Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Confederate Heritage

1212224262732

Posts

  • MagnumCTMagnumCT Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Show me where I said slavery was ok? Or that I supported it? Or that I wish the South had won? Or, any support of the south in the war at all?


    Seriously, I'm drowning in bleeding hearts in here.
    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    Secession, not slavery you ass.
    True, but disparaging a country that attempted to found itself on the same principles as the country it was breaking from is also not right, it's hypocrisy.
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.

    This is so much bullshit. Under the Constitution, the federal government has the right to override any state legislation with legislation of its own. This was codified when the Constitution was first created. There is no clause in the document that says you can just up and leave because a vote didn't go your way.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    And if you can't see the difference between me debating the southern mentality and reasons for secession and me agreeing with the southern mentality and reasons for secession...

    Now you're just flailing. I never said that. And furthermore you didn't address my point at all, but that is semi-excusable since you've got thirty people asking for clarification on your outrageous statements. These are usually good times to back away from the computer and actually think about what people are saying, rather than trusting to the post reflex.
    Actually, yes, I could see how having something your state relies upon for sustainability forcibly removed from you, after being told for a hundred years it was ok, and even in recent times it was fine just as long as you didn't expand it elsewhere, could be viewed as oppression. The fact that it was slavery is neither here nor there, we have the luxury of not having been born in a time where it's even remotely viewed as OK. Being raised your entire life to see a slave as just farm equipment doesn't mean slavery is OK, but it does mean it would be OK to you.

    Now explain the bit where people born now with the benefit of all these years aren't scum for flying the flag of Protect Slaveronia.
    Why should they have to get rid of something simply because a small group uses it to incite hate? Heck, wouldn't it be better if more non-racist nutjobs flew it for the reasons already mentioned in the thread? If lesbians can proudly wear a pink triangle identifying them as such, when it was a symbol once used to mark them for execution, why can't someone fly the Confederate flag who isn't a racist but simply wants to display their affection or whatever for southern culture?

    It has been stated numerous times that NO ONE HERE IS SAYING YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FLY THE CONFEDERATE FLAG.

    It is however going to (rightly) cause people to assume you are a racist and/or jackass because symbols do not exist in a fucking vacuum, and the flag historically symbolizes a nation which by it's own admission (reference PantsBs posts again please) was founded on the principle of oppressing a race of people.

    You can think it means whatever you like. That doesn't excuse you from social consequences, just like I think kicking you in the nuts is an acceptable form of greeting doesn't excuse me from being jailed for assault.

    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • thisisntwallythisisntwally Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    And if you can't see the difference between me debating the southern mentality and reasons for secession and me agreeing with the southern mentality and reasons for secession...

    Now you're just flailing. I never said that. And furthermore you didn't address my point at all, but that is semi-excusable since you've got thirty people asking for clarification on your outrageous statements. These are usually good times to back away from the computer and actually think about what people are saying, rather than trusting to the post reflex.
    Actually, yes, I could see how having something your state relies upon for sustainability forcibly removed from you, after being told for a hundred years it was ok, and even in recent times it was fine just as long as you didn't expand it elsewhere, could be viewed as oppression. The fact that it was slavery is neither here nor there, we have the luxury of not having been born in a time where it's even remotely viewed as OK. Being raised your entire life to see a slave as just farm equipment doesn't mean slavery is OK, but it does mean it would be OK to you.

    Now explain the bit where people born now with the benefit of all these years aren't scum for flying the flag of Protect Slaveronia.
    Why should they have to get rid of something simply because a small group uses it to incite hate? Heck, wouldn't it be better if more non-racist nutjobs flew it for the reasons already mentioned in the thread? If lesbians can proudly wear a pink triangle identifying them as such, when it was a symbol once used to mark them for execution, why can't someone fly the Confederate flag who isn't a racist but simply wants to display their affection or whatever for southern culture?

    :edit: non-racist, non-nutjobs.


    perhaps they could fly it to remind themselves of what their traitorous, bigoted ancestors did, reenforcing their personal vows not to follow in their forefathers racist, ignorant, treasonous footsteps? I could get behind that.

