"I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-08-2017, 04:35 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 02:56 PM)TSG Wrote:  I have an idea.

Maybe people should just stop worrying about fancily-shaped pieces of stone and actually talk about stuff that matters.

All this statue controversy lately is just distracting from actual, physical problems, people who are actually physically suffering, but people are expending so much energy whining about defending statues, or whining about tearing down statues.
The problem of that notion is with existence of statues or idolitry is that it normalizes and gives credence to those with ideas about the stuff that matters.

Having statues that represent religion or a fight for a certain purpose showcases it being a solid deeply respected or traditionally wise position to take for those who latch onto these ideals.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 05:25 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 04:35 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(16-08-2017 02:56 PM)TSG Wrote:  I have an idea.

Maybe people should just stop worrying about fancily-shaped pieces of stone and actually talk about stuff that matters.

All this statue controversy lately is just distracting from actual, physical problems, people who are actually physically suffering, but people are expending so much energy whining about defending statues, or whining about tearing down statues.
The problem of that notion is with existence of statues or idolitry is that it normalizes and gives credence to those with ideas about the stuff that matters.

Having statues that represent religion or a fight for a certain purpose showcases it being a solid deeply respected or traditionally wise position to take for those who latch onto these ideals.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

I'm not sure I understand you.

More Min Gee Ziss
[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 06:02 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 01:45 PM)Dr H Wrote:  I'm with the prez on this one. Washington was a slave holder; we should take down his statues, too. Also those of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and the other 20-30 Founding Fathers who signed a document declaring "all men are created equal" while keeping their fellow men in bondage.

Better still, let's stop putting up statues of dead people and use the money to support food banks and community clinics, eh?

Fuck you. I was just watching PBS about this very bullshit argument. Blacks for the most part are not looking for a perfect past. But the difference between the Revolutionary War and the Civil war is that there WERE proponents of abolition at the founding, and knowing that slavery had ended in the NORTH by the time Jefferson and Adams died, and knowing that Franklin and Pain were advocates for ending slavery, this is a bullshit argument.

If you want to claim the founders were conflicted on the issue, that is no different than knowing Ronald Reagan really didn't give a shit about gay marriage. This is a bullshit backhanded way of saying "They did it too".

The founders regardless of owning slaves were still looking forward. They knew because of the way they wrote it, eventually it would be available to use for more, if that more stood up for it.

Hitler built the Autoban still used today is not an argument.

If you wan't to argue amendments to their monuments sure, I am for that, but that is not the same as glorifying those who sought to destroy the country and keep slavery.

I hold no illusions about Jefferson or Washington nor do most blacks. But it still remains that because of of their ideas at the time supporters of ending slavery used the same principles to do so,and even back then, by the time Jefferson and Adams died slavery had ended in the North as a majority. The South no matter what fought to keep slavery.

The founders as imperfect as you point out were not the same as those Lincoln got murdered by.

If you are going to blame Washington or Jefferson then we should nuke Germany for keeping the highway system Hitler built.

Point being you cannot equate the climate of the Revolutionary War to the Climate of the South at the time of the Civil War. The North was, and you can only argue maybe not fast enough, at the time of the revolution, was starting to lean to the ideas of abolition their allies had already started.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 06:13 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 01:45 PM)Dr H Wrote:  I'm with the prez on this one. Washington was a slave holder; we should take down his statues, too. Also those of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and the other 20-30 Founding Fathers who signed a document declaring "all men are created equal" while keeping their fellow men in bondage.

Better still, let's stop putting up statues of dead people and use the money to support food banks and community clinics, eh?

Maybe we need to put up a few 40 ft statues of T Rump!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 06:20 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 03:22 PM)Dr H Wrote:  
(16-08-2017 02:50 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  Well, there's a bit of a difference between the statues of confiderate generals and others who faught FOR slavery during the Civil War and Washington. Even though, yes, Washington did own slaves. The statues were erected after the Civil War for those who were specifically and intentionally fighting and doing everything they could to keep slavery going, the statues of Washington were for his contributions to the Revolutionary War of Independence and the Presidency. You may not see the difference but I do.
All you're saying it that it's in the eye of the beholder; I agree.

