Unfathomable: Church Massacre

[cabanafrau]

Those who resolved to remain a united country? who? And who is spitting on their memory?

The terms of the surrender that ended the war effectively meant that not only would the armed conflict cease, but that the moniker United States of America would continue to mean that the states would in fact proceed forward as a single nation. It's no secret going forward wasn't easy, but that was the decision nonetheless. Many people suffered greatly to stick with the idea of remaining together as a nation. It seems silly to me that we still struggle over those wounds today, and even sillier that in light of people being murdered more than a century later a good deal of the discussion and focus centers around symbols. I think the energy and passion is better spent focused on people and learning how to live together peacefully.

 

[luvsJack]

The terms of the surrender that ended the war effectively meant that not only would the armed conflict cease, but that the moniker United States of America would continue to mean that the states would in fact proceed forward as a single nation. It's no secret going forward wasn't easy, but that was the decision nonetheless. Many people suffered greatly to stick with the idea of remaining together as a nation. It seems silly to me that we still struggle over those wounds today, and even sillier that in light of people being murdered more than a century later a good deal of the discussion and focus centers around symbols. I think the energy and passion is better spent focused on people and learning how to live together peacefully.

I know the history but that did not answer my question. I asked WHO is spitting on WHOSE memory?

A good deal of discussion and focus has been about symbols, you are right. That symbol has nothing to do with the crime that was committed. That flag did not murder 9 people. Nathan Forrest's portrait did not murder 9 people.

The county that I live in has been named "Forrest" for many, many years. NOW, some of the PTB suddenly realize who its named for? Suddenly now they decide he shouldn't have his name on anything? If that is in fact what they decide, maybe they need to scour their history books a little more because there are a huge number of names that are on states, counties, roads, etc that should be removed.

And has this stopped anything? No. I read a report earlier of a man walking into a church in LA and killing several people. He was black.

 

[Muushka]

I didn't read aggression. I read exactly what is and what can happen. The bust and portraits of Forrest are already in question. What is next?

The poster makes a good point about are we going to worry about everyone who may be offended by any action? Shouldn't one person's being offended by removing a memorial count as much as the person offended by the memorial?

What's next? I heard that there are some who think we need to remove the Jefferson Memorial.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...erson-confederate-statues-20150624-story.html

 

[luvsJack]

What's next? I heard that there are some who think we need to remove the Jefferson Memorial.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...erson-confederate-statues-20150624-story.html

And so it continues.

Jeff Davis's home is in Biloxi MS, hope they don't think that is coming down anytime soon.

At what point do we finally realize that MANY of our past presidents, generals and other leaders owned slaves or were racist. Things were different then. They didn't see the wrong in what they did. That's not to say it wasn't wrong, but they didn't see it like we do now. We can't remove that no more than we can remove the way the white men treated in the Native Americans. We cannot erase it.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

It's hard to tell reading the words on the page, but to me your response sounds in my ears rather aggressive, IMO needlessly so. My take is that you read the other poster's question with an inflection I did not. I think the question simply asked as a point of discussion, if it's causing pain to others, would it be out of line to consider removing it? Yes

You bring up a good and valid perspective that is ripe for discussion, but I think the aggressive style undercuts what you say. IMO the horror that started this whole discussion is proof positive that these issues need to be fully discussed and laid to rest, but that's not possible with shouting or aggression. Maybe if people started talking with one another one on one, as neighbors, heck, as fellow human beings rather than as "the others" with a viewpoint that must be shouted down at all costs, maybe the answers might be more obvious -- and easier to hear.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I am just trying to understand.

 

[CPT Tripss]

Please, it's not just the "south" where horrible things happen. People have no center, no hope for their future and so you have the hole in their lives being filled with all kinds of garbage and hate. The kid whose dad just turned him in because he was going to pull a big ISIS inspired event, that wasn't aimed JUST at blacks but everyone. Hate is hate. So some fixate on color, some religion. It's all wrong. Fine, I'll say it. You took God out of the schools, out of the public and are trying to take Him out of the churches (!!). Look where it's getting us. We are to love, we are all the same color with just some variances in shade and if you don't believe God when he says that, you get into trouble. I'll be looking to my PM folder now.....

Too bad I can't respond appropriately by detailing how the slave owners and the the post reconstruction segregationists used biblical verses to justify their positions . . . Can't discuss religion ya know.

 

[luvsJack]

Too bad I can't respond appropriately by detailing how the slave owners and the the post reconstruction segregationists used biblical verses to justify their positions . . . Can't discuss religion ya know.

So we need to get rid of that too?

 

[pat fan]

Too bad I can't respond appropriately by detailing how the slave owners and the the post reconstruction segregationists used biblical verses to justify their positions

I am aware that people twist things to support certain positions. But there is no REAL support for that.

 

[eliza61]

And so it continues.

Jeff Davis's home is in Biloxi MS, hope they don't think that is coming down anytime soon.

At what point do we finally realize that MANY of our past presidents, generals and other leaders owned slaves or were racist. Things were different then. They didn't see the wrong in what they did. That's not to say it wasn't wrong, but they didn't see it like we do now. We can't remove that no more than we can remove the way the white men treated in the Native Americans. We cannot erase it.

No we can not erase that but we don't have to honor it either. the confederate flag is different that a monument in that it is specifically link to the annilation of a people. Long after slavery that flag was used specifically to convey a distinct message. It is no different than a swastika, can you image the hell that would break out if someone try to fly a swastika on public property?

KKK robes cannot be erased either but I sure as heck don't think there should be a monument to the organization.

While I think the timing is purely theatrical, I'm also not going to accept the argument that just because it was history, that we have to slap it everywhere knowing it's offensiveness and symbolism to 17% of the population.

What I don't understand is why Blacks always have to be "accepting" of slavery and the after effects, no one tells the Jewish population to get over the holocaust or they have to "realize" and move on that it happened.

Yes we have to realize it happened, no we don't have to accept the symbolism of it in our face every day on a state issued license plate

 

[Geoff_M]

"Next they came for Scarlett O'Hara..."

The call for "Cultural Purging" continues.

 

[eliza61]

"Next they came for Scarlett O'Hara..."

The call for "Cultural Purging" continues.

Lol, personally I never understood why White folks liked Scarlett?? let's see she spent the entire movie trying to screw someone else's husband (hoochie mama)
2). Then she stole her sister's fiancee
3) lastly she married someone solely for his money and to live in a big house.

Nowadays we'd call that a backstabbing, gold digging, hoochie

 

[Wendy31]

Lol, personally I never understood why White folks liked Scarlett?? let's see she spent the entire movie trying to screw someone else's husband (hoochie mama)
2). Then she stole her sister's fiancee
3) lastly she married someone solely for his money and to live in a big house.

Nowadays we'd call that a backstabbing, gold digging, hoochie

Because, in a way, she represented the indomitable spirit of the south.

 

[JoeA]

Lol, personally I never understood why White folks liked Scarlett?? let's see she spent the entire movie trying to screw someone else's husband (hoochie mama)
2). Then she stole her sister's fiancee
3) lastly she married someone solely for his money and to live in a big house.

Nowadays we'd call that a backstabbing, gold digging, hoochie

We white folks like hoochie mamas!!

And please, before anyone takes that post serious please note that I have never seen the movie and am completely joking around!

 

[TLSnell1981]

This thread has turned into a discussion about a damn flag. A worthless piece of material flying above a monument or museum or whatever.

Sadly, it was quite apparent, early in this thread, where this was going. Forget the victims and don't waste a crisis....divide and conquer. It's disgusting. IMO

I was raised in the South and never knew ANYONE, who looked upon the Confederate Flag as pro slaverery,...a symbol of hatred or racism. It was simply the Rebel flag, as in rebellious or non-conformist. Abolishing it won't end hatred, racism, or rebellion. Our problems as a Nation are much deeper, than a piece of cloth.

 

[dinolounger]

A columnist at the New York Post wants to force Warner Brothers to bury "Gone With The Wind," just like Disney has tried to bury "Song of the South."

Ashleigh Banfield at CNN (who is a grade A wack job, but that's another discussion) thinks we should tear Down the Jefferson Memorial.

It's not just knee-jerk cultural purging by media talking heads.

It's absolute rank madness.

But there may be hope. I read the following powerful and courageous post on a well known liberal forum:

"Isn't this just like isis destroying statues and historic sites?"

Bingo, yes, it's exactly the same: intentional destruction of legacy and culture by fanatical, extremist zealots.

 

[dinolounger]

I didn't read aggression. I read exactly what is and what can happen. The bust and portraits of Forrest are already in question. What is next?

The poster makes a good point about are we going to worry about everyone who may be offended by any action? Shouldn't one person's being offended by removing a memorial count as much as the person offended by the memorial?

Thank you, particularly for your summary of the point I was making about how offense can work two ways. An example:

Years ago, the wreck of the World War II German battleship Bismark was discovered off the coast of France. The Bismark was sunk after it sunk a British warship, the Hood, which blew up after receiving a direct hit from Bismark. There were only three survivors from the Hood, which had a crew of 1.418.

That huge loss of life had a profound, offensive impact on the British.

The searchers who found the wreck of the Bismark vessel intentionally didn't identify the specific location, because there are over 2,000 dead german sailors in the wreck and it would be offensive to the Germans if that grave site was ever disturbed.

The point here is even though those German sailors were fighting to support an evil agenda, there is respect for the fact they died for their country.

 

[lpereira]

If it isn't official, and it isn't on a pulley, just take it down.

The flag was placed on a fixed pole at the Confederate Memorial after a bipartisab compromise to remove it from the Capitol in 2000. By law the flag cannot be moved 1 inch without a 2/3 vote in both houses of the legistlature.
The legislature already had first reading to move the flag to a museum. The bill will bypass committee and go straight to the floor. This is remarkable given how dysfunctional our legislature is. They typically cannot agree to call the day after Sunday Monday.
That is why it is still up there.

 

[disneyjunkie]

What I don't understand is why Blacks always have to be "accepting" of slavery and the after effects, no one tells the Jewish population to get over the holocaust or they have to "realize" and move on that it happened.

ABSOLUTELY

 

[disneyjunkie]

I was raised in the South and never knew ANYONE, who looked upon the Confederate Flag as pro slaverery,...a symbol of hatred or racism. It was simply the Rebel flag, as in rebellious or non-conformist. Abolishing it won't end hatred, racism, or rebellion. Our problems as a Nation are much deeper, than a piece of cloth.

I find this hard to believe. Every black person I know that grew up in the south see that flag as a sign if slavery, hatred and racism.

 

[eliza61]

A columnist at the New York Post wants to force Warner Brothers to bury "Gone With The Wind," just like Disney has tried to bury "Song of the South."

Ashleigh Banfield at CNN (who is a grade A wack job, but that's another discussion) thinks we should tear Down the Jefferson Memorial.

It's not just knee-jerk cultural purging by media talking heads.

.

See I don't think Disney has tried to bury "song of the south" at all. Personally as a business gal, I'd be pissed at the stupidity of them release it.

African americans spent 10 Billion with a B dollars on tourism in 2010, that's a whole lot of cash that Disney is trying to market too. So you would release an old film that will tick off a whole portion of your population, that is not that great of a film, old and outdated and where most kids briefly associate with a ride?

LOL, as a native NY'er don't take much out of the Post seriously.