Posted on 06/22/2015 3:19:00 PM PDT by ScottWalkerForPresident2016
The American flag was lowered to half-staff at the South Carolina state capitol last week after the deadly church shooting in Charleston, yet the Confederate "battle flag" still flies on the state capitol grounds, outraging South Carolinians and other Americans.
Local politicians and leaders held a joint news conference this morning to call for the Confederate flag, currently flying, by law, at full-staff, to be to be removed entirely from the site, and Gov. Nikki Haley is expected to make a statement on the issue this afternoon.
But though the controversy is focused this week on South Carolina, it is not the only state to have the remnants of the Confederacy in its state symbol.
The Georgia state flag isn't what most Americans commonly recognize as the Confederate flag, but it is is actually based on an earlier version.
That earlier version prominently featured the "Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia," which is the commonly recognized version of the Confederate flag.
The current version was adopted in 2003 after two years of debate over the specifics of the flag, as described in "The New Georgia Encyclopedia". The flag used today is based on the first national flag of the Confederacy (dubbed the "Stars and Bars"), with the Georgia state seal inside the circle of stars and "In God We Trust" written below.
"This legacy did not go unnoticed by African American legislators and others -- but most expressed a willingness to allow this tribute because they did not see it as a symbol widely associated with racist groups," reads "The New Georgia Encyclopedia," which is run through a partnership with groups including the governor's office and the University of Georgia Press.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Now don't you start into this discussion with your deceitful argument. You know very well where is the evidence that the issue of slavery was not the sticking point in the war. What was the sticking point was Independence.
Lincoln made it clear that slavery would be tolerated, but what would NOT be tolerated was a government independent of Washington D.C.
Stop trying to deceive people.
What about the Northern slave states? Was the North oppressing their slaves too?
Inquiring minds want to know if it was just southern slaves being oppressed.
The problem isn't symbolism. The problem is real, concrete differences. The problem is an abject refusal from some to "melt" in the "melting pot."
A stubborn insistence on maintaining a culture at odds with the main culture, and at odds with any hope of success.
The problem is not symbols, it's attitudes which are not compatible with improving ones situation.
I did not know that, and that's funny.
A Captain wrote in his letter back home that “if this war is to be fought over slaves, we couldn’t get two regiments to fight on the field”. This Captain was in the Illinois Infantry at Shiloh and referenced in a book about Shiloh.
I prefer to leave the deceit to you.
Please stop with the deceitful posts.
You can't feed a horse that's not hungry.
The Cause of All Nations: An International History of the American Civil War Hardcover December 30, 2014 by Don H. Doyle
Sounds interesting - I’ll look into it. But I doubt that I will find anything in there at supports the assertion that there was any agreement between leaders of the north and south eliminating slavery as a central bone of contention.
Slavery was the “elephant in the room”.
So much worse for you that I am not doing it, while you are.
This response from you is itself deceitful. You completely ignore addressing the evidence I just provided you, and instead resort to your little pot shots.
Pointing out that five Union states were slave states is deceitful? I would think refraining from mentioning that fact is what is deceitful.
You absolutely abhor the existence of this piece of information because it completely undermines your argument.
If the war was fought to abolish slavery, then how did these five Union slave states not get their own slavery abolished first?
Yeah, that's a tough argument to sell when people know the truth.
I have read a quote from General Grant saying much the same thing, but others have disputed the authenticity of this quote. I don't know if it is true or not, but I have little doubt the sentiment expressed therein was true.
Who is claiming that the “war was fought to abolish slavery”?
Okay, fine. I keep forgetting that you are about the only person arguing for the Union Actions in the Civil war, who ISN'T arguing the war was fought to abolish slavery.
Keep in mind, that from my perspective there is only one of you, and millions of the others.
Usually when you see hoof prints you think "Horse", not "Zebra."
I don’t know of anyone at FreeRepublic (except for the lost causers) who argue that the north went to war to free the slaves. You simply see what you want to see - and fight the strawman you want to fight.
If the Union apologetics argument is not based on the abolition of slavery, then what is the word "Slave" doing in the discussion?
The Southern side argues "Invasion." "Defense of Homeland." "Independence". The Union Apologist side keeps using the "Slave" word.
If nothing else, this will stop thugs from getting shot while they resist arrest after robbing something... if this doesn't do it, then we'll probably have to ban guns, hot rods, beer, country music and BBQ grills next.
The Southern side argues "Invasion." "Defense of Homeland." "Independence".
Jeebus but you're obdurate. Only the lost causers cited those and only after the fact. The confederates said one thing (besides their temper tantrum "nobody gonna tell me what to do!") and that was SLAVERY.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.