Poll: For our African-American posters, which of these flags do you see as racist symbols?

Which of these flags do you see as racist symbols?

  • Any and all Confederate flags

    Votes: 3 27.3%
  • First official flag of the Confederacy

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Second official flag of the Confederacy

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Third official flag of the Confederacy

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Confederate Battle Flag

    Votes: 3 27.3%
  • Confederate Navy Jack

    Votes: 3 27.3%
  • No Confederate flags

    Votes: 5 45.5%

  • Total voters
    11

uafan4life

Hall of Fame
Mar 30, 2001
15,615
7,449
287
43
Florence, AL
You are the one that opened this thread. I tried to participate in a civil manner, yet you thought it was appropriate to tag me with a negative. Seems kind of narrow minded to me to request points of view by opening a delicate topic for discussion, then dish out negatives when you don't care for a point of view.

I assume you did it because in your heart you know you are wrong. I've made my point multiple times, it's time for me to stop, I'm not looking for unpleasantness.

I'm on General Lee's side on this issue as he said there should be no Confederate monuments. I'm gratified he understood what some today can't seem to grasp.
The two dislikes I gave were for very specific things in those two posts, by which point this thread had already wandered far off topic. Which is fine, I assumed that it would.

Personally, I don't really care that much about what statues and monuments are or are not displayed. However, I most certainly do not care at all for attempts to alter history in order to paint a particular point of view.

You made a statement as if it were fact which is very clearly not in agreement with history and that is with what I disagreed.
 

uafan4life

Hall of Fame
Mar 30, 2001
15,615
7,449
287
43
Florence, AL
Just because the 'right' exists doesn't mean that its the 'right' thing to do.
This is true.

However, who - other than the very people who feel they are being oppressed - truly has the right to determine whether it is indeed the right thing to do?

If it is the oppressors, then logic would dictate that we had no right to secede from the British government.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,312
45,170
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
The two dislikes I gave were for very specific things in those two posts, by which point this thread had already wandered far off topic. Which is fine, I assumed that it would.

Personally, I don't really care that much about what statues and monuments are or are not displayed. However, I most certainly do not care at all for attempts to alter history in order to paint a particular point of view.

You made a statement as if it were fact which is very clearly not in agreement with history and that is with what I disagreed.
then the myth of the secession of the southern states being some some noble and just cause must really bother you.
 

uafan4life

Hall of Fame
Mar 30, 2001
15,615
7,449
287
43
Florence, AL
then the myth of the secession of the southern states being some some noble and just cause must really bother you.
There were a combination of factors, both just and unjust.

Those who say that slavery wasn't an issue are no less wrong than those who say that it was the only significant issue.



EDIT:
I assume you are already familiar with some of the constitutional violations committed in Congress before and immediately following the secession of the southern States?
 
Last edited:

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,312
45,170
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
There were a combination of factors, both just and unjust.

Those who say that slavery wasn't an issue are no less wrong than those who say that it was the only significant issue.



EDIT:
I assume you are already familiar with some of the constitutional violations committed in Congress before and immediately following the secession of the southern States?
yes, i have been "educated" by lost causers before.
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
​Let me just summarize this thread.

OP:
Which of these Confederate symbols bother you?
Poster 1: Forget the symbols and let me be more direct. Frankly, some of the views expressed by folks here towards black people disappoint me. I don't want to think less of people, so I don't come here much.
OP: I realize that I asked the question, but I will ignore your response.
Poster 2: Um, okay. I guess I'll try. I don't think any symbols used by insurrectionist armies fighting against the United States should be publicly honored.
OP: Insurrection? Ah, so simpleminded. You couldn't be more wrong. Surely you only disagree with me out of ignorance, so I must educate you.
Posters 1 and 2: *rolls eyes*

I'm exaggerating slightly for effect. But this is honestly the tone some people here take when this issue comes up. Every time. And then folks wonder why some posters might feel unwelcome here.
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,902
35,273
362
Mountainous Northern California
This is true.

