Alabama State Patrol and Confederate flag

[carlfense]

That said, it isn't 1865 anymore. Displaying the stars and bars has a racial undertone in todays world, and eveyone knows it.

So do you feel that by having the Confederate Battle Flag on statehouse grounds at a Civil War memorial makes us a racist state?

I know this isn't directed at me, but if I can add my 2 cents . . . I don't think that it does. As long as it's kept in the historical context, particularly when it's at a Civil War memorial, it is appropriate and perhaps even commendable. Now if it were still flown over the State Capital...that would be a different story in my eyes.

I think that hukertim might have just been referring to shirts and tatoos, etc. etc. I don't have a problem with those per se (although it sure might affect my initial impression of that person!) so long as it's not displayed in some state or governmental capacity.

 

[killer cacti]

That said, it isn't 1865 anymore. Displaying the stars and bars has a racial undertone in todays world, and eveyone knows it.

So do you feel that by having the Confederate Battle Flag on statehouse grounds at a Civil War memorial makes us a racist state?

I know this isn't directed at me, but if I can add my 2 cents . . . I don't think that it does. As long as it's kept in the historical context, particularly when it's at a Civil War memorial, it is appropriate and perhaps even commendable. Now if it were still flown over the State Capital...that would be a different story in my eyes.

I think that hukertim might have just been referring to shirts and tatoos, etc. etc. I don't have a problem with those per se (although it sure might affect my initial impression of that person!) so long as it's not displayed in some state or governmental capacity.

That's how I feel as well. I wasn't trying to start up a flame or anything. Truth is, it's part of our history, we can't do anything about it, but you don't have to flaunt it around personally.

 

[VA Husker2]

I'm a bit of a history buff myself,

That said, it isn't 1865 anymore. Displaying the stars and bars has a racial undertone in todays world, and eveyone knows it. I refuse to accept that you interpet it diffently so it's ok in your mind. Perception is reallity and if everyone around you preceives this as racist, and you certainly know this, aren't you then speaking directly to that.

I

As a history buff, you should probably know that the BF is not the Stars and Bars. I suggest you do some research.

 

[VA Husker2]

To further clarify

Is the Stars and Bars

and furthermore, if racism is the issue should not the display of any US flag before the Emancipation Proclaimation be banned? Tjis nation allowed slavery prior to then.

It's hertiage not hate.

 

[carlfense]

To further clarify

Is the Stars and Bars

and furthermore, if racism is the issue should not the display of any US flag before the Emancipation Proclaimation be banned? Tjis nation allowed slavery prior to then.

It's hertiage not hate.

It's heritage yes, but the reason for the heritage of the Confederacy (as I see it, please don't think that I am trying to offend here) seems to be to protect their right to own slaves.

And as a side note, the Emancipation Proclamation was hardly the great philosophical shift in human rights that many people believe it to be. As you probably know it only freed slaves in some of the Confederate states...and didn't mention at all the states in the Union. It was largely (and successfully!) a political tactic.

(You could probably make a better argument that displaying the Confederate Battle Flag is no different than displaying the US flag by comparing the BF and slavery to the US flag and Native American policy.)

Anyways, thanks for your input. Hopefully we can continue to have a civil discussion.

 

[T_O_Bull]

This has been a very thought provoking thread. I have for a long time thought that "civil discussion" and the ability to allow others to have their own beliefs and not hate them for having those beliefs are the things that may save this world from destroying itself. Racism on any side is just plain stupid. Killing or dying for religion is also unthinkable. The more we get to know each other the more we will find that despite our differences we are all pretty much the same. We want to live our lives, raise our families and not bother or be bothered by the people we come in contact with. "Do unto others," no matter who they may be, "as you would have them do unto you." should be everyones mantra.

T_O_B

 

[carlfense]

This has been a very thought provoking thread. I have for a long time thought that "civil discussion" and the ability to allow others to have their own beliefs and not hate them for having those beliefs are the things that may save this world from destroying itself. Racism on any side is just plain stupid. Killing or dying for religion is also unthinkable. The more we get to know each other the more we will find that despite our differences we are all pretty much the same. We want to live our lives, raise our families and not bother or be bothered by the people we come in contact with. "Do unto others," no matter who they may be, "as you would have them do unto you." should be everyones mantra.

T_O_B

Well said sir. I agree entirely. I may debate an issue in here, but at the end of the day I will try to respect everyone's right to their own opinions. Sometimes the emotional side get's the best of us all, but spirited respectful debate seems healthy.

