Judges back schools’ Confederate flag ban

[Twin Fist]

OMG! I totally get you. It was really shameful when all those gay people seceded from the union and started a war over their right to own others.

Although considering this is Tennessee, I doubt a rainbow flag would be allowed either.

that is crap, and you know it.

For one thing, i am speaking of each being offensive to some people, but one will be allowed and one wont.

second, The civil war was fought over states rights. The north had no high minded ideals when they wanted to abolish slavery, they did it to destroy the souths growing economic power since that economic power was based on agriculture.

Lincoin himself said that he didnt care one way or another about slavery, and if he could have kept the union together by keeping slavery, he would have.

I just love it when people spout the "they wanted to keep on owning other people" line.

 

[KenpoTex]

These are the United States now, well, at least they're supposed to be.

Actually, they're supposed to be the united States (separate, sovereign entities voluntarily united for the common good; not one nation conveniently divided into smaller chunks all of which are subservient to the national government.)

BTW: it wasn't 'till I went to college that I found out that damn Yankee wasn't one word :rofl:

 

[theletch1]

That was my observation as well.

I am a "Yankee". I never thought of myself as a Yankee until I lived down south for 10 years. (North Carolina/Tennessee mountains, very rural). I was born and raised in Chicago, so I was from the midwest in my eyes. When I thought of Yankees, I thought of the northeast. In the area we moved to, anyone not born in one of the confederate states was a yankee, you could be from California and you're still a Yankee. I learned after moving that the civil war is alive and well for most southerners.

The confederate flag was all over the place down there, but in the area I was in, it was all about the war, which they insist had nothing to do with slavery. I didn't see any racism in any of the people I knew, I'm not saying it isn't there, just that it wasn't in my interactions with anyone in our area.

Where am I going with this? I don't know, lol. It does have more racial conotations than they would like to admit. One way or the other, they have got to let it go. These are the United States now, well, at least they're supposed to be.

Some... not most. It has been my experience that the folks that actually believe that the war is still on are pretty few. Many folks have moved to the south in the last 164 years that were either from the north or from other countries. That racism still exists is in the south is a sad fact but not exclusive to the south. Truth be known the "Great war of Northern Aggression" was simply a failed rebellion like so many others that have taken place through out history. Time to get over it folks (for those that still think the South will rise again). The demographics and truthfully, the country, has changed so much that another rebellion will not be divided along cardinal points of the compass.

 

[KenpoTex]

Truth be known the "Great war of Northern Aggression" was simply a failed rebellion like so many others that have taken place through out history.

Use of the term "rebellion" implies that the C.S.A. were trying to overthrow the U.S. government. In reality, they seceded (which was their right) and were invaded by the U.S. and forcibly "re-annexed."

 

[theletch1]

Use of the term "rebellion" implies that the C.S.A. were trying to overthrow the U.S. government. In reality, they seceded (which was their right) and were invaded by the U.S. and forcibly "re-annexed."

I'll honorably concede the point to you, sir. :asian:

 

[elder999]

. In reality, they seceded (which was their right) and were invaded by the U.S. and forcibly "re-annexed."

Hmmmm...? I'd say that they exercised their right to secession, and were convinced to do otherwise.....

 

[celtic_crippler]

That was my observation as well.

I am a "Yankee". I never thought of myself as a Yankee until I lived down south for 10 years. (North Carolina/Tennessee mountains, very rural). I was born and raised in Chicago, so I was from the midwest in my eyes. When I thought of Yankees, I thought of the northeast. In the area we moved to, anyone not born in one of the confederate states was a yankee, you could be from California and you're still a Yankee. I learned after moving that the civil war is alive and well for most southerners.

The confederate flag was all over the place down there, but in the area I was in, it was all about the war, which they insist had nothing to do with slavery. I didn't see any racism in any of the people I knew, I'm not saying it isn't there, just that it wasn't in my interactions with anyone in our area.

Where am I going with this? I don't know, lol. It does have more racial conotations than they would like to admit. One way or the other, they have got to let it go. These are the United States now, well, at least they're supposed to be.

The Brits consider all of us over here "Yankees" LOL

Your comment about how "most southerners" consider the war still alive and well is grossly irresponsible, inaccurate, and not to mention just plain wrong.

I respect the fact that is your perception based on your personal experiences; however, I am a Southerner and also a veteran that traveled quite a bit. In my own experience, I witnessed more prejudice in non-southern states than not. Case in point: Idaho is not a Southern state, yet it headquarters the skinhead/white supremist movement. That doesn't mean that all residents of Idaho are racist scum. Let's try to keep the proper perspective here.

And again, the confederate flag has almost nothing to do with slavery. Anyone that is reasonably proficient in their study of history knows this. Emotions aside, the facts are the facts.

Perhaps it's you that needs to "let it go" and read a little more on the principles upon which this country was founded. The "United States" meant just that. A group of independent states that were unified for the common good of all.

That no longer is the case. We are now one country, under the rule of a central government which trumps any and all state decisions. So, in essence, we are no longer a group of "united states", but actuatally, and quite simply, a single nation subject to the rule of one government.

In Texas, on more than one occasion, people have used the "N" word around me, then excused themselves by pointing out that I wasn't one, I was a Yankee-and I don't think they meant that as a positive distinction, either....funny and sad.

It is sad, agreed.

However, I think that one must recognize that the use of the "N" word is perpetuated by the same people that claim they want it removed from our vocabulary!

The argument that it's okay to use it as long as you're black is preposterous. It's use, in any way, only serves to keep it alive.

I hold, that if one were truely serious about removing it's use from our vocabulary, that they would not use it themselves.

OMG! I totally get you. It was really shameful when all those gay people seceded from the union and started a war over their right to own others.

Although considering this is Tennessee, I doubt a rainbow flag would be allowed either.

Gay people? Are you saying that the Southern States were gay and that's why they seceded? Or, are you trying to say only "gay" people would own a slave?

Regardless, you should do your homework before making outrageous comments.

The Civil War was not fought over the "...right to own others." It's not too much to ask that one actually research a topic before actually posting a comment. I do understand that everyone does not have the benefit of a good education, but that doesn't mean one can't take the initiative to research a topic a little before posting a comment.

I do agree with the statement about accepting a "rainbow flag" these days; regardless of what state it's in. Homosexuals are still feared and shunned in most cases.

As sad as that is, it is relative to the same ignorance that perports that the civl war was over slavery.

Actually, they're supposed to be the united States (separate, sovereign entities voluntarily united for the common good; not one nation conveniently divided into smaller chunks all of which are subservient to the national government.)

BTW: it wasn't 'till I went to college that I found out that damn Yankee wasn't one word :rofl:

Thanks for reminding us.

Some... not most. It has been my experience that the folks that actually believe that the war is still on are pretty few. Many folks have moved to the south in the last 164 years that were either from the north or from other countries. That racism still exists is in the south is a sad fact but not exclusive to the south. Truth be known the "Great war of Northern Aggression" was simply a failed rebellion like so many others that have taken place through out history. Time to get over it folks (for those that still think the South will rise again). The demographics and truthfully, the country, has changed so much that another rebellion will not be divided along cardinal points of the compass.

True. Racism exists world-wide, unfortunately. I too wish people would just "get over it."

You'd think in the 21st century that things like differences in ethnicity, gender, or even eye color would be non-issues when dealing with each other.

There are no two people who are exactly alike. The premise of prejudice is utterly illogical and counterproductive to the perpetuation of our species. It is a byproduct of ignorance just as the misconceptions that accompany it are.

Use of the term "rebellion" implies that the C.S.A. were trying to overthrow the U.S. government. In reality, they seceded (which was their right) and were invaded by the U.S. and forcibly "re-annexed."

True that also. Sadly, many a constitutional right has fallen to the wayside over the years. The "Bill of Rights" is no more than toilet paper these days, IMHO.

I personally feel the best way to deal with these issues and improve upon current conditions is through education.

There's the "ideal world" and then there's the "really real world." Only through proper education of facts can one hope to develop an opinion based in reality.

IMHO, I feel that too many opinions are based on personal emotion which is most often not based on facts. This results in skewed opinion, as evidenced in many of the responses on this particular thread, instead of opinion based on actual events and fact.