However, who - other than the very people who feel they are being oppressed - truly has the right to determine whether it is indeed the right thing to do?

If it is the oppressors, then logic would dictate that we had no right to secede from the British government.
Boy, now there's a quandary if I've ever seen one...

I find the history interesting. It informs the present, not just of the past, but of how we got here and therefore it gives a better understanding of the present.

And yet here we are.

I'm not sure we've learned a thing.
 

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,481
13,328
287
Hooterville, Vir.
No and its not necessary to know them to know that slavery was wrong and I'm guessing that "Alabamians in 1860 knew about all of these things" is a bit of an exaggeration. Alabamians in 1860 were probably more concerned with their day to day lives.
Here is a glimpse of southern thinking as they considered seeking safety out of the Union.
John Brown murdered, with cutlasses, five men on Pottawatomie Creek in May 1856. Afterwards, he went on a fund-raising tour in the northern states, raising money for his “Kansas work.” Northerners gave liberally. Republican former congressman Joshua R. Giddings was among those giving Brown money. Brown took the money, and weapons donated by New England abolitionists, and went to Iowa to train his “army.” In May 1858, Brown and his friends drafted a replacement Constitution for the United States (called the Chatham Constitution), which he planned to put in place after he had overthrown the federal government. At the same time, Hugh Forbes, Brown’s drillmaster, revealed to Republican Senators William Seward (Republican front-runner for president in 1860) and Republican Senator Henry Wilson of Massachusetts the details of Brown’s planned attack on a federal facility in Virginia. In his conversation with Seward, Forbes “went fully into the whole matter in all its bearings.” (“Interview with Seward,” New York Herald, October 27, 1859, p. 4, col. 2.) Seward said he did not object to Brown attacking a federal facility, he just “expressed regret that he had been told.” (These interviews came to light a year and a half later after John Brown’s attack on Harper’s Ferry. Richmond Enquirer, October 25, 1859, p. 2, col. 3.) Neither Wilson nor Seward ever warned any federal or state authority of Brown's impending attack.
After John Brown’s arrest, Republicans raised money for Brown’s legal defense and for the benefit John Brown’s family. (Imagine how people would react if Republicans went to raising money for the defense of the terrorist-murderer of Charlottesville). John Andrew, soon to be the Republican nominee for governor of Massachusetts, said, “John Brown was right.” Henry David Thoreau, an acquaintance of Brown’s, called the government of the United States “this most hypocritical and diabolical government.” On November 1, 1859, abolitionist Wendell Phillips told a Brooklyn crowd “the lesson of the hour is insurrection.” When Brown was executed for murder, treason and inciting servile insurrection, towns all over the northern mourned his passing by ringing bells, decking churches in black, etc. The editor of the Savannah (Ga.) Daily Morning News wrote, “when treason and insurrection are applauded at the North, is it not time for the South to take measures for her own protection?” (Savannah (Ga.) Daily Morning News, November 8, 1859, p. 1, col. 2.)
Joint Resolutions of the General Assembly of Alabama, Feb. 24, 1860, WHEREAS, anti-slavery agitation persistently continued in the non-slaveholding States of this Union, for more than a third of a century, marked at every stage of its progress by contempt for the obligations of law and the sanctity of compacts, evincing a deadly hostility to the rights and institutions of the Southern people, and a settled purpose to effect their overthrow even by subversion of the Constitution, and at the hazard of violence and bloodshed; and whereas, a sectional party calling itself Republican, committed alike by its own acts and antecedents, and the public avowals and secret machinations of its leaders to the execution of these atrocious designs, has acquired the ascendancy in nearly every Northern State, and hopes by success in the approaching Presidential election to seize the Government itself; and whereas, to permit such seizure by those whose unmistakable aim is to pervert its whole machinery to the destruction of a portion of its members would be an act of suicidal folly and madness, almost without a parallel in history; and whereas, the General Assembly of Alabama, representing a people loyally devoted to the Union of the Constitution, but scorning the Union which fanaticism would erect upon its ruins, deem it their solemn duty to provide in advance the means by which they may escape such peril and dishonor, and devise new securities for perpetuating the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity; therefore … upon … the election of a President advocating the principles and action of the party in the Northern States calling itself the Republican Party, it shall be the duty of the Governor, … to issue his Proclamation, calling upon the qualified voters … to elect delegates to a Convention of the State, to consider, determine and do whatever in the opinion of said Convention, the rights, interests, and honor of the State of Alabama requires to be done for their protection. (William R. Smith, The History and Debates of the Convention of the People of Alabama, (Montgomery, Ala: White, Pfister, & Co, 1861), 9-10.)
William Lowndes Yancey of Montgomery gave a speech in Washington DC in September 1860. “My friends, there is one issue before you, and to all sensible men but one issue, and but two sides of that issue. The slavery question is but one of the symbols of that issue; the commercial question is but one of the symbols of that issue; the Union question is but one of those symbols; the only issue before this country in this canvas is the integrity and the safety of the Constitution. . [Great applause and cries of “good.”] He is a true Union man who intends to stand by that Constitution with all its checks and balances. He is a disunion man who means to destroy one single letter of that sacred instrument.” Yancey then addressed his northern countrymen attempting to show how the election of a Republican would be viewed by southerners. “Suppose that party [the Republican party] gets into power; suppose another John Brown raid takes place in a frontier state; suppose ‘Sharpe’s rifles’ and pikes and bowie knives, and all the other instruments of warfare are brought to bear upon an inoffensive, peaceful and unfortunate people, and that Lincoln or Seward is in the presidential chair, where will then be a force of United States marines to check that band? Suppose that is the case – that the frontiers of the country will be lighted up by flames of midnight arson; as it is in Texas [the Texas Troubles of 1860]; that towns are burned; that the peace of our families is disturbed; that poison is found secreted throughout the whole country and immense quantities; that men are found to prowling about in our land distributing that poison in order that it may be placed in our springs and our wells; with arms and ammunition placed in the hands of this semi-barbarous people, what will be our fate? Where will be the United States Marshals to interfere? Where will be the dread of this General Government that exists under this present administration? Where will be the fear of the United States army to intimidate or prevent such movements?” Yancey continued: “Well, then, if John Brown commits a raid on that state while in the peace of God, and while in the peace of the country, under the peace of the Constitution that is supposed to protect it – if he comes with pike, with musket and bayonet and cannon; if he slaughter an inoffensive people; if his myrmidons are scattered all over our country, where it is supposed rests this institution which is so unpalatable, inciting our slaves to midnight arson, to midnight murder, to midnight insurrection against the sparsely scattered white people; if the brotherhood of this nation shall be broken up and the Constitution be ignored; if the protection that is due from every citizen to every other citizen shall be no longer afforded; if, in the place of it, a wild and bloodthirsty spirit – not of avenge, for we have done no wrong to be revenged – but a bloodthirsty spirit of assassination, of murder, of wrong, takes its place, and we find scattered throughout all our borders these people, and we find the midnight skies lighted up by the fires of our dwellings, and the wells from which we hourly drink poisoned by strychnine; and our wives and our children, when we are away at our business, are found murdered by our hearthstones, my answer, my friend, is in these words: what would you do?” [Loud applause] A voice from the audience: “I would stop him before he got that far.” (“Mr. Yancey’s Speech,” Richmond Enquirer, September 25, 1860, p. 2, col. 4-6)

When a Republican won, the governor called for an election to a state convention.
It is not an accident that southern state seceded almost exactly in the order of the percentage of the population that was African-American (the states with the highest percentage of black inhabitants, SC and MSS were the first to leave), not because African-Americans voted, but because white voters did. White southerners, whether they owned slaves or not, were deeply concerned with slave insurrection because all would be threatened with the violence of a slave insurrection. Insurrections by definition are indiscriminate.

