If we are going to ban anything meaningful because of slavery - BAN THE DEMORAT PARTY!!!"
Well, now there's an idea. ;-)
Ain't goin' t'happen, but might explain why Dems are forever changing their name -- are they "liberals" or "progressives" or now something else, anything but just plain Dems?
P-Marlowe: "The Rebel Flag represents rebellion.
It is the symbol of the non-conformist.
It is a statement of protest against centralized big government."
Which is ironic, since as the Confederate Armies' battle flag, it represented the Confederate central government, or such "Big Government" as the Confederacy could muster.
And however brilliantly such armies performed in the field, it was never-ever about "non-conformity" or protest against it's own slave-power government.
But I certainly agree that Dems are driving themselves nuts over this, and worse than that, they seem to be driving us nuts too, and that's pretty serious.
So we are arguing about symbolism -- in this case an unfortunate noble symbol of Southern courage, devotion and resourcefulness -- corrupted perhaps irreparably by (apparently) one lone insane moron (literally, never finished school) who found there inspiration to go murder some blacks, but which blacks?
Revolutionary blacks? No.
Rioting, burning, destroyer blacks? No.
Louis Farrakahn follower blacks? No.
Shoot-'em-up gangsta blacks? No.
The lunatic went after arguably some of the nicest people in the world -- Christians, in church, praying and studying their bibles.
Honest to God... what's up with that?
Of course, we don't know, but in the mean time the Confederate Army's battle flag is trashed, burned and consigned to history's rubbish heap... or so it seems.
And just so we're clear about what that flag truly represents to all of us, remember this: who was arguably our greatest fighting general of the Second World War?
Was it not General George S. Patton, Jr.?
And does everybody forget that Patton was the grandson of Confederate General George S. Patton Sr.?
So America's outstanding military traditions owe as much to our Southern & Confederate ancestors as it does to anyone else.
So I say, let's not cut off our noses to spite our faces.
That makes no sense, and does nobody any good, except our enemies, of which we're seeing more & more these days.
celmak: "Yeppers, we should ignore that demorats ever flew it, and what they were defending."
I certainly "get" your point, celmak.
Without exception, leaders of the Confederacy were Democrats before starting the Civil War, and most went back to being Democrats after losing their war (Longstreet comes to mind as an exception).
Along with their Northern Dough-faced Democrat allies, they were the Slave-Power which dominated Federal government from the Founding until the Civil war, and again from the Great Depression until the 1960s civil rights and conservative revolutions.
So Democrats are responsible for slavery, secession, Civil War and afterwards, for Jim Crow, the Ku-Klux-Klan, lynchings and every other such wickedness.
So, if we are going to be banning all such symbols, let's start with the real source of it: Democrats.
Fine. Ridiculous, but, well, this is a silly season, isn't it?
P-Marlowe: "Read your history, Yankee scum.
The North did not raise the idea of freeing the slaves until the war was half over.
90% or more of the Rebel Soldiers were not slave owners and were not fighting for the right to own them."
Sorry FRiend, but it seems you have no real idea of what was going on.
First of all, going back to the time of our Declaration of Independence (1776), most Founders understood that slavery was an evil (perhaps necessary, but still evil) that should eventually be abolished.
By the time of our Constitutional Convention in 1787, many Northern states had already begun to slowly abolish slavery, and Southern leaders like Thomas Jefferson were proposing solutions which would purchase freedom for slaves, and transport them back to Africa.
Indeed, that was the whole idea behind the country of Liberia.
It was the idea which later leaders like Lincoln inherited and held.
All such ideas were rejected by Southern slave-owners who began looking as slavery not as a necessary-evil, but rather as a positive good thing, to be cherished and never abandoned.
And until the 1850s Republicans, there was never an anti-slavery political party, or an openly anti-slavery president.
Every voter of the time understood that slavery was a necessary pre-condition for Union, and that to openly oppose it was to invite Southern secession.
Indeed, even 1860 Republicans were not outright abolitionists.
Instead what they wanted was to prevent the expansion of slavery into their own states (via Dred-Scott) or into western territories which didn't want it.
But that was enough opposition to drive Southern Fire-Eater Democrats to declare 1) secession, then 2) Confederacy, then 3) war on the USA.
Civil War changed everything.
Now there was a huge military advantage to freeing slaves in territory under US Army control, and so Lincoln ordered it.
In January 1863 that effected only about 25,000 slaves, but by war's end in 1865 the US Army had freed over three million slaves.
Smokin' Joe: "Actually, the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in states which were at war with the Union."
That was all Lincoln had the constitutional authority, as commander in chief, to free.
It originally effected only around 25,000 slaves, but by war's end, over three million.
In December 1865 the 13th Amendment freed all remaining US slaves.
lacrew: "Today I learned that a TV network just banned Dukes of Hazard re-runs.
Political ideology aside, I can spot mass hysteria when I see it....and point out how absurd it."
It's just one spot where their "political correctness" crosses the line into serious political insanity.
The Left is simultaneously vicious and trivial in exercising their domineering political controls.
Everybody loves the good ol' boys and their General Lee, generally speaking, their flag is and should be no problem.
RushIsMyTeddyBear: "You don’t live in the South or fly-over country do you?"
Nearly everybody posting here has lived in the South at one time or another, has some family in the South and visits there whenever possible.
My mother was born in North Carolina and her family is all over the South, my Dad in Pennsylvania, his family mostly northern.
So we are not your "enemies", we are you, and you are us, FRiend.
UnwashedPeasant: "The flag represents Rebellion against Tyranny.
People who love Tyranny hate the flag."
FRiend, we are debating symbols here, and symbols mean whatever people say they mean.
Right now we are being bamboozled by a bums-rush of Leftie propagandists telling us the Confederate Battle Flag is the symbol of racists who murder Christians in cold blood in their church!!
So how do you argue against such nonsense?
Well, for one thing, we must, must stand in total unity and love, with the Christians who were murdered in their church.
For another, we can remind people that the CBF has a proud tradition which belongs to everyone with ancestors from that time, not just the looney-toons.
RushIsMyTeddyBear: "Then you would understand that the rebel flag has morphed through the years as being a symbol of rebellion against big gov or authoritarianism."
Surely, FRiend, you understand that all symbolism, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholders.
And in our culture, sadly, "main-stream" symbolism is under strict control of our Leftist media, academia & politicians (but I repeat myself), and they are coming down super-hard now on the old Confederate battle-flag.
So we are making (as my old CO used to say) like Texas jack-rabbits in a hail storm -- all we can do is hunker and take it.
Still, it's worth remembering that the Civil War was fought predominately by disciplined Christian soldiers, on both sides, and so any attack on Christians has nothing to do with rebellion or opposition to Big Government.
Army of Tennessee battle flag:
Battle of Franklin, 1864: