Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should the Confederate flag be removed from SC statehouse grounds?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by guthrieba View Post
    Has anyone else noted the resemblance between the present Georgia state flag and the Confederate First National? I am sure that it is mere coincidence.
    It aint by accident shall we say.

    Yall want to know the real dang reason we fly the CBF down here, just click on any thread on these forums involving NASCAR. Sure enough somebody is going to poke there nose in and proclaim how superior they are by not watching NASCAR. The CBF is a flip off, for all that smug superiority towards the South that comes from other parts of the country. And since we are Southerners and not rude ass Yankees we start mumbling something about Heritage, instead of saying it is an FU.

    Funny enough down here in the south the Lost Causers and such don't really fly CBF much anymore, heck that just don't stand out, might be Skynard fans or just your average red-neck. Nowadays these types tend to fly the Stainless Banner usually accompanied by the Bonnie Blue.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      I agree it isn't objective. That's my point. This is a subjective thing dreamed up primarily by the Left.
      Before I begin, your standard response of blaming everything you dislike on "the Left" doesn't really do your arguments any service. I'm not saying you're wrong here, only that I suspect you would blame liberals if you stubbed your toe.

      Don't be fooled: DoD blames communists whenever he ends up losing a sock in the dryer. The hypocrite.

      It's the same thing as forcing the City of Los Angeles to remove a tiny cross in it's seal.
      But, the danger in it is that it is also a death of a thousand paper cuts so-to-speak. When a vocal minority can erase history for all intents there's a serious problem.
      But history isn't being erased. It's a recurring argument that hasn't had a scrap of evidence in support - unless one believes that moving something into a museum is 'erasing history'.

      That's where the Left is heading us. Towards a 1984-ish future of revisionist history and fiction where PC rules and the past is forgotten. That's a bad thing.
      Any political ideology is just as culpable of trying to subvert rights. Conservatives have time and again tried to ban burning or desecrating the American flag - for a while it was even law (Flag Protection Act) and there are still into recent years attempts to pass constitutional amendments banning flag desecration.

      That is an attack on free speech by conservatives in the name of criminalizing what they see as an offensive, disrespectful act. It's a gross attack on the 1st amendment by the federal government. By that measure, a state relocating one flag from a public area to a museum doesn't even compare.

      More to the point, much of the language used in this debate depend almost entirely upon hypothetical slippery-slope arguments, which is a fallacy when such an outcome is not proven, or even demonstrated likely.

      At the end of the day we have to be aware of what actually happened here: a confederate flag was moved from a flag pole to a museum. There was no attack on free speech, no limitation of rights, and no deletion of history.

      And this is certainly not the start of some 1984-leftist terror.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Salinator View Post
        While the Rising Sun does not fly over government property in the US...it is however still used by the Japanese Military. It is an example of selective outrage. The Swastika in outlawed in Germany but Imperial Japan that killed move people than Nazi Germany did still flies her battle flag proudly.
        That's also because Japan refuses to accept full guilt for what they did: the two nations had vastly different approaches to their respective war-crimes.

        It's also an example of how outrage, offensiveness, and disrespect is not some objective, universal constant. As I said, flying the swastika in Mongolia will get a different response from flying it in Israel.

        The whole idea of offensiveness is tied into emotions, not rational logic, and is highly subjective. Few people in the United States will be offended by a Democratic Kampuchean flag, after all, but almost everyone would understand and be cautious around a Nazi flag.

        In the end it's not "selective outrage" because people aren't selecting what to be and not to be offended by.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
          Before I begin, your standard response of blaming everything you dislike on "the Left" doesn't really do your arguments any service. I'm not saying you're wrong here, only that I suspect you would blame liberals if you stubbed your toe.

          Don't be fooled: DoD blames communists whenever he ends up losing a sock in the dryer. The hypocrite.
          That is a Leftist response! I know it is! I don't particularly having to bring up the Progressive Left, but they are a major problem. If it were some other faction I'd bring them up just as quick. Sovereign Citizens? Total whack jobs. You should talk to a few. They're squirrelier than the UFO crowd...
          Or, the militia nutters on the Right. They never stopped playing pretend "Army." Survivalists? They had a show on with those guys. They make Cuckoo clocks seem like a good idea...

          But history isn't being erased. It's a recurring argument that hasn't had a scrap of evidence in support - unless one believes that moving something into a museum is 'erasing history'.
          Howard Zinn? As but one example.


          Any political ideology is just as culpable of trying to subvert rights. Conservatives have time and again tried to ban burning or desecrating the American flag - for a while it was even law (Flag Protection Act) and there are still into recent years attempts to pass constitutional amendments banning flag desecration.
          Yes, but the Left is far better and more virulent at it than any other faction of the political spectrum.


          That is an attack on free speech by conservatives in the name of criminalizing what they see as an offensive, disrespectful act. It's a gross attack on the 1st amendment by the federal government. By that measure, a state relocating one flag from a public area to a museum doesn't even compare.
          How many universities have "speech codes?" How often does the Right get so violent that a speaker can't even show up for an event because their life is in danger? The Left is like that.

          This is typical of the Progressive Left when it comes to ideas, candidates, and speech they disagree with. Watch the video. You can find lots and lots of ones with the Left behaving like that. You find far less, exponentially less, from the Right.

          http://thesilentmajoritynomore.com/2...-in-manhattan/










          More to the point, much of the language used in this debate depend almost entirely upon hypothetical slippery-slope arguments, which is a fallacy when such an outcome is not proven, or even demonstrated likely.

          At the end of the day we have to be aware of what actually happened here: a confederate flag was moved from a flag pole to a museum. There was no attack on free speech, no limitation of rights, and no deletion of history.

          And this is certainly not the start of some 1984-leftist terror.
          There were two columns in the Arizona Republic just a few days ago that illustrate the difference between left and Right perfectly.

          Here's the Leftist one from Congressman Raul Grijalva. He's on the far Left.

          http://www.azcentral.com/story/opini...ions/29752549/

          And this one from Tom Jenney, Arizona Director of Americans for Prosperity a very Right / Conservative group.

          http://www.azcentral.com/story/opini...tion/29752561/

          The contrast is stark.

          Raul Grijalva's column is nothing but emotion based rhetoric and generalities calling for more taxes, more government, and more government spending. There is not one factual piece of evidence given in the whole article.

          Tom Jenny's column is filled with facts and figures. He backs up what he says with evidence. His conclusions are based on what he presents.

          Now, I'm not arguing that either is right or all conclusive. What I'm saying is based on solely their articles, you have to accept the Left's position on feelings and faith because there's nothing else there.
          The Right's column is based on actual facts and data. You may not like those facts and data but until they are refuted you have to accept them as reality.

          That's the difference. The Left says that if you accept their arguments they'll result in rainbows and unicorns for everyone. The Right says their facts and figures mean hard work and effort have to be put in.
          For many, they want the winning lottery ticket and ignore the odds. Hence the Left gets in office. Stupid wins and the idiocracy becomes the established norm. Black Sabbath was right.
          Last edited by T. A. Gardner; 11 Jul 15, 00:36.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
            That is a Leftist response! I know it is! I don't particularly having to bring up the Progressive Left, but they are a major problem. If it were some other faction I'd bring them up just as quick. Sovereign Citizens? Total whack jobs. You should talk to a few. They're squirrelier than the UFO crowd...
            Or, the militia nutters on the Right. They never stopped playing pretend "Army." Survivalists? They had a show on with those guys. They make Cuckoo clocks seem like a good idea...
            I generally treat the "extremes" at either end as the same. The far-right has as little respect as the far-left when it comes to rights - they just pick and chose differently.

            Although according to some, I'm both a radical lefty and a horrifying right-winger for my anarchist views, so I guess I can't complain.

            Howard Zinn? As but one example.
            He's dead. And I'm not sure what you're talking about here. What history has been erased by the decision to move the flag into a museum?

            Yes, but the Left is far better and more virulent at it than any other faction of the political spectrum.
            Depends on who you talk to. I have a friend who would say the same thing about conservatives because of how he has been treated for being gay in the south.

            Kinda hard to argue about property rights or who respects the constitution more when you're being beaten and stabbed by rednecks.

            How many universities have "speech codes?" How often does the Right get so violent that a speaker can't even show up for an event because their life is in danger? The Left is like that.
            I go to a conservative Baptist university that most certainly does restrict freedom of speech for its students, and they are a far-cry from being liberal.

            As for the whole radical violence thing - no defense offered. The far-left are a crazy bunch indeed.

            But then, this thread is about the taking down of a flag brought about by someone on the far-right deciding to shoot up a church. Seems that both sides are just as capable of violence when it suits them.

            This is typical of the Progressive Left when it comes to ideas, candidates, and speech they disagree with. Watch the video. You can find lots and lots of ones with the Left behaving like that. You find far less, exponentially less, from the Right.

            http://thesilentmajoritynomore.com/2...-in-manhattan/
            How about the differences in how the ISIS flag and the Israeli flag are treated at Berkeley:



            Again, you'll get no argument from me that radicals on the left are a loony bunch. But again, I see plenty to criticize from people on the right.

            How about the Turkish response to this gay pride parade?



            Playing the "one side is actually worse" game is a matter of perspective - especially when you're someone like me that both probably consider to be a inherent enemy.

            There were two columns in the Arizona Republic just a few days ago that illustrate the difference between left and Right perfectly.

            <snip>

            That's the difference. The Left says that if you accept their arguments they'll result in rainbows and unicorns for everyone. The Right says their facts and figures mean hard work and effort have to be put in.
            For many, they want the winning lottery ticket and ignore the odds. Hence the Left gets in office. Stupid wins and the idiocracy becomes the established norm. Black Sabbath was right.
            If you're going to do the "this article represents this whole ideology" thing, you can't just pick two articles and assume that settles anything. If I wanted I could bring up an almost endless stream of Fox News videos demonstrating some idiocy, lunacy, and downright frightening views from conservative politicians, pundits, and protesters.

            And then we could bring up some MSNBC nonsense about... well, who cares: nobody watches MSNBC anyway, so their special brand of liberal lunacy is best ignored.