I do not endorse racism or any other prejudice. My network of "friends" is diverse, and I do not define them by color, gender, or sexual preference. My "friends" earn my respect because of other factors not related to how they look, their gender, or where they come from. IMHO, that's how it should be.

 

[Big Don]

I respect the fact that is your perception based on your personal experiences; however, I am a Southerner and also a veteran that traveled quite a bit. In my own experience, I witnessed more prejudice in non-southern states than not. Case in point: Idaho is not a Southern state, yet it headquarters the skinhead/white supremist movement. That doesn't mean that all residents of Idaho are racist scum. Let's try to keep the proper perspective here.

Thank you for pointing THAT out. There is also the prejudice against Southerners and anyone rural, but, that is another thread.

And again, the confederate flag has almost nothing to do with slavery. Anyone that is reasonably proficient in their study of history knows this. Emotions aside, the facts are the facts.

A great point! It is sad that because some use the confederate flag while espousing racist crap, it gets branded as racist along with them, just as the Swastika, which has thousands of years of history gets lumped in with Hitler's NAZI's (NAZI is an acronym and thus, every letter should be capitalized, even if the spell check doesn't think so.)

Gay people? Are you saying that the Southern States were gay and that's why they seceded? Or, are you trying to say only "gay" people would own a slave?

No, he was arguing against Twin Fist's assertion that while many find the confederate flag offensive, many also find the rainbow flag used by homosexual activists offensive, but, because the homosexual activists viewpoint is popular (or at least unpopular to confront) at this point in time, that their flag would never be forced out of any venue.

Regardless, you should do your homework before making outrageous comments.

The Civil War was not fought over the "...right to own others." It's not too much to ask that one actually research a topic before actually posting a comment. I do understand that everyone does not have the benefit of a good education, but that doesn't mean one can't take the initiative to research a topic a little before posting a comment.

I do agree with the statement about accepting a "rainbow flag" these days; regardless of what state it's in. Homosexuals are still feared and shunned in most cases.

Twin Fist's point however, is valid, many people find the overt displays of homosexual advocacy distasteful, but, anyone who dared challenge their flag would be branded a bigot, no matter what the facts actually are

As sad as that is, it is relative to the same ignorance that perports that the civl war was over slavery.

Sorry, I must disagree. That some are called bigots and (MUCH) worse because they feel the behaviors of homosexuals are abhorrent is completely different than those (idiots) who believe one race is better than another, be they white supremacists or La Raza

Thanks for reminding us.
True. Racism exists world-wide, unfortunately. I too wish people would just "get over it."

You'd think in the 21st century that things like differences in ethnicity, gender, or even eye color would be non-issues when dealing with each other.

You darn blue, green, and brown eyed people are defective! We Hazel eyed ar clearly superior

There are no two people who are exactly alike. The premise of prejudice is utterly illogical and counterproductive to the perpetuation of our species. It is a byproduct of ignorance just as the misconceptions that accompany it are.

You cannot tell a bad person from a good one on sight and to try to or encourage others to is wrong.

True that also. Sadly, many a constitutional right has fallen to the wayside over the years. The "Bill of Rights" is no more than toilet paper these days, IMHO.

Isn't it ironic how those people with their panties in such a twist over alleged violations of rights by the Bush administration have no problem curtailing the rights of the people to keep and bear arms? Gee, if they hadn't lobbied so hard and so long for anti-gun laws, perhaps they would be able to arm themselves against tyranny...

I personally feel the best way to deal with these issues and improve upon current conditions is through education.

There's the "ideal world" and then there's the "really real world." Only through proper education of facts can one hope to develop an opinion based in reality.

IMHO, I feel that too many opinions are based on personal emotion which is most often not based on facts. This results in skewed opinion, as evidenced in many of the responses on this particular thread, instead of opinion based on actual events and fact.

How do we fix that when so many teachers and professors (Ward Churchill comes to mind) are so far left as to stretch the bounds of sanity?

I do not endorse racism or any other prejudice. My network of "friends" is diverse, and I do not define them by color, gender, or sexual preference.

Nor do I, nor should anyone.

