Home Non Cigar Related

Too freakin much

jd50aejd50ae West Gnawed Pencil, TNPosts: 7,934 ✭✭✭✭✭

Vandals Target Confederate Monuments In Half-Dozen States

Published June 27, 2015

Dborah Cannon/Austin American-Statesman via AP

By Jim Salter, AP

ST. LOUIS — Vandals have targeted monuments dedicated to the leaders and soldiers of the Confederacy, painting the slogan "Black lives matter" on memorials in a half-dozen states...


«13

Comments

  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Sounds fine.
  • Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat West TNPosts: 6,813 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    Sounds fine.
    If you enjoy mob rule, senseless hate, and random acts of violence, and are determined to erase both sides of history so we repeat all our mistakes endlessly.
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "There is nothing so in need of reforming as another person's bad habits."   Mark Twain
  • Lee.mcglynnLee.mcglynn HahahahaaaaaPosts: 6,030 ✭✭✭✭
    For all the hate stuff against black people is say this is a drop in the bucket...plus I'd rather see this before a shooting! Also it was probably some white people that did it
    Money can't buy taste
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    Sounds fine.
    If you enjoy mob rule, senseless hate, and random acts of violence, and are determined to erase both sides of history so we repeat all our mistakes endlessly.
    The slippery slope argument, super... Is this like Peter's argument that gay mariage will lead to lonely housewives marrying their cats?

     I don't believe that I was advocating book burning or rewriting history. I have a problem with states that honor enemy combatants of America with statues and flying their battle flag over America's state buildings. I know some text books are changing why the North and South were fighting by claiming that it was over states right, but it was clearly for a state to declare that certain people can be property. Maybe some black people don't like monuments of individuals that wished to keep them in bondage and viewed that as being less than a person.

  • The3StogiesThe3Stogies MainePosts: 2,653 ✭✭✭✭
    Happened in a number of different states so the activists are behind this.  All lives matter, get it right.  

    Did you see they want to ban Gone with The Wind?  And the Dukes of Hazzards General Lee because of the flag on it?  I have some old Confederate money my father in law gave us.  Will they be coming for me next?
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    There's always going to be a few crazy people in a group. I believe that private individuals should have the right to believe however they see fit. If someone wants to join the KKK or some other hate group, that's fine. If the government wants to sponsor it is where I have a problem. 

    The civil war is an important and turbulent time for America, it should be studied and discussed. I just can't think of another country that has monuments and relics for enemies the state.
  • Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat West TNPosts: 6,813 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    Eulogy said:
    Sounds fine.
    If you enjoy mob rule, senseless hate, and random acts of violence, and are determined to erase both sides of history so we repeat all our mistakes endlessly.
    The slippery slope argument, super... Is this like Peter's argument that gay mariage will lead to lonely housewives marrying their cats?

     I don't believe that I was advocating book burning or rewriting history. I have a problem with states that honor enemy combatants of America with statues and flying their battle flag over America's state buildings. I know some text books are changing why the North and South were fighting by claiming that it was over states right, but it was clearly for a state to declare that certain people can be property. Maybe some black people don't like monuments of individuals that wished to keep them in bondage and viewed that as being less than a person.

    Nope. Not the slope. These people are on the first rung of the same ladder as the S C shooter. "I hate them, therefore I can abuse them in any way I please, because they are 'them'". The only difference is the degree of risk they are willing to take. It is not a slippery slope, because they are already the same. Haters. Do you really want to be one of them?
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "There is nothing so in need of reforming as another person's bad habits."   Mark Twain
  • peter4jcpeter4jc Milwaukee, WIPosts: 10,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The slippery slope argument, super... Is this like Peter's argument that gay mariage will lead to lonely housewives marrying their cats?

    You know...  that's not what I said.

    I'm with you jetmech_63.
    "I could've had a Mi Querida!"   Nick Bardis
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Along those lines, but admittedly a bit silly, what happens if a good chunk of the US decides they love their pets and farm animals, and think they should be allowed to marry?  Sounds stupid, I know.  But what's going on now, seemed impossibly far-fetched 150 years ago too.
    ^^^What you said.
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    Eulogy said:
    Sounds fine.
    If you enjoy mob rule, senseless hate, and random acts of violence, and are determined to erase both sides of history so we repeat all our mistakes endlessly.
    The slippery slope argument, super... Is this like Peter's argument that gay mariage will lead to lonely housewives marrying their cats?

     I don't believe that I was advocating book burning or rewriting history. I have a problem with states that honor enemy combatants of America with statues and flying their battle flag over America's state buildings. I know some text books are changing why the North and South were fighting by claiming that it was over states right, but it was clearly for a state to declare that certain people can be property. Maybe some black people don't like monuments of individuals that wished to keep them in bondage and viewed that as being less than a person.

    Nope. Not the slope. These people are on the first rung of the same ladder as the S C shooter. "I hate them, therefore I can abuse them in any way I please, because they are 'them'". The only difference is the degree of risk they are willing to take. It is not a slippery slope, because they are already the same. Haters. Do you really want to be one of them?
    I'm totally cool hating on racists.
  • ExpendableYouthExpendableYouth Bay Area, CaliforniaPosts: 2,099 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think the real question is what positive reason is there to fly the confederate flag, or monumentalize people associated with slavery and succession. 
  • Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat West TNPosts: 6,813 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    Eulogy said:
    Eulogy said:
    Sounds fine.
    I'm totally cool hating on racists.
    Sure, OK, but racist is an assumption on your part. Hating on an assumption makes YOU the racist. Every tyranical government begins by rewriting its history, which is one of things you are advocating. The acts af vandalism you condone are, simply, hate crimes. The greatest conflagration begins with the smallest spark. That is not a slippery slope, it is a fact of life. When you fan that flame of hate within yourself, you join the haters. Hate is a sin. All sin is sin. The nature of sin is that, if you dwell on it it will consume you. You are free to disagree, to join the haters and condone their hate, create new symbols of hate to live by and force on others, and you become the same as them. That is what the S.C. shooter did. I think we are all better off taking the course that many who were personally affected by that horrible crime did, and forgiving, rather than setting new fires of hate ablaze amonst us, as you condoned above. Again, you may disagree, but you will remain wrong in your hate.
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "There is nothing so in need of reforming as another person's bad habits."   Mark Twain
  • peter4jcpeter4jc Milwaukee, WIPosts: 10,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    Along those lines, but admittedly a bit silly, what happens if a good chunk of the US decides they love their pets and farm animals, and think they should be allowed to marry?  Sounds stupid, I know.  But what's going on now, seemed impossibly far-fetched 150 years ago too.
    ^^^What you said.
    My post was reflecting on how change is implemented and why.  It never alluded to gay marriage leading to, or resulting in, or causing anything.

    Why don't you answer in that thread, and we can discuss it.
    "I could've had a Mi Querida!"   Nick Bardis
  • jd50aejd50ae West Gnawed Pencil, TNPosts: 7,934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think the real question is what positive reason is there to fly the confederate flag, or monumentalize people associated with slavery and succession. 
    Because like it or not, it is our history.
  • jd50aejd50ae West Gnawed Pencil, TNPosts: 7,934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    peter4jc said:
    Eulogy said:
    Along those lines, but admittedly a bit silly, what happens if a good chunk of the US decides they love their pets and farm animals, and think they should be allowed to marry?  Sounds stupid, I know.  But what's going on now, seemed impossibly far-fetched 150 years ago too.
    ^^^What you said.
    My post was reflecting on how change is implemented and why.  It never alluded to gay marriage leading to, or resulting in, or causing anything.

    Why don't you answer in that thread, and we can discuss it.
    Don't waste your time. A number of posts I ended up asking for the quote to prove the post and have yet to get an answer.

    Remember what I said about Key Board Warriors and PC Commandos.
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    jd50ae said:
    peter4jc said:
    Eulogy said:
    Along those lines, but admittedly a bit silly, what happens if a good chunk of the US decides they love their pets and farm animals, and think they should be allowed to marry?  Sounds stupid, I know.  But what's going on now, seemed impossibly far-fetched 150 years ago too.
    ^^^What you said.
    My post was reflecting on how change is implemented and why.  It never alluded to gay marriage leading to, or resulting in, or causing anything.

    Why don't you answer in that thread, and we can discuss it.
    Don't waste your time. A number of posts I ended up asking for the quote to prove the post and have yet to get an answer.

    Remember what I said about Key Board Warriors and PC Commandos.
    What are you talking about JD?  That blurb is literally what he said. Go to the marriage thread and you can verify that quote is unedited if you'd like.
  • jd50aejd50ae West Gnawed Pencil, TNPosts: 7,934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The civil war was here. We are not Germany who went all over the world. I could give a crap about Germany's monuments, I live here. Or do you think that we can erase history? The Lxxxxxxs are trying to rewrite it and I suppose if we were to exist another 500 years there is a real chance it could be erased, and the country would end up populated by a bunch of mindless drones (actually close to it now). And you have been to Germany? Or how about Wash state where Lenin is a local hero? Or one of the "higher education" indoctrination centers where Che is spoken of so reverently? People who don't grasp history are doomed to repeat it, you have heard that, right?.
  • ExpendableYouthExpendableYouth Bay Area, CaliforniaPosts: 2,099 ✭✭✭✭✭
    No one is advocating erasing the civil war from our history books or schools. There is no reason to fly a confederate flag, name a building or raise a monument to anyone from the confederacy. You can teach the past without glorifying it. 
  • peter4jcpeter4jc Milwaukee, WIPosts: 10,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    jd50ae said:
    peter4jc said:
    Eulogy said:
    Along those lines, but admittedly a bit silly, what happens if a good chunk of the US decides they love their pets and farm animals, and think they should be allowed to marry?  Sounds stupid, I know.  But what's going on now, seemed impossibly far-fetched 150 years ago too.
    ^^^What you said.
    My post was reflecting on how change is implemented and why.  It never alluded to gay marriage leading to, or resulting in, or causing anything.