            We could get into a contest of responding piece by piece of "good vs bad" liberal and conservative articles and interviews, but what's the point? I've known liberal people who were wonderful, smart, and intelligent folk. I've known liberal people who I wouldn't trust to man a Cuisinart.

            Liberalism is a vast and disparate political tag, just like conservatism is. To say that one article represents them all is a bit of a disservice, don't you think?

            Also, these seems to be getting far away from the actual topic, which is the confederate flag. Plenty of conservatives voted to bring the flag down and put it in a museum instead, so I'm not sure how you can simply say it's the liberals fault and suggest we're going to end up at a 1984 scenario just because of lefties.

            Comment


            • Oh for cryin' out loud....

              Look, I have never flown that flag, and I don't really like it either.

              However, I think that the entire concept of banning it is foolish, self-defeating and not very American. Its a symbol, and nothing more.

              What makes more sense to you?
              - try to punish people for flying it because the establishment says it 'bad'.
              - arguing against what is symbolizes in the arena of free speech and the free exchange of ideas?

              I would say #2, and I would think that's why the flags of Nazi Germany or the USSR are not banned as well in this country.
              We are supposed to believe in the idea that we can defeat the ideas behind evil.... instead of banning the symbol which is like making some medieval gesture to ward off the evil eye or some such nonsense.

              America isn't supposed to be like this.
              "Why is the Rum gone?"

              -Captain Jack

              Comment


              • Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post

                America isn't supposed to be like this.
                We both know it will only get worse from here.
                ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                Comment


                • Guys. The state shall not be racist. Do you really want the government to tell someone that they are **** because of their skin tone?

                  That's what your defending...
                  Credo quia absurdum.


                  Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                    That's also because Japan refuses to accept full guilt for what they did: the two nations had vastly different approaches to their respective war-crimes.

                    It's also an example of how outrage, offensiveness, and disrespect is not some objective, universal constant. As I said, flying the swastika in Mongolia will get a different response from flying it in Israel.

                    The whole idea of offensiveness is tied into emotions, not rational logic, and is highly subjective. Few people in the United States will be offended by a Democratic Kampuchean flag, after all, but almost everyone would understand and be cautious around a Nazi flag.

                    In the end it's not "selective outrage" because people aren't selecting what to be and not to be offended by.
                    Are oyu sure about your final statement, DoD?

                    It seems to me that people are extremely selective about what they are outraged about. Black "victimization" is but one prime example.

                    Yes, I am aware that DoD is always sure about his statements, but...
                    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                      Guys. The state shall not be racist. Do you really want the government to tell someone that they are **** because of their skin tone?

                      That's what your defending...
                      You mean the way Obama does whenever a white LEO arrest a black man? Or the way the legal community reacts whenever a black is killed and a white person was within one mile at the time? Why goodness, no, Bwaha...we don't want that.

                      Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                      Comment


                      • I'd rather let us sort the issue out, or do you want more government involvement in our lives?

                        Do you really want more government involvement?

                        I'd just prefer less government rather than more. To shitcan a state symbol of repression is a good thing eh?
                        Credo quia absurdum.


                        Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                          I'd rather let us sort the issue out, or do you want more government involvement in our lives?

                          Do you really want more government involvement?

                          I'd just prefer less government rather than more. To shitcan a state symbol of repression is a good thing eh?
                          Sure it is the question is the circumstances under which it was removed and the reasons. The idea that being progressive is undesirable is hard to fathom but in this case it isn't so much progress as mob rule.
                          We hunt the hunters

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                            Sure it is the question is the circumstances under which it was removed and the reasons. The idea that being progressive is undesirable is hard to fathom but in this case it isn't so much progress as mob rule.
                            Lets be clear on the subject. I want the state to be neutral in all affairs of race, religion, and sex. I want them to be as little as we can get away with. Not some money hog that tells us how to live our lives.

                            Those CFL's that they are shoving down our throats is a splendid example. Myself? I bought a lifetime supply of incandescents before the ban came down.

                            Credo quia absurdum.


                            Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                            Comment


                            • What is funny about the KKK Latino woman is that her skin color is light enough to have a Spanish bloodline. If she knew that she would change her tone.
                              My worst jump story:
                              My 13th jump was on the 13th day of the month, aircraft number 013.
                              As recorded on my DA Form 1307 Individual Jump Log.
                              No lie.

                              ~
                              "Everything looks all right. Have a good jump, eh."
                              -2 Commando Jumpmaster

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                                Lets be clear on the subject. I want the state to be neutral in all affairs of race, religion, and sex. I want them to be as little as we can get away with. Not some money hog that tells us how to live our lives.

                                Those CFL's that they are shoving down our throats is a splendid example. Myself? I bought a lifetime supply of incandescents before the ban came down.

                                LEDs will be next along with the expense of deposing the mercury laden CFL's.

                                And, they are going after the steamboat Robert E. Lee. http://woodtv.com/2015/07/10/should-...at-be-renamed/
                                “Breaking News,”

                                “Something irrelevant in your life just happened and now we are going to blow it all out of proportion for days to keep you distracted from what's really going on.”

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X