    #someshit
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Show me where I said slavery was ok? Or that I supported it? Or that I wish the South had won? Or, any support of the south in the war at all?


    Seriously, I'm drowning in bleeding hearts in here.
    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    Secession, not slavery you ass.
    True, but disparaging a country that attempted to found itself on the same principles as the country it was breaking from is also not right, it's hypocrisy.
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.

    This is so much bullshit. Under the Constitution, the federal government has the right to override any state legislation with legislation of its own. This was codified when the Constitution was first created. There is no clause in the document that says you can just up and leave because a vote didn't go your way.
    Well yeah, because that would be stupid, and you wouldn't need to forcibly secede because there's already a law saying it's ok to whenever your way of life and economy are threatened. What was your point?

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • ElkiElki GOBS OF PUKE!!! YES!!!!!!!Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    And if you can't see the difference between me debating the southern mentality and reasons for secession and me agreeing with the southern mentality and reasons for secession...

    Now you're just flailing. I never said that. And furthermore you didn't address my point at all, but that is semi-excusable since you've got thirty people asking for clarification on your outrageous statements. These are usually good times to back away from the computer and actually think about what people are saying, rather than trusting to the post reflex.
    Actually, yes, I could see how having something your state relies upon for sustainability forcibly removed from you, after being told for a hundred years it was ok, and even in recent times it was fine just as long as you didn't expand it elsewhere, could be viewed as oppression. The fact that it was slavery is neither here nor there, we have the luxury of not having been born in a time where it's even remotely viewed as OK. Being raised your entire life to see a slave as just farm equipment doesn't mean slavery is OK, but it does mean it would be OK to you.

    Now explain the bit where people born now with the benefit of all these years aren't scum for flying the flag of Protect Slaveronia.
    Why should they have to get rid of something simply because a small group uses it to incite hate? Heck, wouldn't it be better if more non-racist nutjobs flew it for the reasons already mentioned in the thread? If lesbians can proudly wear a pink triangle identifying them as such, when it was a symbol once used to mark them for execution, why can't someone fly the Confederate flag who isn't a racist but simply wants to display their affection or whatever for southern culture?

    Because it was the flag used by those who wanted to protect slavery. That's it. Yeah, they might have thought it was OK, because it was their time and blah blah blah. This is not the 19th fucking century, though. Everyone born now knows sure fucking knows it's wrong, or better, and yet some still want that fucking flag.

    It's still means "fuck black people." It never meant anything else.

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Well yeah, because that would be stupid, and you wouldn't need to forcibly secede because there's already a law saying it's ok to whenever your way of life and economy are threatened. What was your point?
    I'm missing something here; where's that written?

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Why should they have to get rid of something simply because a small group uses it to incite hate? Heck, wouldn't it be better if more non-racist nutjobs flew it for the reasons already mentioned in the thread? If lesbians can proudly wear a pink triangle identifying them as such, when it was a symbol once used to mark them for execution, why can't someone fly the Confederate flag who isn't a racist but simply wants to display their affection or whatever for southern culture?
    Okay, again, it would be really hard to misinterpret the Lesbian triangle thing as a Lesbian thinking that she should be executed for muff-diving. It's not very hard at all to interpret white, redneck Southerner flying a symbol of the Confederacy as meaning "darkie, git off my lawn."

  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited February 2009
    Matt, what would it actually take for you to admit you're wrong? What kind of shit do we have to say? Granted, everybody's said it all already, but at what point do you give up and concede that you are wrong about this?

    Spoiler:
  • FencingsaxFencingsax Bondage Discipline Spider-Man Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    And if you can't see the difference between me debating the southern mentality and reasons for secession and me agreeing with the southern mentality and reasons for secession...

    Now you're just flailing. I never said that. And furthermore you didn't address my point at all, but that is semi-excusable since you've got thirty people asking for clarification on your outrageous statements. These are usually good times to back away from the computer and actually think about what people are saying, rather than trusting to the post reflex.
    Actually, yes, I could see how having something your state relies upon for sustainability forcibly removed from you, after being told for a hundred years it was ok, and even in recent times it was fine just as long as you didn't expand it elsewhere, could be viewed as oppression. The fact that it was slavery is neither here nor there, we have the luxury of not having been born in a time where it's even remotely viewed as OK. Being raised your entire life to see a slave as just farm equipment doesn't mean slavery is OK, but it does mean it would be OK to you.

