Texas school board bans confederate flag

It doesn't matter. It's symbolic of the Confederacy and it's principles.

I don't idolize it and many blacks I know feel the same. There are whites that idolize the abuse of blacks that occurred in the South. Do all whites therefore feel that way?

 

Well, the Christian cross is widely used by the KKK. The KKK is a protestant hate group intent on ridding the world of Catholics, gays, Jews, and of course black people. We can talk about how slavery is not only allowed Islam, but encouraged. They are the same people Americans bought their slaves from primarily, if it wasn't an imprisoned tribe from a waring neighboring tribe.

 

Why didn't Jefferson Davis free the slaves? He could have done so, just as Lincoln.

 

Yes, which shows you how little they actually cared about protecting slavery. It was about economic and political power, just like every other war in history.

Yes, they peacefully withdrew from the union and the north invaded, just like I said.

 

Originally the cross was a symbol of something that was actually very sacred, not the KKK.

 

You must not be familiar with reconstruction are you?

 

It shows you just how intent the South was in waging war. South Carolina said they were going to secede if Lincoln were elected.

The Union did not fire the first shot at Ft Sumter.

 

Being willfully ignorant will not stop the fact Lincoln did not end slavery.

 

If slavery were not an issue in the war, why didn't the Confederate states come back into the Union as slave states? After all, if slavery were not an issue, they could have just come back in the way they were before the war.

 

The Stars n' Bars LOST. That should've been the end of it. We should've kept Sherman down south for a couple more years.

 

Jefferson Davis was quite ignorant. To believe that blacks are inherently inferior to whites and therefore worthy of being slaves is quite ignorant.

 

The Confederacy means a lot of different things to many different people. To most Southerners, it stands for honor, integrity, and will to stand up for what you believe. It's something the North and West will never understand, because people like you marginalize the atrocities of a small percentage of a population to denote and connote the population as a whole.

 

A few did. If you knew you history, you would know that.

 

Ever read the 10th commandment? Slavery was okay in God's eyes.

 

No, it shows you how intent they were on leaving the Union, nothing else. And like you said, they could have just stayed in the Union and kept slavery, but they didn't, which means slavery was not their motivation for seceding.

Because they knew he was a tyrant.

The Union had no business being there anymore. They were foreign occupiers.

 

Lincoln didn't think much of blacks either.

 

I have said in this thread that I admire Robert E Lee as a general. But I don't like the fact that he fought for a nation that believed that blacks are inferior to whites and worthy of being slaves. If someone wants to keep the flag in their home, fine. It's just like I believe in God. But I respect that other people do not have such a belief, and I therefore don't want to impose what I believe on them by displaying symbols of my faith in public places.

 

The South tried to leave peacefully. John C. Calhoun, a Supreme Justice, ruled that states could succeed from the Union. The North refused to states act on that right. Charleston only fired on a ship trying to supply Ft. Sumter with munitions and other provisions for the soldiers there.

 

So true. Can't argue that one.

 

Unsustainable. Here is but one of numerous articles bebunking the claim:

One of the more interesting questions related to blacks serving in the American Civil War is this, did blacks (free or slave) serve in combat roles in the Confederate Army? Unquestionably the historical evidence is strong that some blacks – perhaps several thousand – did serve in the Confederate Army in unofficial, non-combat roles as servants, laborers, teamster, musician, cooks, etc. But the official record is very unsupportive that thousands of blacks served as official soldiers in the ranks of the Southern soldiers’ rosters.​

Of course, the myth that "a lot of Blacks fought for the South" has no relevance to what flags Texas wants to fly.

 

There was no attempt to whitewash. You said you viewed slavery in the South in a hostile light. I asked if you viewed slavery in the North in a better light. It was a direct question.

An example of slavery in the North....

Published in The New York Times...January 9, 2000

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

While New Yorkers celebrated a new century, a team of biological anthropologists at Howard University in Washington were intensely focused on a most grisly aspect of New York City's past. Led by Dr. Michael Blakey, the team has spent several years examining the skeletal remains of more than 400 African slaves whose graves were accidentally uncovered during the construction of a federal office tower in lower Manhattan nine years ago.

That the graves existed at all surprised New Yorkers who grew up believing that theirs was a "free" state where there had never been slavery. But a series of reports from the Blakey team -- the first due out early this year -- will present statistics to show that colonial New York was just as dependent on slavery as many Southern cities, and in some cases even more so. In addition, the brutality etched on these skeletons easily matches the worst of what we know of slavery in the South.

The first slave ship that sailed into Jamestown Harbor in Virginia in 1619 contained a handful of captive Africans. But by the end of the Atlantic slave trade more than two centuries later, somewhere between 8 million and 12 million Africans had arrived in the New World in chains. The historian Ira Berlin, author of "Many Thousands Gone," estimates that one slave perished for every one who survived capture in the African interior and made it alive to the New World -- meaning that as many as 12 million more captive Africans perished along the way.

During the 16th century, the massive outflow of slaves decimated countries like the Kingdom of the Kongo, whose monarch, King Affonso I, wrote letter after letter imploring King João III of Portugal to cease the slave trade because it was generating "depravity . . . so widespread that our land is entirely depopulated." He said that "a monstrous greed pushes our subjects, even Christians, to seize members of their own families, and of ours, to do business by selling them as captives."

Many of the stolen Africans ended up in the United States, some of them in the Dutch colonial city of New Amsterdam, which later became New York City. The Dutch recruited settlers with an advertisement that promised to provide them with slaves who "would accomplish more work for their masters, at less expense than [white] farm servants, who must be bribed to go thither by a great deal of money and promises." Integral to the colony from the start, slaves helped build Trinity Church, the streets of the city and the wall -- from which Wall Street takes its name -- that protected the colony from military strikes.

In life, slaves lived in attics, hallways and beneath porches, cheek to jowl with their masters and mistresses. In death, these same slaves were banished to the Negro Burial Ground, which lay a mile outside the city limits and contained between 10,000 and 20,000 bodies by the time it was closed in 1794, according to the historian Dr. Sherrill Wilson. The graveyard was paved over, built upon and forgotten -- until 1991, when the General Services Administration excavated the foundation for a new tower. After protests from black New Yorkers, the agency agreed to finance research on the skeletons, but failed to budget the necessary money and generally dragged its feet, putting one of the most important archaeological projects of the century years behind schedule.

The Howard team has yet to identify among the skeletons the many Africans who are known to have been burned at the stake during the rebellion-plot hysteria that swept the colony in 1741. But what the researchers have found is brutal enough on its own. Of the 400 skeletons taken to Howard, about 40 percent are of children under the age of 15, and the most common cause of death was malnutrition. Most of the children had rickets, scurvy, anemia or related diseases. About twice as many infant girls seem to have died as boys, suggesting at least some infanticide. As Dr. Blakey said, "Women who gave birth in these conditions knew that they were bringing their children into hell."

The adult skeletons show that many of these people died of unrelenting hard labor. Strain on the muscles and ligaments was so extreme that muscle attachments were commonly ripped away from the skeleton -- taking chunks of bone with them -- leaving the body in perpetual pain. The highest mortality rate is found among those ages 15 to 20. Dr. Blakey has concluded that some died of illnesses acquired in the holds of slave ships or from a first exposure to the cold -- or from the trauma of being torn from their families and shipped in chains halfway around the globe. But in many cases, he said, "what we see is that these women were worked to death by owners who could simply go out and buy a new slave."

The Blakey team will conduct two sets of studies in an attempt to determine more closely where the slaves where born. One study will analyze tooth enamel for trace minerals that would mark the captives as having grown up in Africa, the Caribbean or in North America. If DNA research proceeds as planned, it will further pin down the country of origin by comparing the dead with known populations in Africa.

There were 4 Union states that still had slavery.

Regarding states that outlawed slavery. here's the New Jersey example.