 

[elder999]

It is sad, agreed.

However, I think that one must recognize that the use of the "N" word is perpetuated by the same people that claim they want it removed from our vocabulary!

The argument that it's okay to use it as long as you're black is preposterous. It's use, in any way, only serves to keep it alive.

I hold, that if one were truely serious about removing it's use from our vocabulary, that they would not use it themselves. .

I'll point out now, just as I did then, that it's not....okay....with....me.

I don't use it, don't perpetuate it, don't need to hear it, thank you.

Now, and without meaning to accuse you of anything, I'd like to point out how the phrasing perpetuated by "the same people" sounds, and ask what you meant: the "same people" in Dallas? the "same people" that rap?What, exactly?

yankee...... *giggle*

Yeah, I'm a Yankee-born in Connecticut, raised in New York, part of a long line of people who lived in that part of the world and sailed on whaling ships-educated at a rather exclusive New England prep school.

In those respects, I have pretty much the same background as that "mighty Texan," George W. Bush...:lol:

 

[Twin Fist]

Actually, a LOT of texans consider Bush a Yankee too. But at least he tries to be a texan.

 

[elder999]

Actually, a LOT of texans consider Bush a Yankee too. But at least he tries to be a texan.

Pretends, TF-pretends to be a Texan...:lol:

 

[Twin Fist]

and how are you qualified to make the distiction?

oh thats right, you're not

 

[elder999]

and how are you qualified to make the distiction?

oh thats right, you're not

It was a joke-hence the laughing smiley.

However, none of the Texans I know would bother to go calling a 1600 acre hog farm a "ranch." :lol:

 

[Jade Tigress]

Some... not most. It has been my experience that the folks that actually believe that the war is still on are pretty few. Many folks have moved to the south in the last 164 years that were either from the north or from other countries. That racism still exists is in the south is a sad fact but not exclusive to the south. Truth be known the "Great war of Northern Aggression" was simply a failed rebellion like so many others that have taken place through out history. Time to get over it folks (for those that still think the South will rise again). The demographics and truthfully, the country, has changed so much that another rebellion will not be divided along cardinal points of the compass.

That's very true and I know it. I based my observation on a personal experience in a very small geographic area. If there's one thing I'm not, it's well traveled.

Your comment about how "most southerners" consider the war still alive and well is grossly irresponsible, inaccurate, and not to mention just plain wrong.

I respect the fact that is your perception based on your personal experiences; however, I am a Southerner and also a veteran that traveled quite a bit. In my own experience, I witnessed more prejudice in non-southern states than not. Case in point: Idaho is not a Southern state, yet it headquarters the skinhead/white supremist movement. That doesn't mean that all residents of Idaho are racist scum. Let's try to keep the proper perspective here.

Oh, I totally agree that racism is everywhere. My comment wasn't about racism, it was the opposite. In fact, I said no one I had met in my area showed any racism at all, I said the flag to them had nothing to do with that.

Alive and well...what do I mean by that? That the South is still fighting a war? No. I mean it's a totally different perspective, the war is very close to their hearts. When was the last time a Northern state did a war reenactment? Schools spend much more time teaching on the war in the area I was in compared to what I had growing up. When I went to school it was a small chapter.

Alive and well = close to the heart.

And again, the confederate flag has almost nothing to do with slavery.

I know, that's what I said.

I'm sorry for any offense, didn't mean to come across that way. Peace. :asian:

 

[theletch1]

JT, no offense taken and certainly no apologies needed. Perception creates our realities.

As for the last several posts before that one... how did we go from discussing the Confederate flag to "Bush bashing" and petty arguing? I must have missed something. Since my attention span this week is so short can we get back to the original topic. There are plenty of other threads to generate RTMs in.

 

[Twin Fist]

It was a joke-hence the laughing smiley.

However, none of the Texans I know would bother to go calling a 1600 acre hog farm a "ranch." :lol:

eh, as a city boy i cant really speak to that.....but 1600 acres is really not that much

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Use of the term "rebellion" implies that the C.S.A. were trying to overthrow the U.S. government. In reality, they seceded (which was their right) and were invaded by the U.S. and forcibly "re-annexed."

