Shooting at SC Church During Bible Study - Suspect still at large

[Granite]

The point i was making was that just because he didnt keep mentioning what he admitted wasn't possible or feasible, is no evidence that he didn't feel that way.

Well that's an argument from silence that flies in the face of his attitude on the matter after 1862. And even if Lincoln still wanted the slaves he just freed returned to Africa (seriously, why bother emancipating them in that case?) I'm not sure what if anything it "proves."

 

[Angel4Truth]

Well that's an argument from silence that flies in the face of his attitude on the matter after 1862. And even if Lincoln still wanted the slaves he just freed returned to Africa (seriously, why bother emancipating them in that case?) I'm not sure what if anything it "proves."

Well no, its really not, since he had already made his feelings known. His last speech also included for the first time his feelings publically (the same as he often expressed privately) on support for only limited black sufferage -

" “It is unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers.” April 11th, 1965

Pretty clearly to the very end, he only wanted limited rights and only for those who served the union cause.

No silent argument at all.

Why does it bother you so much, does it make him less of a hero to you, knowing that he still didnt believe blacks equal to whites even though he was against slavery?

 

[Granite]

Well no, its really not, since he had already made his feelings known.

His attitude on the issue changed over time. You seem to be in one of your moods where you're bored and just trying to pick a fight.

“It is unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers.”

Yes, exactly: Limited suffrage isn't the same thing as sending them back to Africa. Nothing about that's difficult to understand.

Pretty clearly to the very end, he only wanted limited rights and only for those who served the union cause.

...which is, again, a far cry from his views on the subject in 1858.

Why does it bother you so much

Your ignorance and ego doesn't "bother" me so much as it just annoys me sometimes. I had you on ignore for two weeks and today's a reminder why keeping you there for a while longer's a good idea, so that's what I'm going to do.

does it make him less of a hero to you

Who said he was my "hero"? Woman, you don't know me.

I'd tell you to get over yourself but a mirror's your favorite plaything.

:wave2:

 

[Angel4Truth]

Woman

yes indeed. :banana:

 

[rainee]

Sure I do. He struggled with the matter of race his entire life, despised slavery since his youth, and resolved to do something about it before he entered public service. When the opportunity presented itself, he acted.



He did indeed float this idea but abandoned it for any number of reasons--this is certainly true post 1862, after the Emancipation Proclamation, and he never again mentioned returning slaves to Liberia. He was a man of his time but was also ahead of it in many ways. It's fascinating (if pointless) to speculate about his role post-war as he guided the nation through Reconstruction.

I apologize beforehand for what I'm about to say. Sigh.
But it is one thing to try to gage a human being's position on a series of letters or even better a diary - but to base the knowledge of a soul's stand on the public speeches of a politician or government official is...
Well, probably done by writers who express themselves.

I think Lincoln wrote truths in the speech G first gave a link to, I don't think he was wrestling with anything in public or trying to confess his soul but rather saying things true to the differing groups before him.
Notably the truths may not seem cohesive, but after all they are not.

Speeches later will not have such a conflicting group, right? The demographics of the population who will hear him later will be different.

But to think the man does not consider who his audience is and just where he wants to move their thinking (not his own) is romantic.

I believe Bleeding Kansas on wiki is where I got my quotes about anti and pro slavery issues of the farmers.

Some reading on Wilberforce Colony (and the riot before it in Cincinnati) found at wiki may explain something about Lincoln speaking both of sending African Americans away and not sending them away.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilberforce_Colony

My problem with this presentation of the Colony is the date it says it lasted to, I thought it began failing way before that, maybe before it ever started.

I could be wrong but I believe people who are captured by their enemies and sold as slaves are not necessarily of the same mental bend as those who leave past and contacts and go places where the closest hospital or only hospital for that matter is where they just left it.

 

[rainee]

It's the Fourth of July and Greg G just had a segment on his show about the Confederate Flag....
One bright,politically savvy, in touch with truth and reality (supposedly) young woman said if the Confederacy had won there would still be slaves.
Funny.

That is why getting rid of the Confederate flag is good, you see... ?



So forget soil becoming too poor to grow cotton, forget tobacco taking a down turn... Forget especially combines... Because slaves became unneeded with combines...

Because those above and many more reasons would have made slaves an obviously expensive and unnecessary reality.

But people have implied the South was immune to condemning slave owning, or spiritually questioning the owning another human being.

How dumb is that? Of course slave owning would have been condemned - does the North still approve of abusing children in factories? Do they still ok working, cheating, sometimes killing Chinese people working on the railroad? Are American Indians still held as below human by the English?

All of these were true of that time. So were slave owners the only evil?

Well, were they? People who focus on one thing end up lying about other things, or so it appears with this topic.

So some say get rid of the Confederate Flag...
But think about it: the flag flies in state situations and some other purely Southern situations when slavery is already condemned, when many friendships, co-working and neighborhoods already prove The Southern Confederacy was made of people who were about something other than owning slaves and people who came from kidnapping and slavery.

How can you trust that? Because the flag flies and has been flying while we simply live and can work with, go to school with, and be friends with people of color when Northerners who often never experience those situations in any comparable numbers produce lip serving liberals who have no clue.

Would there still be slaves in the Confederacy? Hello, there have not been. Didn't anyone notice?

 

[Town Heretic]

...The Southern Confederacy was made of people who were about something other than owning slaves.

But the war wasn't. The battle flag of that nation doesn't belong on a flag pole any more than a swastika does.

 

[rainee]

But the war wasn't. The battle flag of that nation doesn't belong on a flag pole any more than a swastika does.

So the Church that was so old and historic that was attacked by that twenty year old killer was in the North?


Or did you miss that point?

Strangely, Town you compare Nazis, a people who went to war to conquer others with the South who wanted to get away from oppressive people.

Has it not occurred to you, brother, it was your Yankee side that that wanted to break people?

 

[rainee]

I don't want to make the irritation worse, but let's be honest.

Ok?

Uncle Ben and Aunt Jemima are names that are being condemned right now because.... Because they are an example of... What?

Because those humans were diminished as individual people in the homes where they worked in the service of others?

Yeah, that's right you hypocrites. You hire Hispanics or Latinos and say nothing about this horrible lie because you, you are the frigid uncaring cold ones.

So know this, those of you who do not know of years of employment in a home...These were terms of endearments.

It meant the people were family, it meant children should respect and trust them when they were there every day or regularly....They had their job while those who called them those terms had theirs, duh.

Some People of today want to twist something so non hostile, non hateful into an unthinkable evil.

How stupid.

You know what your lies accomplish?

OJ Simpsons child is quoted as telling the Hispanic maid that she was to obey her because the maid worked for the family... And which one of you get the difference?

In my world years ago, the woman of color told my friend she would get chicken and dumplings.
And we were overjoyed! Because that maid ruled the roost while the white parents were at work. It was so great to know what great thing she was cooking for us at lunch...and she would laugh and btw boss us around.

I know.

Some of you will be so jealous you will want to destroy something you can never know.

 

[rainee]

I can't leave on that note, though so one more post.
Years later one of my work mates was complaining. Yes he had been in the military - but he wasn't complaining about serving for years and then getting out.

He was complaining about a writer to the newspaper who claimed blacks should be grateful they were taken as slaves because it got them to this country...

He looked with great frustration and anger into my eyes. He added tracing ones family tree had become so popular - but those from slaves could not trace back years and years because their lines were cut from their original past area of their old country, their past family, past community, past anything. All severed, all cut, all lost.

I've wondered if DNA work will one day help. But the truth is he was right to be hurt by that. However, I was the one who worked with him and had tears come to my eyes when he was offended and frustrated by a letter to the editor.

But I liked working with him and felt for him. I didn't travel around trying to stir up all civil troubles. That was the self righteous job for. Others.

 

[Town Heretic]

I wrote: The battle flag of that nation doesn't belong on a flag pole any more than a swastika does.

So the Church that was so old and historic that was attacked by that twenty year old killer was in the North?

Why not answer with "Blue". It has the same degree of rational connection to my point.

Strangely, Town you compare Nazis, a people who went to war to conquer others with the South who wanted to get away from oppressive people.

Not so strangely you miss the actual parallel, of two peoples battling to advance an evil. In the case of the South that would be pushing slavery into new territories while preserving the right to own, rape, mutilate, buy and sell people where they were already about the business of it. And I suppose the Nazis would have seen an attempt to end their planned genocide as oppressive.

