if majority opinion was always honored, like Des said - we would have legalized pot, socialized medicine and a higher minimum wage in every state, and congressional term limits, for example. we would never have gone to war in Iraq, or Vietnam, and there would be campaign finance reform, and corporations would not be considered people, if majority opinion and reasoned discourse decided national action.
"we the people" don't decide issues. elected representatives do, and they make decisions based on a lot of influences other than majority opinion or pure reason.
no, but for example, the battle of liberty place monument that's getting removed in New Orleans commemorates a very much overtly white supremacist terrorist action and hostile takeover of the city, that ended with the national guard coming in to oust the proudly racist men who had taken and occupied it by force.
there's already a plaque next to it explaining that the city doesn't agree with those people anymore, and the lettering on the monument itself has been changed to reflect the same, and many previous city governments have tried to remove it.
they're still not destroying these things; they're talking about building a brand new park to put them in.
I personally do not care if they remove or relocate the various statues they are in a fuss over. What I do care about is that they use the exact same standard to remove or relocate OTHER statues/signs ........ whatever that are ALSO offensive to some. Oh, I don't know, say all the statues/signs/shops dedicated to Voodoo worship? I kinda find them offensive, BUT the majority of the citizens of New Orleans are black, and they are those who are involved in Voodoo worship......sooooo
Just to be Historically correct...........WHEN blacks were FIRST brought to America and sold into slavery, what FLAG was flying over our various Government locations? Anyone? .............. Anyone?
Just to be Historically correct...........WHEN blacks were FIRST brought to America and sold into slavery, what FLAG was flying over our various Government locations? Anyone? .............. Anyone?
specifically, state's rights to keep slavery legal, the expansion of slavery into western territories / states, and the economic ramifications of national emancipation. this was the biggest issue - and the one that touched every other argument off. the south didn't secede because the federal government instituted taxes or made polygamy illegal, or anything else that might be seen as "infringing" on states rights. they seceded over the issue of slavery. the arguments that they used weren't all about slavery, but it was the key issue, and i think that in large part the opinion that the states right's argument was just a rationalization for justifying keeping slavery holds a lot of water.
i wonder if years from now, people will say ISIL's actions weren't about religion? that they were about cultural rights? well i think some people may end up spinning it that way. to put a better face on it, you know.
i am a southerner too. and i wasn't around in 1860's. tbh, none of my family was either; they were in other countries. i realize that the confederate flag represents different things to different people, and that people chose sides in the civil war for a lot of different reasons. but slavery was no "marginal" issue with the powers-that-be or activists that actually made the war happen.
It was MADE the KEY issue........and has been MADE the KEY issue by those who wanted it to be the KEY issue....... just saying...........
Many Southerners saw the KEY ISSUE as States Rights.............consider the BIG PICTURE from their point of view.....while I do not support the concept of slavery, i can understand how they saw that the Northern political powers were trying to force their opinions on Southern citizens.
Just as with our Legal System........it is seen as the fruit of the poisoned tree.........or "slippery slope" if you wish. IF the Yankees could force this on the Southern citizens, WHAT NEXT? Where would it stop? States Rights was the BIG issue for many Southern citizens who understood what was going on.........and did not want an oppressive Central Government taking away their right to govern themselves.......
I am so very happy that slavery was done away with............but the downward spiral of States Rights can be directly traced from that time until today. The same oppressive Central Government in DC today continues to erode Stated Rights...........ESPECIALLY the Socialist Liberals in the Democrat Party.
just saying...........
Many Southerners saw the KEY ISSUE as States Rights.............consider the BIG PICTURE from their point of view.....while I do not support the concept of slavery, i can understand how they saw that the Northern political powers were trying to force their opinions on Southern citizens.
Just as with our Legal System........it is seen as the fruit of the poisoned tree.........or "slippery slope" if you wish. IF the Yankees could force this on the Southern citizens, WHAT NEXT? Where would it stop? States Rights was the BIG issue for many Southern citizens who understood what was going on.........and did not want an oppressive Central Government taking away their right to govern themselves.......
I am so very happy that slavery was done away with............but the downward spiral of States Rights can be directly traced from that time until today. The same oppressive Central Government in DC today continues to erode Stated Rights...........ESPECIALLY the Socialist Liberals in the Democrat Party.
just saying...........
i am a southerner too. and i wasn't around in 1860's. tbh, none of my family was either; they were in other countries. i realize that the confederate flag represents different things to different people, and that people chose sides in the civil war for a lot of different reasons. but slavery was no "marginal" issue with the powers-that-be or activists that actually made the war happen.
We are not saying it was a "marginal issue," rather that it was not THE SOLE ISSUE as has been suggested here.........It WAS an issue that eventually was put forth as THE ISSUE for those from the North.........but it was NOT THE ISSUE for Southerners........it was AN issue yes........but States Rights was THE ISSUE.
We are not saying it was a "marginal issue," rather that it was not THE SOLE ISSUE as has been suggested here.........It WAS an issue that eventually was put forth as THE ISSUE for those from the North.........but it was NOT THE ISSUE for Southerners........it was AN issue yes........but States Rights was THE ISSUE.
I'm not liberal...and yes I know the Civil War was fought over states rights. but states rights to what? they were not being excessively taxed new order any of their rights being taken from them.Abraham Lincoln won the election and shortly after South Carolina seceded from the Union after publishing an article saying that they were willing to fight for their right to own slaves. the rest of the states soon followed suit.
A little info to consider:
Under the terms of the First Confiscation Act of August 1861, disloyal masters would “forfeit” the use of their slaves, but the slaves were not actually freed. Lincoln ordered General John C. Frémont to rescind his decree of that September freeing the slaves of rebels in Missouri, and several months later the President rescinded General Hunter’s order abolishing slavery in three states. As late as the summer of 1862, we are reminded, Lincoln was writing letters to Horace Greeley saying that if he could end the war without freeing a single slave, he would do so. Even after the President finally promised an emancipation proclamation, in September 1862, several months elapsed until the proclamation actually came on 1 January 1863.
Under the terms of the First Confiscation Act of August 1861, disloyal masters would “forfeit” the use of their slaves, but the slaves were not actually freed. Lincoln ordered General John C. Frémont to rescind his decree of that September freeing the slaves of rebels in Missouri, and several months later the President rescinded General Hunter’s order abolishing slavery in three states. As late as the summer of 1862, we are reminded, Lincoln was writing letters to Horace Greeley saying that if he could end the war without freeing a single slave, he would do so. Even after the President finally promised an emancipation proclamation, in September 1862, several months elapsed until the proclamation actually came on 1 January 1863.
......and then wait until they respond revealing that they are a bigot........??? too, too funny