    Now explain the bit where people born now with the benefit of all these years aren't scum for flying the flag of Protect Slaveronia.
    Why should they have to get rid of something simply because a small group uses it to incite hate? Heck, wouldn't it be better if more non-racist nutjobs flew it for the reasons already mentioned in the thread? If lesbians can proudly wear a pink triangle identifying them as such, when it was a symbol once used to mark them for execution, why can't someone fly the Confederate flag who isn't a racist but simply wants to display their affection or whatever for southern culture?

    :edit: non-racist, non-nutjobs.
    No, it would be better if they admitted that that was a horrible period of American history, admit that none of those ideals should be honored, and move the fuck on.

    It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    In a democracy the loosing side has to go along with the majority. The south Had become the minority in the US. Their attempts to export slavery to new territories had foundered on the majority of the population in the territories opposing slavery. When it became obivous that they would lose any free and democratic contest on the issue, they seceded.

    In other words: They tried to force the majority of the nation to go along with their views. They tried to manipulated the territores to form goverments more to their liking, against the majorities of said territories. They tried to meddle in the internal affairs of other states(the fugitive slave law).

    When this failed they, instead of accepting the will of the majority, they seceded and used violence to preserve their views.The USA was a democracy and the South lost the vote on slavery. HOW IN THE HELL DOES THIS MAKE THEM THE OPPRESSED? HOW THE HELL DOES THIS GIVE THEM THE RIGHT TO SECEDE?

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Show me where I said slavery was ok? Or that I supported it? Or that I wish the South had won? Or, any support of the south in the war at all?


    Seriously, I'm drowning in bleeding hearts in here.
    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    Secession, not slavery you ass.
    True, but disparaging a country that attempted to found itself on the same principles as the country it was breaking from is also not right, it's hypocrisy.
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.

    This is so much bullshit. Under the Constitution, the federal government has the right to override any state legislation with legislation of its own. This was codified when the Constitution was first created. There is no clause in the document that says you can just up and leave because a vote didn't go your way.
    Well yeah, because that would be stupid, and you wouldn't need to forcibly secede because there's already a law saying it's ok to whenever your way of life and economy are threatened. What was your point?

    My point is that your justifications are invalid. If we followed their example, the red states could just up and leave because they didn't like how the election turned out, and your logic says it's just fine. How can you not see that this line of thinking would break up the United States. Fuck, it already has once.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    If a person wants to honor the idea of fighting an oppressive government, there is the Don't Tread on Me flag. Or the Free French Forces flag. Or any of the many flags used by resistance groups against actual oppressors.

  • Roland_tHTGRoland_tHTG Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    I believe Matt Has more than one problem, unless racism, ignorance, complete lack of reflection and being a moron fall under a single category of being a "terrible person." Honestly, defending the Confederacy because the white people were being oppressed?
    Again, show me one time I defended what they did. Pointing out the reasons why they did something, especially in the context they did them in, is not defending them. I will, however, defend the right of someone to fly the Confederate flag, for whatever reason they may have.
    Nobody is saying that people don't have the right to fly the Confederate flag. We're just saying that doing so makes them incredibly ignorant and/or bigoted.
    And by repeatedly not caring what anyone else has to say about an issue you have no personal experience with makes you (looks up definitions) ignorant and/or a bigot.
    If I didn't care about what other people have to say about an issue, I wouldn't be in here. However, I have yet to see anyone say anything defensible about flying the Confederate flag. It's a symbol of a "nation" established for one reason, and one reason only: to protect and propagate the institution of black slavery. This isn't rocket science, or even one of those things where there's a lot of grey area or wiggle room. This is objective fact; all of the evidence points to this, and until you present evidence refuting it, I don't see any reason to consider your opinion anything other than deluded apologism.


    I've not apoligized for anything the South, North, or America as a whole has done, is doing, or will do.
    Also, it's been brought up already that the flag you keep referring to as the "Confederate flag" was never even endorsed by the Confederacy. It's known as the rebel flag.

    roland even though you are just living life until ragnarok

    us mortals have to deal
  • Richard_DastardlyRichard_Dastardly Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    My point is that your justifications are invalid. If we followed their example, the red states could just up and leave because they didn't like how the election turned out, and your logic says it's just fine. How can you not see that this line of thinking would break up the United States. Fuck, it already has once.

    I don't think it was an issue of the South feeling underrepresented at the time of Lincoln's election that caused succession. I'm pretty sure it was the future threat of underrepresentation, since many in the South believed that Lincoln wouldn't continue the tradition of admitting 1 free state and 1 slave state to keep shit equal.

    ಠ_ರೃ wrote: »
    cats are douches
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Show me where I said slavery was ok? Or that I supported it? Or that I wish the South had won? Or, any support of the south in the war at all?


    Seriously, I'm drowning in bleeding hearts in here.
    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    Secession, not slavery you ass.
    True, but disparaging a country that attempted to found itself on the same principles as the country it was breaking from is also not right, it's hypocrisy.
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.

    This is so much bullshit. Under the Constitution, the federal government has the right to override any state legislation with legislation of its own. This was codified when the Constitution was first created. There is no clause in the document that says you can just up and leave because a vote didn't go your way.
    Well yeah, because that would be stupid, and you wouldn't need to forcibly secede because there's already a law saying it's ok to whenever your way of life and economy are threatened. What was your point?

    My point is that your justifications are invalid. If we followed their example, the red states could just up and leave because they didn't like how the election turned out, and your logic says it's just fine. How can you not see that this line of thinking would break up the United States. Fuck, it already has once.
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out. A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • ElkiElki GOBS OF PUKE!!! YES!!!!!!!Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited February 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    I believe Matt Has more than one problem, unless racism, ignorance, complete lack of reflection and being a moron fall under a single category of being a "terrible person." Honestly, defending the Confederacy because the white people were being oppressed?
    Again, show me one time I defended what they did. Pointing out the reasons why they did something, especially in the context they did them in, is not defending them. I will, however, defend the right of someone to fly the Confederate flag, for whatever reason they may have.
    Nobody is saying that people don't have the right to fly the Confederate flag. We're just saying that doing so makes them incredibly ignorant and/or bigoted.
    And by repeatedly not caring what anyone else has to say about an issue you have no personal experience with makes you (looks up definitions) ignorant and/or a bigot.
    If I didn't care about what other people have to say about an issue, I wouldn't be in here. However, I have yet to see anyone say anything defensible about flying the Confederate flag. It's a symbol of a "nation" established for one reason, and one reason only: to protect and propagate the institution of black slavery. This isn't rocket science, or even one of those things where there's a lot of grey area or wiggle room. This is objective fact; all of the evidence points to this, and until you present evidence refuting it, I don't see any reason to consider your opinion anything other than deluded apologism.


    I've not apoligized for anything the South, North, or America as a whole has done, is doing, or will do.
    Also, it's been brought up already that the flag you keep referring to as the "Confederate flag" was never even endorsed by the Confederacy. It's known as the rebel flag.

    "That flag" is the most popular symbol of the Confederacy. Does anyone here want to dispute that point?

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out. A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?
    This is a good point. The citizens in the south were free to get the fuck out if they wanted. What they weren't allowed to do was take the land and resources of the federal government with them when they left. So yeah... that doesn't really work either.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    They would still have influence in the Supreme Court plus they would still have had a decent amount of power in the Senate even if it did stop being 50-50. Douglas had already killed off the old tradition with popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty was supported by most Southerners.