Has it not occurred to you, brother, it was your Yankee side that that wanted to break people?

Has it occurred to you that you're an apologist for something vile? And I don't know what you think you mean by "Yankee side".

 

[rainee]

I wrote: The battle flag of that nation doesn't belong on a flag pole any more than a swastika does.

Why not answer with "Blue". It has the same degree of rational connection to my point.

I'm sorry you think that. Hopefully you were just trying to win a point and really can see how ridiculous the idea is to try to compare the flying Confederate Flag to the carrying of the Nazi Swastika.

It is like saying the Nazis would have the Jewish Synagogue downtown since they lost and they held it in high regard and pride and affection.


It would ALSO be like saying Northerners STILL want to use and abuse the poor and children in factories and on railroads since they did that when the South had slavery.

(Do we really have to keep doing the "oh I forgot what hypocrites the Northerners can be"? Just because you weren't taught it in school doesn't mean you are excused from not putting two and two together, and even if you think you are helping by leading with your popular smooth oh so simple limited theme, sooner or later this was going to show its self you know.)
Bbl8ter

Not so strangely you miss the actual parallel, of two peoples battling to advance an evil. In the case of the South that would be pushing slavery into new territories while preserving the right to own, rape, mutilate, buy and sell people where they were already about the business of it. And I suppose the Nazis would have seen an attempt to end their planned genocide as oppressive.


Has it occurred to you that you're an apologist for something vile? And I don't know what you think you mean by "Yankee side".

 

[Town Heretic]

I'm sorry you think that.

I'm a rationalist.

Hopefully you were just trying to win a point and really can see how ridiculous the idea is to try to compare the flying Confederate Flag to the carrying of the Nazi Swastika.

Two nations supporting, at their core, an great human evil. Both peoples otherwise contributing great art and literature to their nation and to the political and scientific worlds as well. Yeah, it's a real stretch.

It is like saying the Nazis would have the Jewish Synagogue downtown since they lost and they held it in high regard and pride and affection.

Well, no. What your speaking for is like suggesting descendants of those sons of Germany want to fly a Nazi battle flag to honor their dead.

It would ALSO be like saying Northerners STILL want to use and abuse the poor and children in factories and on railroads since they did that when the South had slavery.

See, the problem is you want to mention child labor abuses but you don't have a connective tissue to this point, about the flag, so you do whatever that was...but it doesn't have anything to do with the Confederate Battle flag. Have abuses and social ills been sanctioned or protected by the Union? Sure. And the alleviation of those ills as well.

We're a nation. We get to have a flag. And that flag represents the aspiration of a people still struggling to flesh out the principles it was founded upon. That's how ahead of the curve those often horrifically flawed founding fathers were in their vision. The Confederacy is dead. What it fought for died with it. Keep the flag in history books, keep the monuments for as much a cautionary tale as anything else and retire that symbol of human misery and denigration in relation to any semblance of government.

I've noted the molasses to rum to slaves hypocrisy of much of the northern power structure, the blind eye reliance on the agriculture of the South, spoken of the child labor ills and exploitation of the immigrant by our northern cousins, of the Native Americans and their mistreatment, the discrimination against those freed by proclamation and against women.

None of that helps those wanting to hoist or honor the obscenity of that Confederate battle flag. A flag that flew over the holdings of my family to a large extent and which was fought for by a cousin of mine you've doubtless heard about. Leave it to history.

 

[rainee]

...
Not so strangely you miss the actual parallel, of two peoples battling to advance an evil. In the case of the South that would be pushing slavery into new territories...

Strangely, the government of the United States was giving slave status to territories becoming states at the same time some very rich soil territories (that would have the Railroad going through them) no slave status. Some how cleverness or something worse is being misunderstood as purity of morality to non slave status.
.

...
while preserving the right to own, rape, mutilate, buy and sell people where they were already about the business of it. .

Are you saying there were no good or kind slave owners? Or that all business men were good since some did control people without owning them?

Is this your way of saying businessmen
could abuse and use people working on the railroad, or
Force young women to have sex to have a room to rent or have a job, or demand
long hours of work from the poor immigrants or their children - and all this was ok?

And I suppose the Nazis would have seen an attempt to end their planned genocide as oppressive. .