And to VA Husker2, I fully agree that private citizens do (and should!) have the right to display the CBF. My opinion of what that flag stands for is far less important than the freedom of each person to speak and act as they see fit.

 

[SouthBayHusker]

This has been a very thought provoking thread. I have for a long time thought that "civil discussion" and the ability to allow others to have their own beliefs and not hate them for having those beliefs are the things that may save this world from destroying itself. Racism on any side is just plain stupid. Killing or dying for religion is also unthinkable. The more we get to know each other the more we will find that despite our differences we are all pretty much the same. We want to live our lives, raise our families and not bother or be bothered by the people we come in contact with. "Do unto others," no matter who they may be, "as you would have them do unto you." should be everyones mantra.

T_O_B

Well said sir. I agree entirely. I may debate an issue in here, but at the end of the day I will try to respect everyone's right to their own opinions. Sometimes the emotional side get's the best of us all, but spirited respectful debate seems healthy.

And to VA Husker2, I fully agree that private citizens do (and should!) have the right to display the CBF. My opinion of what that flag stands for is far less important than the freedom of each person to speak and act as they see fit.

When NEBRASKA played southern miss in 2003 (I think) I remember driving from Jackson MS and seeing a billboard of the governor running for re-election that had the confederate flag on it. It's a different world down there. Everyone pretty much knows their place.

 

[VA Husker2]

It's heritage yes, but the reason for the heritage of the Confederacy (as I see it, please don't think that I am trying to offend here) seems to be to protect their right to own slaves.

Slavery was only a fraction of the decision to secede. State's rights to govern themselves was the real issue. Enforcement of any unpopular law would have netted the same result. Plus it was not only Southern states who owned slaves, it was just as common in Northern states I firmly beleive that if the Union had been forced into accepting slavery, the ramifications would have been equally despised.

 

[carlfense]

It's heritage yes, but the reason for the heritage of the Confederacy (as I see it, please don't think that I am trying to offend here) seems to be to protect their right to own slaves.

Slavery was only a fraction of the decision to secede. State's rights to govern themselves was the real issue. Enforcement of any unpopular law would have netted the same result. Plus it was not only Southern states who owned slaves, it was just as common in Northern states I firmly beleive that if the Union had been forced into accepting slavery, the ramifications would have been equally despised.

That's simply not true. Only the border states in the Union permitted slavery. The majority of states in the North prohibited slavery.

What primary right were the Confederate states seeking? Don't say the right to secede and the right to govern themselves . . . I realize that. WHY did they want to secede and govern themselves? The answer is that the Southern economy was largely dependent on slave labor, and without that labor, their economy would collapse. Therefore, yes, the decision to secede was for states rights and economic concerns . . . but the root issue remained that of slavery.

Is there something obvious that I am missing?

 

[carlfense]

I looked up a few numbers.

As of 1860:

Confederate states - over 3.5 million slaves (3,521,110)

Northern States (and border states) - under .5 million slaves. (429,403)

Slavery was NOT as common in the North as in the South.

 

[killer cacti]

I looked up a few numbers.

As of 1860:

Confederate states - over 3.5 million slaves (3,521,110)

Northern States (and border states) - under .5 million slaves. (429,403)

Slavery was NOT as common in the North as in the South.

True. But there were also a lot of farmers in the south. The north was more industrialized. Just throwing that fact out there.

 

[carlfense]

I looked up a few numbers.

As of 1860:

Confederate states - over 3.5 million slaves (3,521,110)

Northern States (and border states) - under .5 million slaves. (429,403)

Slavery was NOT as common in the North as in the South.

True. But there were also a lot of farmers in the south. The north was more industrialized. Just throwing that fact out there.

Absolutely. The reason why there were fewer slaves in the North was largely because it was not as economically practical as it was in the South. Unfortunately, the North did not really have the moral high ground because it's stance against slavery was more economical than moral.

 

[killer cacti]

I looked up a few numbers.

As of 1860:

Confederate states - over 3.5 million slaves (3,521,110)

Northern States (and border states) - under .5 million slaves. (429,403)

Slavery was NOT as common in the North as in the South.

True. But there were also a lot of farmers in the south. The north was more industrialized. Just throwing that fact out there.

Absolutely. The reason why there were fewer slaves in the North was largely because it was not as economically practical as it was in the South. Unfortunately, the North did not really have the moral high ground because it's stance against slavery was more economical than moral.

Word.