  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out. A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?
    This is a good point. The citizens in the south were free to get the fuck out if they wanted. What they weren't allowed to do was take the land and resources of the federal government with them when they left. So yeah... that doesn't really work either.
    You seem to think that people must request, and be granted, the right to resist their government. That's not how it works. Whether right or wrong, when you have exhausted (or believe you've exhausted, or are just tired of trying to exhaust) all legal and peaceful means of resistance but your grievances still exist, your choice is either to accept that you will never succeed, or resist by force. This is all the south did. As such, at the moment they voted for secession, the laws of the country they were seceding from no longer applied to them in their own, new country. The country they were seceding from, of course, thought otherwise.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Show me where I said slavery was ok? Or that I supported it? Or that I wish the South had won? Or, any support of the south in the war at all?


    Seriously, I'm drowning in bleeding hearts in here.
    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    Secession, not slavery you ass.
    True, but disparaging a country that attempted to found itself on the same principles as the country it was breaking from is also not right, it's hypocrisy.
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.

    This is so much bullshit. Under the Constitution, the federal government has the right to override any state legislation with legislation of its own. This was codified when the Constitution was first created. There is no clause in the document that says you can just up and leave because a vote didn't go your way.
    Well yeah, because that would be stupid, and you wouldn't need to forcibly secede because there's already a law saying it's ok to whenever your way of life and economy are threatened. What was your point?

    My point is that your justifications are invalid. If we followed their example, the red states could just up and leave because they didn't like how the election turned out, and your logic says it's just fine. How can you not see that this line of thinking would break up the United States. Fuck, it already has once.
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out.

    Man, you are this dense. Sure, the southerners could've left the country en masse. That's not what happened; what they did was claim that their state lands were no longer a part of the United States. Please tell me you see the difference.
    A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?

    What the fuck does this have to do with calling the Confederates traitors when, by all objective facts, they were? Their secession war failed, ergo they were traitors to the country.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out. A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?
    This is a good point. The citizens in the south were free to get the fuck out if they wanted. What they weren't allowed to do was take the land and resources of the federal government with them when they left. So yeah... that doesn't really work either.

    In other words: You are allowed to leave the country, but you are not allowed to take the country with you when you go. And 4 years ago people said they where going to move out of the US. They did not say that G.W. Bush was illegitimate and that they didn't have to obey the federal goverment as a result. In other words no one tried to usurp the federal goverments authority and activily rebel against it.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Whether right or wrong, when you have exhausted all legal and peaceful means of resistance
    Too bad that they didn't do that. Lincoln hadn't even been inaugurated before they seceded.
    your choice is either to accept that you will never succeed, or resist by force.
    Lincoln hadn't done much other than say that he was opposed to the extension of slavery. He was a fucking moderate. That is why they chose him instead of the more hard line Republicans.

  • MagnumCTMagnumCT Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    That would've been interesting.

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out. A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?
    This is a good point. The citizens in the south were free to get the fuck out if they wanted. What they weren't allowed to do was take the land and resources of the federal government with them when they left. So yeah... that doesn't really work either.
    You seem to think that people must request, and be granted, the right to resist their government. That's not how it works. Whether right or wrong, when you have exhausted (or believe you've exhausted, or are just tired of trying to exhaust) all legal and peaceful means of resistance but your grievances still exist, your choice is either to accept that you will never succeed, or resist by force. This is all the south did. As such, at the moment they voted for secession, the laws of the country they were seceding from no longer applied to them in their own, new country. The country they were seceding from, of course, thought otherwise.

    The thing is, they were never actually separated from the United States. That's what the war was for, to establish their separation. Once they were brought back into the fold, we would've been within our rights to try the leaders for treason.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Show me where I said slavery was ok? Or that I supported it? Or that I wish the South had won? Or, any support of the south in the war at all?


    Seriously, I'm drowning in bleeding hearts in here.
    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    Secession, not slavery you ass.
    True, but disparaging a country that attempted to found itself on the same principles as the country it was breaking from is also not right, it's hypocrisy.
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.

    This is so much bullshit. Under the Constitution, the federal government has the right to override any state legislation with legislation of its own. This was codified when the Constitution was first created. There is no clause in the document that says you can just up and leave because a vote didn't go your way.
    Well yeah, because that would be stupid, and you wouldn't need to forcibly secede because there's already a law saying it's ok to whenever your way of life and economy are threatened. What was your point?