Are you comparing them and their planned genocide to immoral business men we know have existed or farmers when you say this??
Who is it who tied up the girl and put her on the railroad track in the cartoon? Please don't be naive.

.

Has it occurred to you that you're an apologist for something vile? And I don't know what you think you mean by "Yankee side".

I am not for anything vile.
I am not for slavery. But
I am not as bamboozled as I think you are, sorry to say.

I thought you said you're from both sides?

 

[Town Heretic]

Strangely, the government of the United States was giving slave status to...

Which has nothing to do with any argument for the flag and ignores the Amendment that ended the discussion altogether.

Are you saying there were no good or kind slave owners?

How does that begin to excuse the practice, the norm or any celebration related to it?

Is this your way of saying businessmen could abuse and use people working on the railroad, or Force young women to have sex to have a room to rent or have a job, or demand long hours of work from the poor immigrants or their children - and all this was ok?

Well of course. I mean it just follows, doesn't it, that objecting to the dehumanization of a people necessarily means you support it for another group. [/sarcasm]

Stop throwing sand into the air in hopes it will obscure the point. I've addressed the failings of north and South. It doesn't change the argument or excuse the use of that shameful rag.

Are you comparing them and their planned genocide to immoral business men we know have existed or farmers when you say this?? Who is it who tied up the girl and put her on the railroad track in the cartoon? Please don't be naive.

Read the remark in context and as answer. It isn't remotely unclear whom I'm speaking to.

I am not for anything vile. I am not for slavery. But I am not as bamboozled as I think you are, sorry to say.

You're shilling for a flag that represents one of the worst moral lapses in our national history and you don't think you're bamboozled?

It would be funny were it not so tragic.

I thought you said you're from both sides?

No. I said we had family members on both sides of the conflict. We also have been in the South for as long as there's been a South to speak of on my mother's side.

 

[rainee]

I'm a rationalist.


Two nations supporting, at their core, an great human evil. Both peoples otherwise contributing great art and literature to their nation and to the political and scientific worlds as well. Yeah, it's a real stretch.

The two nations were Germany and the United States? Or are you skipping over the slavery that was done away with up north?
.

Well, no. What your speaking for is like suggesting descendants of those sons of Germany want to fly a Nazi battle flag to honor their dead.
.

Nazis had a nazi battle flag? You know I'm afraid you're going to offend Germans now as well as people like me if you keep working this angle by shooting from the hip...
.

See, the problem is you want to mention child labor abuses but you don't have a connective tissue to this point, about the flag, so you do whatever that was...but it doesn't have anything to do with the Confederate Battle flag. .

The Confederate Flag was the Red White and Blue reminder of the Articles of Confederation which was the First Constitution of the original 13 Colonies/States. The only thing that could connect to that would be our current flag and current constitution...so you're right nothing else can compare to it.i


.

Have abuses and social ills been sanctioned or protected by the Union? Sure. And the alleviation of those ills as well. .

Ok good we agree and are at peace then. Give acknowledgment please to the South to have this same changeability, please.
.

We're a nation. We get to have a flag. And that flag represents the aspiration of a people still struggling to flesh out the principles it was founded upon. .

Wow well said.
.

That's how ahead of the curve those often horrifically flawed founding fathers were in their vision. .

Hmm...

.

The Confederacy is dead. What it fought for died with it. .

The South is not dead. It's identity, however, was marked when every one who had slaves stopped and then told the South it had to be evil to still have them. It was told it was too rich because it had slaves, and too evil, and too aggravating.
The Confederacy was a measure of time in the life of the South.
Gotta go
Bbl8ter

.

Keep the flag in history books, keep the monuments for as much a cautionary tale as anything else and retire that symbol of human misery and denigration in relation to any semblance of government.

I've noted the molasses to rum to slaves hypocrisy of much of the northern power structure, the blind eye reliance on the agriculture of the South, spoken of the child labor ills and exploitation of the immigrant by our northern cousins, of the Native Americans and their mistreatment, the discrimination against those freed by proclamation and against women.

None of that helps those wanting to hoist or honor the obscenity of that Confederate battle flag. A flag that flew over the holdings of my family to a large extent and which was fought for by a cousin of mine you've doubtless heard about. Leave it to history.