    Why don't you answer in that thread, and we can discuss it.
    Don't waste your time. A number of posts I ended up asking for the quote to prove the post and have yet to get an answer.

    Remember what I said about Key Board Warriors and PC Commandos.
    What are you talking about JD?  That blurb is literally what he said. Go to the marriage thread and you can verify that quote is unedited if you'd like.
    Sure it's what I said.  But you clipped a portion of my post, and the entirety of the post doesn't say what you're alleging it says by taking this portion out of context.  As I said this morning, if you want to discuss that topic, let's do it in that thread.
    "I could've had a Mi Querida!"   Nick Bardis
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I understand that you ended your post on change but the other 2/3 of your post used polygamy and beastality as the examples of what gay marriage could bring.
  • jd50aejd50ae West Gnawed Pencil, TNPosts: 7,934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    I understand that you ended your post on change but the other 2/3 of your post used polygamy and beastality as the examples of what gay marriage could bring.
    Judist Priest......go to that thread.
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm not debating on that topic. I'm only justifying my use of it in this topic as a slippery slope argument. I don't care to discuss it because it's the law of the land now and it would take a miracle for a constitutional amendment that would be needed to change it.
  • jd50aejd50ae West Gnawed Pencil, TNPosts: 7,934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 2015
    Eulogy said:
    I'm not debating on that topic. I'm only justifying my use of it in this topic as a slippery slope argument. I don't care to discuss it because it's the law of the land now and it would take a miracle for a constitutional amendment that would be needed to change it.

    Obviously you are not debating the topic of this thread.....that is clear to everyone. I believe its called thread jacking. Stay on topic or go to the one you are trying to talk about here.
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Which part?
  • peter4jcpeter4jc Milwaukee, WIPosts: 10,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    I understand that you ended your post on change but the other 2/3 of your post used polygamy and beastality as the examples of what gay marriage could bring.
    I'm sorry that I worded my post in such a way that you would interpret my view that gay marriage would lead to or could bring those things about.  My logic is not that flawed to believe that could be the case.  The overall thought I was trying to convey was to generate discussion on how laws are changed.
    "I could've had a Mi Querida!"   Nick Bardis
  • EulogyEulogy Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm only answering questions or concerns that are directly being asked to me. I'm not trying to start a flame war or jack this thread. 

    If you weren't trying to make a slippery slope argument Peter, that's fine. Maybe go back and reread what you wrote because I'm not the only one who read it like that.

    JD, my point from eariler stands. They're is no reason for racist flags or statues to be honored on public land. I'm not suggesting that we rewrite history or forget the past. These monuments have a very dark meaning for some members of our society and they serve no practical purpose in honoring them.
  • SecretSquirrelSecretSquirrel Hayward, CAPosts: 895 ✭✭✭✭

    No one is advocating erasing the civil war from our history books or schools. There is no reason to fly a confederate flag, name a building or raise a monument to anyone from the confederacy. You can teach the past without glorifying it. 

    im with you on this, but im not giving this retarded discussion any more effort than I already have.
  • Amos_UmwhatAmos_Umwhat West TNPosts: 6,813 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eulogy said:
    I'm only answering questions or concerns that are directly being asked to me. I'm not trying to start a flame war or jack this thread. 

    If you weren't trying to make a slippery slope argument Peter, that's fine. Maybe go back and reread what you wrote because I'm not the only one who read it like that.

    JD, my point from eariler stands. They're is no reason for racist flags or statues to be honored on public land. I'm not suggesting that we rewrite history or forget the past. These monuments have a very dark meaning for some members of our society and they serve no practical purpose in honoring them.
    I can see how, being from the part of the country you are from, that this would be incomprehensible for you. The Stars and Bars are probably only seen and used as a symbol of hate there. For those of us here in the part of the country where it originated, who have always known the parts of history that are now finally being told elsewhere it is different. Perhaps an example will help. My son was once stationed with a black Captain who was from TN. On the front of his pick-up he had a Confederate flag. People assumed he just hadn't removed it, or it had been put there as a sick joke. When asked,he told them that he had put it there because he believed that the agrarian way of life would have been better for America, that Cyrus McCormick and Jefferson Davis would have eventually freed the slaves with McCormicks modern machines, and Davis's beliefs that the African American population needed to be first given an opportunity to become educated and acculturized, as he was doing for the slaves on his plantation with the help of his best friend and plantation manager, the first slave he owned. When Davis went out west with this man, they formed a life long bond. When Davis was not at home, this was the person who made all binding agreements and business decisions, not Davis wife. Davis believed that forced emancipation would result in resentments and hatred that would last for generations. His views were not always well received in his own culture, therefore he believed that thewhite population would also require education and acclimatization to what was for him and some oyhers the inescapable fact that the black race was create by God to be the white races equal in every way. These are verifiable facts. Does that help?
    WARNING:  The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme.  Proceed at your own risk.  

    "There is nothing so in need of reforming as another person's bad habits."   Mark Twain
Sign In or Register to comment.