    My point is that your justifications are invalid. If we followed their example, the red states could just up and leave because they didn't like how the election turned out, and your logic says it's just fine. How can you not see that this line of thinking would break up the United States. Fuck, it already has once.
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out.

    Man, you are this dense. Sure, the southerners could've left the country en masse. That's not what happened; what they did was claim that their state lands were no longer a part of the United States. Please tell me you see the difference.
    A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?

    What the fuck does this have to do with calling the Confederates traitors when, by all objective facts, they were? Their secession war failed, ergo they were traitors to the country.
    So you're saying they're only traitors because they failed then? So, by this logic, had they succeeded they would've been patriots?

    It's almost as if history gets written by the victor.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • Roland_tHTGRoland_tHTG Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    I believe Matt Has more than one problem, unless racism, ignorance, complete lack of reflection and being a moron fall under a single category of being a "terrible person." Honestly, defending the Confederacy because the white people were being oppressed?
    Again, show me one time I defended what they did. Pointing out the reasons why they did something, especially in the context they did them in, is not defending them. I will, however, defend the right of someone to fly the Confederate flag, for whatever reason they may have.
    Nobody is saying that people don't have the right to fly the Confederate flag. We're just saying that doing so makes them incredibly ignorant and/or bigoted.
    And by repeatedly not caring what anyone else has to say about an issue you have no personal experience with makes you (looks up definitions) ignorant and/or a bigot.
    If I didn't care about what other people have to say about an issue, I wouldn't be in here. However, I have yet to see anyone say anything defensible about flying the Confederate flag. It's a symbol of a "nation" established for one reason, and one reason only: to protect and propagate the institution of black slavery. This isn't rocket science, or even one of those things where there's a lot of grey area or wiggle room. This is objective fact; all of the evidence points to this, and until you present evidence refuting it, I don't see any reason to consider your opinion anything other than deluded apologism.


    I've not apoligized for anything the South, North, or America as a whole has done, is doing, or will do.
    Also, it's been brought up already that the flag you keep referring to as the "Confederate flag" was never even endorsed by the Confederacy. It's known as the rebel flag.

    "That flag" is the most popular symbol of the Confederacy. Does anyone here want to dispute that point?

    I could argue that point, but, as was brought up in a post earlier (that I just don't feel like looking for atm) since I was born and raised IN the south, and you likely weren't, we view things differently and it wouldn't solve a thing, nor would either of us think any differently about the situation anyway.

    roland even though you are just living life until ragnarok

    us mortals have to deal
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    .
    You're intentionally distorted the reasons for the Confederacy. Either you're a fucking moron or you're a terrible terrible person or more likely both.

    The Confederacy was built on oppressing others, not rebellion from oppression.

    edit(cut huge quote tree)

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    They can just up and leave. Hell, 4 years ago the country was awash in people saying they were moving to Canada because they didn't like how an election turned out. A thousand years ago, aside from a small handful, none of the countries that exist today existed. Through wars or disease or natural disaster, countries come and go. Who are you to say this should be stopped, just because you like it how it is?
    This is a good point. The citizens in the south were free to get the fuck out if they wanted. What they weren't allowed to do was take the land and resources of the federal government with them when they left. So yeah... that doesn't really work either.
    You seem to think that people must request, and be granted, the right to resist their government. That's not how it works. Whether right or wrong, when you have exhausted (or believe you've exhausted, or are just tired of trying to exhaust) all legal and peaceful means of resistance but your grievances still exist, your choice is either to accept that you will never succeed, or resist by force. This is all the south did. As such, at the moment they voted for secession, the laws of the country they were seceding from no longer applied to them in their own, new country. The country they were seceding from, of course, thought otherwise.

    The thing is, they were never actually separated from the United States. That's what the war was for, to establish their separation. Once they were brought back into the fold, we would've been within our rights to try the leaders for treason.
    To the Union, they weren't. To themselves, as soon as the articles were signed, they were. The war was because the Union didn't recognize the separation, as it rightly shouldn't have, since under its laws it was illegal. And several CSA leaders were indicted for treason, but blanket immunity was granted and none were ever tried.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited February 2009
    I could argue that point, but, as was brought up in a post earlier (that I just don't feel like looking for atm) since I was born and raised IN the south, and you likely weren't, we view things differently and it wouldn't solve a thing, nor would either of us think any differently about the situation anyway.

