Multiple Victims in Charleston SC Church Shooting

[StrangeSox]

I do not believe in the Confederate apologia (it was about states rights! etc.). I do believe that some who do believe that may have a genuine change of heart if there's a forceful enough event.

[Jenksismyhero]

I do not believe in the Confederate apologia (it was about states rights! etc.).

 

I can buy it in South Carolina. They're weirdly proud of being the first state to secede. Given the reaction that most South Carolinians have had to this tragedy, it's pretty clear they're not supporting what the flag originally meant or even what it may have meant in the 60's, which is why it's laughable that you think having this flag some how plays a part in this demented dude's view of America and black people specifically. Take away the confederate flag and that guy is still holding onto those views and his hate.

 

I do believe that some who do believe that may have a genuine change of heart if there's a forceful enough event.

 

Yep, take down the flag and get a bunch of rich white dudes in power to tweet a few "I don't believe this is right" and the problem of looney racists will be solved!

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

By the way, this is precisely why I hate that opportunists are using this tragedy as a way to get the flag down. I totally agree with that in principle. But the talk and reaction to this is now about a stupid flag and not about that church and the loon that killed their members. It once again places blame on someone/something other than the person that committed the act, even if its being done indirectly.

[southsider2k5]

I do not believe in the Confederate apologia (it was about states rights! etc.). I do believe that some who do believe that may have a genuine change of heart if there's a forceful enough event.

 

If there are really people on the fence, I think outside pressure is more likely to result in people sympathetic to the flag, and not the reverse. This is the deep south we are talking about. Every major civil rights event results in a major boom in the Klan, and not people leaving it. Yankees pushing them to take down the flag isn't going win sympathy with people who already have leanings that way.

[Balta1701]

If there are really people on the fence, I think outside pressure is more likely to result in people sympathetic to the flag, and not the reverse. This is the deep south we are talking about. Every major civil rights event results in a major boom in the Klan, and not people leaving it. Yankees pushing them to take down the flag isn't going win sympathy with people who already have leanings that way.

Then don't be scared of the Klan and do it because it's the right thing to do.

[southsider2k5]

Then don't be scared of the Klan and do it because it's the right thing to do.

 

If you end up aiding the enemy more, is it the right thing to do?

[Balta1701]

If you end up aiding the enemy more, is it the right thing to do?

yes. Stop flying a racist symbol and let the racists be mad. Be the better human.

[southsider2k5]

yes. Stop flying a racist symbol and let the racists be mad. Be the better human.

 

Even if it creates more racists?

[EvilMonkey]

Even if it creates more racists?

SS2k for the WIN!

[Jake]

There are many otherwise reasonable people who live in the South who really don't think the stars and bars represent something very bad. This is because they were taught that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery and that the implication that it had anything to do with race or slave ownership was purely revisionist history. Those who have been challenged on these points will often respond with seemingly damning facts like that the Emancipation Proclamation didn't even free Union slaves. Of course, these things miss the forest for the trees, but they come up.

 

Not all feel this way, of course, that would be painting with far too broad of a brush. But this is not a position held only be the extreme racist or backwoods types. People of many statuses and who should know better don't because they were raised with the reality of the flag being a positive, not a negative symbol -- even if at the same time they think institutional racism and the slave-owning past it came from were also bad things. It's not some anomaly that a poll just months ago found that 66% of South Carolinians wanted to keep the stars and bars flying in the capitol.

[chw42]

There are many otherwise reasonable people who live in the South who really don't think the stars and bars represent something very bad. This is because they were taught that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery and that the implication that it had anything to do with race or slave ownership was purely revisionist history. Those who have been challenged on these points will often respond with seemingly damning facts like that the Emancipation Proclamation didn't even free Union slaves. Of course, these things miss the forest for the trees, but they come up.

 

Not all feel this way, of course, that would be painting with far too broad of a brush. But this is not a position held only be the extreme racist or backwoods types. People of many statuses and who should know better don't because they were raised with the reality of the flag being a positive, not a negative symbol -- even if at the same time they think institutional racism and the slave-owning past it came from were also bad things. It's not some anomaly that a poll just months ago found that 66% of South Carolinians wanted to keep the stars and bars flying in the capitol.

 

I don't see how some people in the south can consider anything related to the Confederacy as a source heritage or pride. It's not like the Confederates won the Civil War and became its own recognized nation. People in the south don't live in the Confederate States of America right now.

