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

1202123252632

Posts

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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...

    Why are you debating something you don't agree with? To be a troll?

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    For instance, if you are ENSLAVED
    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.
    You seem to be saying that it's okay to fly the Confederate flag and celebrate it because it represents fighting against oppression. The only problem with this is that the Southern states were the most oppressive states in the Union, and they seceded because they thought that the Northern states were going to make them stop oppressing people quite so much. You further argue that the people flying this flag are neither ignorant nor bigoted. So, you can see where we might have some problems with what you're saying.

  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    And this was the first time in the history of the Union they had been out-voted. Seriously, the South totally dominated American politics right up to the election of Abraham Lincoln.
    And they handled it with such grace and aplomb.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Uh, actually, yes, exactly. It was seen as the north saying "you will now abide by our rules with no say in the matter, no matter how it will affect you."

    There is this cool thing called the marketplace of ideas which people in democracies are expected to compete in.
    And for all of history when people saw themselves as not being represented by, or being actively repressed by, their leaders, they revolted. This isn't a new concept.

    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?

    If you can't see the distinction between oppression and fulfilling your half of the social contract, then you probably have some high school classes you are overdue to retake.
    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...

    The southern mentality was apparently that they were special snowflakes that didn't have to follow the Constitution if it meant they couldn't own slaves.

    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
  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.
    Has someone said that you shouldn't be allowed to fly it yet? Or just that if you fly it a large portion of people are going to assume you're an ignorant, racist piece of waste?

  • ElkiElki GOBS OF PUKE!!! YES!!!!!!!Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited February 2009
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Uh, actually, yes, exactly. It was seen as the north saying "you will now abide by our rules with no say in the matter, no matter how it will affect you."

    There is this cool thing called the marketplace of ideas which people in democracies are expected to compete in.
    And for all of history when people saw themselves as not being represented by, or being actively repressed by, their leaders, they revolted. This isn't a new concept.

    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?

    WTF?

  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited February 2009
    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.

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?

    WTF?
    I think you misunderestimate how oppressed the white, land-owning plantation owners of the south were Elki. :P

  • Limp mooseLimp moose Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Limp moose wrote: »
    Limp moose wrote: »
    I am not saying it is an excuse I am saying they don't view it as racist or inflammatory. Just because their view differs from yours is a free pass to call them ignorant.

    While I do agree it is racist i am sort of playing devils advocate here.

    It's so annoying when people do that because nobody can ever do it well. Here's how it works: they're ignorant to what the flag means. Period. It's a fact. It has nothing to do with opinions or beliefs. That flag stands for slavery and treason. If they fly it without realizing that it doesn't mean they're suddenly allowed to get away with it.

    What if they view its meaning differently. The swastika used to mean something else. Does its use in a bad act forever end its use as something else?

    Maybe it does. I don't have a swastika or the stars and bars on my car. And generally think anyone that does is a douche. But I have met so many people that do have the stars and bars that there has got to be a reason they still use it.

    The Confederate flag never meant anything else. This fact has been repeated over and over and over and over and over again throughout this thread.

    The reason they still use it is because they're ignorant to what it represents.

    Ok everything but the red part.

    Do you really think a huge number of people are ignorant of what that flag means. They know it was the flag of the confederacy. They know it was fighting for slaves. But they use it anyway. Under your stance they are either Idiots or racists.

    There is no other possibility.

    For example that to them it means something else.

  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I'd say that the meanings ascribed to it by the people who choose to fly it are what it actually means.
    This is not how things work. How would anything hold any meaning or be able to convey any idea if meaning were determined entirely by each individual?
    In their defense, this is coming from people who think "y'all" is a word.
    Contrasted with those who think chowder is edible, I'll take those who say "y'all".

    It's an easy game to hate
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.
    Has someone said that you shouldn't be allowed to fly it yet? Or just that if you fly it a large portion of people are going to assume you're an ignorant, racist piece of waste?
    At which point I say unless they're flying it while marching down the street in hoods and sheets, you're choosing to ascribe a meaning to it that doesn't apply.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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?
    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.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I'd say that the meanings ascribed to it by the people who choose to fly it are what it actually means.
    This is not how things work. How would anything hold any meaning or be able to convey any idea if meaning were determined entirely by each individual?
    In their defense, this is coming from people who think "y'all" is a word.
    Contrasted with those who think chowder is edible, I'll take those who say "y'all".
    It's "chowdah."

    And it's delicious.

  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited February 2009
    Limp moose wrote: »
    For example that to them it means something else.

    Because they're ignorant to what it means. It doesn't mean anything else. I can wave around a flag of my cock inside a cow's ass and say it represents my love of nature, but that don't make it fucking so.

    Spoiler:
  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Limp moose wrote: »
    The Confederate flag never meant anything else. This fact has been repeated over and over and over and over and over again throughout this thread.

    The reason they still use it is because they're ignorant to what it represents.

    Ok everything but the red part.

    Do you really think a huge number of people are ignorant of what that flag means. They know it was the flag of the confederacy. They know it was fighting for slaves. But they use it anyway. Under your stance they are either Idiots or racists.

    There is no other possibility.

    For example that to them it means something else.
    It can mean something else to them. That's fine. Just dandy. But they'll be deemed ignorant/bigoted by the other portion of the populace who sees it as a symbol of slavery and the will to fight to keep slaves.

  • thisisntwallythisisntwally Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?

    WTF?
    I think you misunderestimate how oppressed the white, land-owning plantation owners of the south were Elki. :P

    so oppressed. I think that post should be reported for awesome, to ensure that the noble struggle of the south does not pass unnoticed by future generations

    #someshit
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?