 

[rainee]

I've said what I can. I can only ask what do the TOLers think?
If there were a poll where they could vote anonymously would they agree with you, that the Confederate flag is a rag to be gotten rid of?
Or would they hold it as a right to have state flags and a flag of the Confederacy as part of their past - a part of what they have gone through - and therefore a part of their identity?

 

[bybee]

I've said what I can. I can only ask what do the TOLers think?
If there were a poll where they could vote anonymously would they agree with you, that the Confederate flag is a rag to be gotten rid of?
Or would they hold it as a right to have state flags and a flag of the Confederacy as part of their past - a part of what they have gone through - and therefore a part of their identity?

Well Rainee, I am a Yankee, guilty of "Minnesota Nice"! So I come from a different perspective. I am very respectful of other peoples meaningful symbols. For instance, whilst I am mistrustful of the motivation of many Muslims, still, I would not ever desecrate their holy book.
We have Native American Nations here who have been relatively silent on the controversy over a professional sports team being called "The Redskins". Some have called for it to be changed but they haven't raised any serious ruckus about it.
However, I would say that some things are so offensive to so many people that we ought to consider, in the interest of goodwill to each other, amending our behavior?
The problem is that where is the amending to stop? Are we to just sit in our corners, not speaking, not moving so as to avoid offending each other?
We have lost our rights to negotiate in good faith with each other because our government has taken over ruling all aspects of our societal behavior.
This stinks, in my opinion!

 

[Town Heretic]

The two nations were Germany and the United States? Or are you skipping over the slavery that was done away with up north?

We were speaking about a parallel between Germany and the South. You didn't see it. I'm suggesting you might want to open your eyes.

Nazis had a nazi battle flag?

They did. It had a swastika on it.

You know I'm afraid you're going to offend Germans now as well as people like me if you keep working this angle by shooting from the hip...

I'm not worried about offending Nazis or Nazi sympathizers any more than I worry about bruising the feelings of the Klan.

As for your shooting from the hip, no. I'm arguing from a knowledge of history. If you don't know that history you might want to at least go to Google and type in WWII German Battleflag. It was designed by Hitler.

The Confederate Flag was the Red White and Blue reminder of the Articles of Confederation which was the First Constitution of the original 13 Colonies/States.

You're thinking of the original flag, not the Confederate battle flag. The original flag of the confederacy was a very different looking animal. Here's what one looks like.

The flag being objected to is the Confederate War flag, one that was by and large relegated to museums and family chests until the Civil Rights movement was under way. It was popular among racists in my part of the country and stood for the ol "They told us what to do with our coloreds then but we're not going to let them tell us now" nonsense. We'd done our level best to deny blacks everything but literal freedom in the South.

The original stars and bars wasn't well received and this response encapsulates the feeling: William T. Thompson, the editor of the Savannah-based Daily Morning News called for another and said, in 1863 that he opposed it, like others, "on account of its resemblance to that of the abolition despotism against which we are fighting."

Ok good we agree and are at peace then. Give acknowledgment please to the South to have this same changeability, please.

That time and circumstance would have ended the practice at some point? Okay, it's a strong possibility that in a few generations it would have been significantly blunted and even ended by the South for any number of reasons thereabouts or thereafter. But that doesn't impact or affect the point in opposition to flying the battle flag of an enemy nation born in support of the slave trade over capital domes, state or other.

The South is not dead.

The Confederacy is. Stay on point.

It's identity, however, was marked when every one who had slaves stopped and then told the South it had to be evil to still have them.

Most of the north was actually composed of free states. And it was that drive that moved the Southern power brokers into a desperate gamble that failed, bringing an end to slavery sooner than even those in the north had envisioned.

It was told it was too rich because it had slaves, and too evil, and too aggravating.

No, it was told "This far and no further." It was given to understand that its presence in the territories would be denied it, at the very least by the use of popular sovereignty and a numbers game the South wasn't in a position to win. And that loss of territory and the states that would arise because of it, free, would signal the power shift that would end the economic practice and reality for the South.

The Confederacy was a measure of time in the life of the South.

Predicated and existing to serve an evil institution. Regarding the war flags of that effort, raised like Lazarus to protest integration and the fear of real equality for blacks before the law here, with anything other than contempt is compounding the mistakes of our forefathers.

 

[fzappa13]

Not to annoy or butt in but, as symbolism, the Stars and Bars is Masonic ... as is so much of America's iconic symbolism.