 

The thing is that it shouldn't have taken this long for state governments to recognize that having a sign of a traitorous battle flag on government property is in bad taste. Hell, Mississippi has that damn thing on their state flag. I don't know how much worse you can really do. It shouldn't take a racist asshole shooting up a Church to start this discussion.

[caulfield12]

http://www.christianpost.com/news/bible-sa...a-pastor-99583/

 

Bible says gays should be be executed, according to Arizona pastor

[Y2HH]

You know how they say keep your eye on the ball?

 

This thread went from being about innocent people being murdered by a stupid racist asshole to flags and pastors saying gays should be executed.

 

1) Racists don't need a flag to be racists, they'll just find a new symbol to make their own. As Hitler did with the Swastika, which is now a "racist symbol" despite the fact that it's thousands of years older than that, going back as far as Ancient India and the city of Troy. It was once considered a good luck charm in aviation circles. Thousands of years of history were wiped away when racists adopted it as their own. What if these racists adopt the star spangled banner as their new "symbol/flag", do we ban American flags as well?

 

2) This is about Rev. Clementa Pinckney, Rev. Sharonda Singleton, Myra Thompson, Tywanza Sanders, Ethel Lee Lance, Cynthia Hurd, Rev. Daniel L. Simmons Sr., Rev. DePayne Middleton-Doctor and Susie Jackson...the innocents gunned down by a f***ing racist pig, whose name I will not print as he doesn't deserve it.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Y2HH

[Y2HH]

I can buy it in South Carolina. They're weirdly proud of being the first state to secede. Given the reaction that most South Carolinians have had to this tragedy, it's pretty clear they're not supporting what the flag originally meant or even what it may have meant in the 60's, which is why it's laughable that you think having this flag some how plays a part in this demented dude's view of America and black people specifically. Take away the confederate flag and that guy is still holding onto those views and his hate.

 

 

 

Yep, take down the flag and get a bunch of rich white dudes in power to tweet a few "I don't believe this is right" and the problem of looney racists will be solved!

 

This.

 

As mentioned in my previous post, if racist pigs can hijack an ancient symbol and make it their own -- why can't regular folk hijack what was once a racist symbol and make it one of peace? You can't just ban everything racist morons decide to adopt as their own ... because they're morons, and you don't allow morons to dictate what means what in the modern world.

 

And this thread should be about the victims, not a flag. If you wan't to have a "fun with flags" discussion with Sheldon Cooper, open a new thread. May as well re-title this thread "society in general" at this rate.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

The problem with that is that the confederate flag wasn't "hijacked." It is and has always been about white supremacy.

 

The flag became such a central topic because it was still flying at full mast during the initial Haley press conference after the attack. If they didn't have the 2/3's majority-to-lower-it law, it probably doesn't even become much of a topic of discussion.

[caulfield12]

For those who haven’t been following this issue, in 2012 the Supreme Court gave individual states the option, if they so chose, of blocking the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid, a key part of the plan to provide health insurance to lower-income Americans. But why would any state choose to exercise that option? After all, states were being offered a federally-funded program that would provide major benefits to millions of their citizens, pour billions into their economies, and help support their health-care providers. Who would turn down such an offer?

 

The answer is, 22 states at this point, although some may eventually change their minds. And what do these states have in common? Mainly, a history of slaveholding: Only one former member of the Confederacy has expanded Medicaid, and while a few Northern states are also part of the movement, more than 80 percent of the population in Medicaid-refusing America lives in states that practiced slavery before the Civil War.

 

And it’s not just health reform: a history of slavery is a strong predictor of everything from gun control (or rather its absence), to low minimum wages and hostility to unions, to tax policy.

 

So will it always be thus? Is America doomed to live forever politically in the shadow of slavery?

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/22/opinion/...c=recg&_r=0

 

 

If you take the time to click on the map of the 22 states, you see virtually the entire Confederacy, Missouri (border state), Wisconsin (Scott Walker explains that one)...Maine is another outlier. Arkansas is the only state EXPANDING coverage. Also, KY and West Virginia, basically border states.

Edited June 23, 2015 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

The fact that debate exists as to whether it's racist or not shows it's simply what you choose to believe.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/ju...ate-flag-debate

 

You realize that the KKK -- for MANY years -- flew the US flag (stars/stripes) as they're symbol, too...right? So does that make the US flag racist? The answer to that is much the same. For some, YES, it is a racist symbol. For others, NO, it's not.

 

 

So what's the difference between Germany today flying a 1930's Nazi flag today and the US Capitol flying a Confederate flag?