Just as a side note. It was acutally a war of southern aggression. Lincoln stated that he had no interest in fighting to keep the Union together originally, though he did say that he would use force to maintain federal property. He wanted those involved in the seccession to willingly come back into the union.

It was actually an attack by the Confederate states upon Fort Sumter that was the first violent act of the war,

 

[celtic_crippler]

When was the last time a Northern state did a war reenactment? Schools spend much more time teaching on the war in the area I was in compared to what I had growing up. When I went to school it was a small chapter.

Alive and well = close to the heart.

I know, that's what I said.

I'm sorry for any offense, didn't mean to come across that way. Peace. :asian:

Though I don't participate in reenactments, I know a fella that does. He became good friends with a fellow from MASSACHUSETTS that came down with a group to represent the Union Army's 54th Massachusetts (which was comprised mostly of blacks.) So they do participate but since I don't recall any battles taking place in Massachusetts, that' probably why the reencactments don't take place there. The usually take place on the actual battlegrounds.

The Civil War and the events that led up to it are very important and its ramifications are still being felt today (like every time the Fed's tell a State it can or can't do something.) If your school treated these events as a footnote more-or-less, then they did you a huge disservice and you should demand your tax money back that they claimed went to fund education.

BTW, no offense taken.

Just as a side note. It was acutally a war of southern aggression. Lincoln stated that he had no interest in fighting to keep the Union together originally, though he did say that he would use force to maintain federal property. He wanted those involved in the seccession to willingly come back into the union.

It was actually an attack by the Confederate states upon Fort Sumter that was the first violent act of the war,

When our country was still governed by the Constitution, states had the right to seceed. Fort Sumter is located in South Carolina, and the people there wanted Union troops out once they seceeded. It only became "aggressive" when union troops would not leave. If I came and sat down in your living room and refused to leave, would you not feel justifed in removing me forcibly?

BTW, the only casualty that occured was because a cannon didn't fire properly killing a Union soldier. You can read more about the event here if you like -> http://www.civilwarhome.com/CMHsumter.htm

 

[KenpoTex]

Just as a side note. It was acutally a war of southern aggression. Lincoln stated that he had no interest in fighting to keep the Union together originally, though he did say that he would use force to maintain federal property. He wanted those involved in the seccession to willingly come back into the union.

It was actually an attack by the Confederate states upon Fort Sumter that was the first violent act of the war,

When our country was still governed by the Constitution, states had the right to seceed. Fort Sumter is located in South Carolina, and the people there wanted Union troops out once they seceeded. It only became "aggressive" when union troops would not leave. If I came and sat down in your living room and refused to leave, would you not feel justifed in removing me forcibly?

BTW, the only casualty that occured was because a cannon didn't fire properly killing a Union soldier. You can read more about the event here if you like -> http://www.civilwarhome.com/CMHsumter.htm

and, IIRC, Lincoln had actually agreed to remove the US troops from the fort. The CSA did not attack until Lincoln tried to resupply it.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Originally Posted by celtic_crippler
When our country was still governed by the Constitution, states had the right to seceed. Fort Sumter is located in South Carolina, and the people there wanted Union troops out once they seceeded. It only became "aggressive" when union troops would not leave. If I came and sat down in your living room and refused to leave, would you not feel justifed in removing me forcibly?

BTW, the only casualty that occured was because a cannon didn't fire properly killing a Union soldier. You can read more about the event here if you like -> http://www.civilwarhome.com/CMHsumter.htm

Although I understand the sentiment, the analogy doesnt exactly translate.

It would be more akin to you allowing me to have full rights in a bedroom I rent (a place exclusively set aside for my own use, and for which I pay), then to someone just coming willy-nilly into a living room. Even modern law states that you cannot arbitrarily just kick someone out, at least without some type of arrangement, whether that be reasonable notice.

Now, having read the link provided, it puts things in an interesting perspective. It appears to me that Lincoln made a gentlemens agreement with South Carolina not to reinforce Fort Sumter, which he, apparently, subsequently broke. Although not legal binding, it makes one understand how one could see why they would call it Northern Aggression.

Still, being a Black man in America, I am certainly glad that they did.