In 1804 the New Jersey Legislature passed "An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery." It provided that females born of slave parents after July 4, 1804, would be free upon reaching 21 years of age, and males upon reaching 25. Like New York's, this law held a hidden subsidy for slaveowners. A provision allowed them to free their slave children, who would then be turned over to the care of the local overseers of the poor (the state's social welfare agency in those days). The bill provided $3 a month for the support of such children. A slaveowner could then agree to have the children "placed" in his household and collect the $3 monthly subsidy on them. The evidence suggests this practice was widespread, and the line item for "abandoned blacks" rose to be 40 percent of the New Jersey budget by 1809. It was a tax on the entire state paid into the pockets of a few to maintain what were still, essentially, slaves.

Furthermore, New Jersey slaveowners had the option to sell their human property into states that still allowed slaveholding, or into long indentures in Pennsylvania, until an 1818 law that forbid "the exportation of slaves or servants of color."

New Jersey, like other northern states, replaced outright slavery with stricter controls of free blacks. Black voters were disenfranchsed by an 1807 state law that limited the franchise to "free, white male" citizens.

In 1830, of the 3,568 Northern blacks who remained slaves, more than two-thirds were in New Jersey. The institution was rapidly declining in the 1830s, but not until 1846 was slavery permanently abolished. At the start of the Civil War, New Jersey citizens owned 18 "apprentices for life" (the federal census listed them as "slaves") -- legal slaves by any name.

"New Jersey's emancipation law carefully protected existing property rights. No one lost a single slave, and the right to the services of young Negroes was fully protected. Moreover, the courts ruled that the right was a 'species of property,' transferable 'from one citizen to another like other personal property.' "[10]

Thus "New Jersey retained slaveholding without technically remaining a slave state."[11]

http://www.slavenorth.com/newjersey.htm

It was common for Northern states, as they freed slaves, to enable them to be sold in the South. Not exactly a moral high ground.

You also mentioned Oregon. From Oregon's Constitution of 1859:

Article I Section 35.-- No free negro, or mulatto, not residing in this State at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall come, reside, or be within this State, or hold any real estate, or make any contracts, or maintain any suit therein; and the Legislative Assembly shall provide by penal laws, for the removal, by public officers, of all such negroes, and mulattoes, and for their effectual exclusion from the State, and for the punishment of persons who shall bring them into the state, or employ, or harbor them. (Repealed November 3, 1926).

Article II Section 6.--No Negro, Chinaman, or Mulatto shall have the right of suffrage. (Repealed June28, 1927).

 

CONTINUED:

Abe Lincoln was content to leave slavery as it was. Slavery was legal in the USA as well as in the CSA. It is what it is. To absolve one region and assigning all blame to another is ridiculous.

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]-that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."........ Abraham Lincoln Sept. 18, 1858

I already showed that free blacks owned slaves in a greater % than whites did. Read back a few posts and you will see the info from the census records.

Are you asserting that blacks were only oppressed in the South? That would be incorrect.

One of the people I referred to earlier as having been a product of segregated schools was a retired bank manager. That disadvantage you refer to sounds more like you've bought into the victimhood theory.

How about the blacks up North? Were they victims of Southern slavery?

These photo, which has been circulated before and attributed to Southern racists, was taken in Marion, Indiana.

The Union also believed it was perfectly fine for blacks to be slaves....just not in their backyard. They didn't want them in any guise....slave or free.

The ending of slavery was a by-product of the war...not the goal of it.

Your statement indicates what is wrong with so many today.They have no qualms about our government doing the wrong thing, if done for a perceived 'right' reason. Trouble is, once you set that precedent, you soon have them doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason.

Lincoln upended the Constitution in his pretext for and prosecution of the war. That is a wrong that should never have been tolerated for any reason. THAT is the legacy we ALL suffer with today.

 

Lincoln's attitude evolved over time. It is simplistic to assign him any encompassing static perspective, whether regressive or progressive.

Cherry-picking quotes to bolster one slant or another is facile.

 

Here's you beloved Lincoln "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]-that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

Still want to fly the American flag?

 

His attitude evolved along with the propaganda war he was waging.