    Alright Mr. Appeal-to-Authority, is that flag used a symbol of the Confederacy now, y/n?

    Spoiler:
  • Roland_tHTGRoland_tHTG Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »

    You're intentionally distorted the reasons for the Confederacy. Either you're a fucking moron or you're a terrible terrible person or more likely both.

    The United States of America was built on oppressing others, not rebellion from oppression.

    edit(cut huge quote tree)

    the indians think you must have mistyped that part.


    @Wonder_Hippie: of course it is, haven't you watched any movies lately?

    roland even though you are just living life until ragnarok

    us mortals have to deal
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    .
    You're intentionally distorted the reasons for the Confederacy. Either you're a fucking moron or you're a terrible terrible person or more likely both.

    The Confederacy was built on oppressing others, not rebellion from oppression.

    edit(cut huge quote tree)
    It's still oppression when someone tries to force a change in your way of life, no matter how justified that oppression may be.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »

    You're intentionally distorted the reasons for the Confederacy. Either you're a fucking moron or you're a terrible terrible person or more likely both.

    The United States of America was built on oppressing others, not rebellion from oppression.

    edit(cut huge quote tree)

    the indians think you must have mistyped that part.

    The USA has lived long enough to look back and say "WTF is wrong with me!?" Most colonial powers also had that moment. The CSA lasted for less than five years and never said "Why the hell did we ever support THAT!?"

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »

    You're intentionally distorted the reasons for the Confederacy. Either you're a fucking moron or you're a terrible terrible person or more likely both.

    The United States of America was built on oppressing others, not rebellion from oppression.

    edit(cut huge quote tree)

    the indians think you must have mistyped that part.


    @Wonder_Hippie: of course it is, haven't you watched any movies lately?

    No. The United States of America was built on the concept of "All Men are Created Equal." In the course of the United States history the people the US and the US government did many bad things to Native Americans, but this was not the foundation or justification of the US.

    The Confederacy existed solely because of slavery.
    PantsB wrote: »
    .
    You're intentionally distorted the reasons for the Confederacy. Either you're a fucking moron or you're a terrible terrible person or more likely both.

    The Confederacy was built on oppressing others, not rebellion from oppression.

    edit(cut huge quote tree)
    It's still oppression when someone tries to force a change in your way of life, no matter how justified that oppression may be.

    No it is not. You obviously don't know the meaning of the word oppression.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    It's still oppression when someone tries to force a change in your way of life

    You just described all government. Help, I'm being oppressed because they won't let me steal money from banks.

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    It's still oppression when someone tries to force a change in your way of life

    You just described all government. Help, I'm being oppressed because they won't let me murder matthasaproblem.

    Well I guess we'll have to form our own country.

    Timewarp 150 years into the future:
    "What do you mean this "Let's-Murder-MatthasaProblem-berg flag represents pointless violence? They were being oppressed!"

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Moderator mod
    edited February 2009
    It's still oppression when someone tries to force a change in your way of life, no matter how justified that oppression may be.

    That's moronic. Your definition could just as easily apply to people who go to jail.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    The incongruity of a group of people seceding because the government is going to oppress them eventually by preventing the expansion of oppression is hilarious.

  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    It's still oppression when someone tries to force a change in your way of life

    You just described all government. Help, I'm being oppressed because they won't let me steal money from banks.
    Actually I'm describing them attempting to make illegal something that had never been illegal before. Justly oppressed, unjustly oppressed, it doesn't really matter as we can look back on it with an entirely different moral compass.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • ScooterScooter Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    It's still oppression when someone tries to force a change in your way of life

    You just described all government. Help, I'm being oppressed because they won't let me steal money from banks.
    Actually I'm describing them attempting to make illegal something that had never been illegal before. Justly oppressed, unjustly oppressed, it doesn't really matter as we can look back on it with an entirely different moral compass.

    I came to this thread after seeing the Awesome Post, and I am not disappointed!

Sign In or Register to comment.