    WTF?
    I think you misunderestimate how oppressed the white, land-owning plantation owners of the south were Elki. :P

    so oppressed. I think that post should be reported for awesome, to ensure that the noble struggle of the south does not pass unnoticed by future generations

    Way ahead of ya

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Limp moose wrote: »
    For example that to them it means something else.

    Because they're ignorant to what it means. It doesn't mean anything else. I can wave around a flag of my cock inside a cow's ass and say it represents my love of nature, but that don't make it fucking so.
    I'm going to need experimental verification to back up your claim.

    "Despite all the bitching, if Diablo 3 sucks, I will eat my own cock. Counter-claim: If Diablo 3 does not suck, I will have a list of whiners who need to eat cocks." - Zen Vulgarity
  • Limp mooseLimp moose Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Limp moose wrote: »
    The Confederate flag never meant anything else. This fact has been repeated over and over and over and over and over again throughout this thread.

    The reason they still use it is because they're ignorant to what it represents.

    Ok everything but the red part.

    Do you really think a huge number of people are ignorant of what that flag means. They know it was the flag of the confederacy. They know it was fighting for slaves. But they use it anyway. Under your stance they are either Idiots or racists.

    There is no other possibility.

    For example that to them it means something else.
    It can mean something else to them. That's fine. Just dandy. But they'll be deemed ignorant/bigoted by the other portion of the populace who sees it as a symbol of slavery and the will to fight to keep slaves.

    This really doesn't seem to bother them. Especially since the majority of people that feel this way reside above the mason dixon line.

    Also if you made a flag of your cock in a cows ass. That would be pretty awesome.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Fly the Confederate flag all you want, but leave clam chowder out of this.
    New England clam chowder, anyway. You can take that tomato soup Manhattan shit.

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Bama wrote: »
    Limp moose wrote: »
    For example that to them it means something else.

    Because they're ignorant to what it means. It doesn't mean anything else. I can wave around a flag of my cock inside a cow's ass and say it represents my love of nature, but that don't make it fucking so.
    I'm going to need experimental verification to back up your claim.
    Hypothesis #1) Nature will feel loved when I'm through with it. :winky:

  • Roland_tHTGRoland_tHTG Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.

    roland even though you are just living life until ragnarok

    us mortals have to deal
  • thisisntwallythisisntwally Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?

    WTF?
    I think you misunderestimate how oppressed the white, land-owning plantation owners of the south were Elki. :P

    so oppressed. I think that post should be reported for awesome, to ensure that the noble struggle of the south does not pass unnoticed by future generations

    Way ahead of ya

    you're a gentleman and a scholar.

    #someshit
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • MagnumCTMagnumCT Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    This is pretty much going around in pointless circles. What I'd like to know is, why the ad hominem attack because my slang is different than yours, Thanatos?

  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    Uh, actually, yes, exactly. It was seen as the north saying "you will now abide by our rules with no say in the matter, no matter how it will affect you."

    There is this cool thing called the marketplace of ideas which people in democracies are expected to compete in.
    And for all of history when people saw themselves as not being represented by, or being actively repressed by, their leaders, they revolted. This isn't a new concept.

    And how does that make it okay again?
    Because it's a human right to not be oppressed?
    For instance, if you are ENSLAVED

    Ohh, BUUUUUURN!

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    MagnumCT wrote: »
    This is pretty much going around in pointless circles. What I'd like to know is, why the ad hominem attack because my slang is different than yours, Thanatos?
    Than's Checklist of Who to Hate Upon:
    1) Are you living in The South?
    2) Are you now or have you ever been a cop?
    3) Are you the relative of any cops?
    4) Do you farm corn?

    There's probably a few more, but that covers most of it I think. If you answered yes to any of the above you should probably just duck out now!

  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick 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.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • MagnumCTMagnumCT Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I see. That pretty much disqualifies one from neutral discussion, doesn't it?

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil 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.
    So losing the majority vote in government is reason to secede?

  • ElkiElki GOBS OF PUKE!!! YES!!!!!!!Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited February 2009
    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.

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    MagnumCT wrote: »
    I see. That pretty much disqualifies one from neutral discussion, doesn't it?
    Only if you're a dirty southerner/cop/cop sympathizer/or Iowan.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.

    Serious, serious mischaracterization of history going on right here (of course, I shouldn't expect anything less). It's not like Abe got elected and the next morning he suddenly decided slavery was awful. Slavery had been consistently and vigorously opposed since before the Revolution, and by 1850 the majority of the nation opposed it, but the South was able to resist majority opinion due to their admittedly masterful political manipulations, the particulars of which date all the way back to wrangling at the constitutional convention. The South wasn't told "it was just fine as long as they didn't expand it elsewhere"; non-expansion generally failed in Congress due to southern intrasigence, forcing compromises in which slave states would only be added to the Union if balanced by new free states (see: the reason Maine is not still part of Massachusetts).

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    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.

  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited February 2009
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.

    But those principles are transparently hypocritical. No amount of whining is going to make me respect someone who thinks it's okay to take up arms to fight for one's right to exploit other people.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    The principles being the right to govern themselves and preserve their way of life.
    I am sure the slaves would love the same thing.

  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick 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.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    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.

    There's a big difference between just saying some shit and saying some shit that stands up to scrutiny. If there's one thing D&D is good at, it's some mother fucking layman's peer review.

    Spoiler:
Sign In or Register to comment.