 

Both are elements of the history of those countries...6 million Jews were wiped out by the Nazis, whereas it was "only" thousands of blacks who were lynched in those states with the Stars & Bars as elements of their state flags or state emblems...? Basically, only if the South had actually won the Civil War, enacted a nationalized policy of killing all black people....and then later they "lost" the country again could we say it would be unacceptable to have the Confederate Flag flying over the Capitol or state houses today?

 

What about the policy of the South during the war of executing all former slaves who took up arms against the Confederacy, along with their white commanding officers?

Edited June 23, 2015 by caulfield12

[Y2HH]

I'd also like to point out that over the years, there has been about 75 "confederate flags", and the only official ones were:

 

 

The flag people attribute to being the confederate flag is actually a battle flag and was never an official flag of the confederacy. It only came to be the flag most prominently associated with the Confederacy after the South lost the war.

 

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/8-thin...nfederate-flag/

Edited June 23, 2015 by Y2HH

[bmags]

jesus christ, the pretzels you will twist into to defend a bunch of lost cause white supremacists.

[StrangeSox]

The flag was the flag of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia. It's always been associated with the Confederacy. This is the same army that deliberately enslaved as many free northern blacks as they could. It's a Confederate flag and chosen by racists in the years following the Civil War for what it's always represented, which is white supremacy.

[StrangeSox]

In what world do people who don't get that the Confederate flag is racist, actually exit? If they don't get it, they are the type of people who don't want to get it.

welp, you asked

[Y2HH]

The flag was the flag of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia. It's always been associated with the Confederacy. This is the same army that deliberately enslaved as many free northern blacks as they could. It's a Confederate flag and chosen by racists in the years following the Civil War for what it's always represented, which is white supremacy.

 

This is half true.

 

Yes, it was a battle flag of Lee's army. No, it wasn't always associated with the confederacy, as pointed out in the article I linked, it didn't come to known as such until AFTER the war was over. No, it was NEVER an official flag of the confederacy.

 

People are absolutely free to attribute it to the confederacy, but it was never an official flag of theirs.

[Jenksismyhero]

For those who haven’t been following this issue, in 2012 the Supreme Court gave individual states the option, if they so chose, of blocking the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid, a key part of the plan to provide health insurance to lower-income Americans. But why would any state choose to exercise that option? After all, states were being offered a federally-funded program that would provide major benefits to millions of their citizens, pour billions into their economies, and help support their health-care providers. Who would turn down such an offer?

 

The answer is, 22 states at this point, although some may eventually change their minds. And what do these states have in common? Mainly, a history of slaveholding: Only one former member of the Confederacy has expanded Medicaid, and while a few Northern states are also part of the movement, more than 80 percent of the population in Medicaid-refusing America lives in states that practiced slavery before the Civil War.

 

And it’s not just health reform: a history of slavery is a strong predictor of everything from gun control (or rather its absence), to low minimum wages and hostility to unions, to tax policy.

 

So will it always be thus? Is America doomed to live forever politically in the shadow of slavery?

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/22/opinion/...c=recg&_r=0

 

 

If you take the time to click on the map of the 22 states, you see virtually the entire Confederacy, Missouri (border state), Wisconsin (Scott Walker explains that one)...Maine is another outlier. Arkansas is the only state EXPANDING coverage. Also, KY and West Virginia, basically border states.

 

Has nothing to do with slavery and everything to do with the southern states generally being anti-federal government and pro-state's rights. That's what they've been for the last 150 years and now it's more about principle than politics for people down there.

[bmags]

LOL

 

There are facts and there is the truth. You can pull any small data pieces from 200 years to obscure the truth, or you could just look at that history from the confederacy to the revisionism and the use of the battle flag from funerals to daughters of the confederacy to the civil rights movement where suddenly the confederate flag and states rights makes a comeback.

 

It's the flag of white supremacist traitors to the country, that had every ambition of creating an empire of white supremacy. It is inseparable from the cause, it is not a sign that you like sweet tea and cornbread, it is a pride that you come from a land that put white supremacy first and foremost as it's great cause.

 

Heritage!

 

It needs no analogy to Nazi Germany, it is a horrible horrible symbol of terrorism and treason. fly it high!

[StrangeSox]

This is half true.

 

Yes, it was a battle flag of Lee's army. No, it wasn't always associated with the confederacy, as pointed out in the article I linked, it didn't come to known as such until AFTER the war was over. No, it was NEVER an official flag of the confederacy.

 

People are absolutely free to attribute it to the confederacy, but it was never an official flag of theirs.

 

Please explain how the battle flag of the main and most famous army of the Confederacy was ever not associated with the Confederacy.