There are people -- I've met some -- who believe that the Confederacy was primarily a big test of the alleged Constitutional guarantee of states' rights, and that slavery was a subsidiary issue to that. To them those statues commemorate not a stubborn defense of slavery, but people bravely fighting for their right to self-determination in the face of an overwhelmingly obtrusive federal government's attempts to quash it. Even though, yes, some of them did own slaves.

Do you see the difference there?

Quote:Had Washington magically lived to fight in the Civil War on the South's side then yup, his statues should be removed and put in a museum.
It's an interesting question as to which side he might have taken. He was troubled during his life by the moral implications of slavery, although apparently not enough to become an abolitionist like Franklin. On the other hand, he was a Virginian.

NO THere is no difference to see. The state right they were killing for was the right to own other human beings!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 06:24 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
Quote:I'm with the prez on this one.

Then fuck you.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 06:26 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
(16-08-2017 06:13 PM)Born Again Pagan Wrote:  
(16-08-2017 01:45 PM)Dr H Wrote:  I'm with the prez on this one. Washington was a slave holder; we should take down his statues, too. Also those of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and the other 20-30 Founding Fathers who signed a document declaring "all men are created equal" while keeping their fellow men in bondage.

Better still, let's stop putting up statues of dead people and use the money to support food banks and community clinics, eh?

Maybe we need to put up a few 40 ft statues of T Rump!

When someone can point out where I objected to amendment displays I will concede.

It still remains that the Revolutionary war was about fighting the king and the South in the Civil War was about destroying America and KEEPING SLAVERY.

Here is the HISTORY of ABOLITION in the United States.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitioni...ted_States

Thomas Jefferson Wrote:In 1806, President Thomas Jefferson denounced the international slave trade and called for a law to make it a crime. He told Congress in his 1806 annual message, such a law was needed to "withdraw the citizens of the United States from all further participation in those violations of human rights ..

Considering he had sex with Sally and when he died he willed that she and her kids be freed, says to me he was uncomfortable with it. Did it make it right while he owned them? NO, but that is not the same as fighting to keep slavery.

He seemed to see the writing on the wall even if he couldn't get it done in the South, it still ended in the North by a vast majority by the time he died.

[/quote]

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 06:35 PM (This post was last modified: 16-08-2017 06:39 PM by Brian37.)
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
It also seems Washington was conflicted on the issue and had changed his views over his life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Was...nd_slavery

Article Wrote:Visitors recorded varying impressions of slave life at Mount Vernon: one visitor in 1798 wrote that Washington treated his slaves "with more severity" than his neighbors, while another around the same time stated that "Washington treat[ed] his slaves far more humanely than did his fellow citizens of Virginia."[6]

So again, as with Jefferson, it seems they didn't like what they were doing, but couldn't get out of it because of politics. It still remains they set the stage for the end of slavery within their lifetime in the North. And embolden Lincoln who paid with his life.

[/quote]

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 06:45 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
George Washigton Wrote:After the war, Washington often privately expressed a dislike of the institution of slavery. In 1786, he wrote to a friend that "I never mean ... to possess another slave by purchase; it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted, by which slavery in this Country may be abolished by slow, sure and imperceptible degrees." To another friend he wrote that "there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see some plan adopted for the abolition" of slavery.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2017, 08:59 PM
RE: "I wonder, is it George Washington next week?"
And Lincoln thought that every African American should leave the country and go back to Africa after the war, that racist asshole.

So what? We can't expect historical figures to elevate themselves above the mores of their era in all things. We acknowledge those leaders who manage to overcome just one thing that moved their era into the future. I doubt we would find anyone pure enough to meet the impossible standard of embracing every value of our culture 200 years after their time. I highly doubt, for instance, we will find figures in history embracing acceptance of homosexuality--we're not even fully there yet today, let alone any time in the past.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BryanS's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: