the WBTS was fought for just ONE main reason. the southland wanted her FREEDOM from the arrogant, self-righteous, ignorant, self-serving,hateFILLED,intrusive damnyankees.
the lust for FREEDOM was no different in 1861 than it was in 1776 OR 2004. (we southrons STILL want/deserve our LIBERTY!)
chattal slavery was at MOST a side issue, since only 5-6% of southerners EVER owned even one slave AND about the same percentage of yankees owned slaves as southerners. (i hasten to add that for the FEW percent of persons who WERE slaveowners, no matter where they resided, the continuation of slavery was VERY important!)
saying that slavery was any more than a SIDE ISSUE is mindless,cynical, stupid and/or a FRAUD, which is designed to deceive the ignorant.
free dixie,sw
And what freedom was she being denied? Can you point to anything in particular aside from "practice slavery" (or, to be more precise, "spread slavery westwards into new territory")?
What seems to be missing from your debate is the question of the perception of symbols.
Ultimately this flag is just a symbol for something. The problem is that it is interpreted in a different way.
For supporters of the flag, it is a symbol of freedom insofar as they used it to defend themselves from liberal northerners from telling them how to live their lives.
To opponents it is clearly a symbol of slavery and oppression.
The problem is that both are right. Unfortunately, the South was quite wrong about the slavery issue and the denial of civil rights to the descendants of those slaves.
This legacy is what haunts the conservatives who are the ancestors of the people who fought under the confederate flag. In large part because Northerners still want to tell them what to do in ways that will take away their freedom. And, this time the northerners (we now call them liberals) are very much wrong.
Flag supporters also need to understand, however the power of the symbol and its meaning to others. The Swastika is a 6000 year old symbol of luck that is now identified in the West with Nazis and their atrocities. It is not to be seen outside of references to that 13 year period.
But Swastikas are extremely prevalent in India because it is still a symbol of luck (displayed often immediately next to what we identify as the Star of David). It carries no stigma and is freely displayed on peoples doors in temples and elsewhere as a natural part of their culture and religion.
Unfortunately, the flag issue is one which is slightly more complex because the problem is in one country and in one state. The question of whether the a democratic majority can decide what a symbol is going to stand for is dubious when it was the minority that suffered the consequences of what they believe the symbol represents (as if Germans put it to a vote as to whether to allow Swatikas and did not heed the complaints of the tiny Jewish minority in the country).
Ultimately the argument here is not whether slavery was good or bad, but rather what the flag symbolizes.
If you can find yourself staring at a Swatika and everyone around identifies it as a sign of luck, then it actually begins to lose its negative symbolism.
Thus, if Southern states can be confident that the flag is displayed in such a manner so that no one uses it as a symbol of slavery and oppression, then it should be allowed. Otherwise, it is a difficult thing to advocate.
I know some of you will disagree, and please feel free to intelligently point out errors in my reasoning.