With all your education and experience, you have still not figured out that abortion on demand as a means of birth control is wrong.
 

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,481
13,328
287
Hooterville, Vir.
Now THAT'S what I call a non sequitur!
Bonus points for using a Latin phrase.
I think that parallels between slavery and abortion on demand as a means of birth control are illustrative (and probably troubling for abortion advocates).

And I think that in 150 years, abortion advocates will be seen in a similar light to the way we look at slavery apologists.
 
Last edited:

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,481
13,328
287
Hooterville, Vir.
The claim itself is certainly illustrative...
Now, this is a sidetrack, but you see no relationship?
1. Both were decided when the Supreme Court decided to take a political hot potato issue off the plate and declare that one group of people were actually not people at all, and thus had no rights the court had to respect.
2. One party went to the mat to protect an institution that lots of members of the other party had serious moral issues with. One party was pro-choice on slavery and the other was not. "Keep you hands off my plantation," or "keep the government out of the plantation," or "if you don't like slavery, don't own one," sound morally obtuse to some. I mean, there might be a larger issue at play here.
 

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,481
13,328
287
Hooterville, Vir.
There are some key differences.
1. When anti-abortion extremists undertake violent action against abortion, Republicans do not generally rush out to raise money for the defense of the accused perp like they did in 1859.
2. Republican governors today do not use their offices to protect the perpetrators of anti-abortion violence from prosecution like they did in 1860.
 
Last edited:

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,626
39,856
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Interesting. I'm not familiar with that. What was the first go-around? And when were the voters replaced?
Now you're going to make me research. All the counties north of a line roughly from Tuscaloosa to Talladega voted "no," with the exception of Calhoun, which had a railroad to south Alabama. All the other counties' economies were tied to the Tennessee River and hence to the north...
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,617
5,120
287
I see this thread has gone a little off topic so I'm going to add a funny quote from the late Dick Gregory that I enjoyed. Please excuse the repetition if you've already heard it.

“Last time I was down South I walked into this restaurant, and this white waitress came up to me and said, ‘We don’t serve colored people here.’ I said: ‘that’s all right, I don’t eat colored people. Bring me a whole fried chicken.’ “
-Dick Gregory
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,617
5,120
287
​Let me just summarize this thread.

OP:
Which of these Confederate symbols bother you?
Poster 1: Forget the symbols and let me be more direct. Frankly, some of the views expressed by folks here towards black people disappoint me. I don't want to think less of people, so I don't come here much.
OP: I realize that I asked the question, but I will ignore your response.
Poster 2: Um, okay. I guess I'll try. I don't think any symbols used by insurrectionist armies fighting against the United States should be publicly honored.
OP: Insurrection? Ah, so simpleminded. You couldn't be more wrong. Surely you only disagree with me out of ignorance, so I must educate you.
Posters 1 and 2: *rolls eyes*

I'm exaggerating slightly for effect. But this is honestly the tone some people here take when this issue comes up. Every time. And then folks wonder why some posters might feel unwelcome here.
I see you've really fine tuned your posting since I was a regular.

Your humor here is so spot-on it's almost cruel.

I said almost.
 

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast
Staff member
Mar 13, 2001
26,788
21,587
337
Breaux Bridge, La
Now, this is a sidetrack, but you see no relationship?
1. Both were decided when the Supreme Court decided to take a political hot potato issue off the plate and declare that one group of people were actually not people at all, and thus had no rights the court had to respect.
2. One party went to the mat to protect an institution that lots of members of the other party had serious moral issues with. One party was pro-choice on slavery and the other was not. "Keep you hands off my plantation," or "keep the government out of the plantation," or "if you don't like slavery, don't own one," sound morally obtuse to some. I mean, there might be a larger issue at play here.
I think I literally heard heads explode.....
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.