Abrams calls for removal of Confederate faces off Stone Mountain

[Sea of red]

I personally don't think people that lead war against the federal government should be celebrated.

[Sea of red]

One of my cousins said that she has always been a democrat and her dad too, and this time they both voted for Trump because the democrats have gone nuts with all this nonsense and violence.

Funny, my parents are lifelong republicans and they are ready to vote democrat for the first in their entire lives in the mid terms, just because of the inanity of Trump and the GOP congress.

[JimL]

Statues can represent lots of things Jimmy. Some of those statues were built as a memorial to those who died or for peace. You should really try reading dedication plaques on statues sometime. Likewise, many of my ancestors were Irish, Italian, and American Indians and we know how poorly these groups were treated. How should I feel about their treatment? Nothing because those events happened to them and not me. Same is true for the descendents of slaves. It was your ancestors who were locked into slavery, not you. So remember the past, make sure those events don't repeat, and stop trying to benefit from the suffering of your ancestors.

I'm not a black person you idiot.

[lilpixieofterror]

I'm not a black person you idiot.

Never said you were and good job missing the point. I don't feel anything about what happened to my ancestors because it is irrelevant to my living situation today. I have a hard time getting emotionally invested in events that happened over 100 years before my birth. Can you explain why I should be upset about them, even when some of my ancestors were the victims of racism and even outright slaughter?

[ke7ejx]

Never said you were and good job missing the point. I don't feel anything about what happened to my ancestors because it is irrelevant to my living situation today. I have a hard time getting emotionally invested in events that happened over 100 years before my birth. Can you explain why I should be upset about them, even when some of my ancestors were the victims of racism and even outright slaughter?

Irish?

[lilpixieofterror]

Irish?

There's plenty of historical job ads and pictures in which Irish were told not to apply. Modern ideas of race are different than ones from the 19th and even early 20th century. Several groups were subjected to what could be considered racism. Irish, Italians, Polish, Jews, Chinese, or Japanese are just a few immigrants that experienced some pretty harsh racism. My point is being upset about things that happened generations before you were born is rather silly. Plus, few people would hold up to progressive views on piety. If we want to tear down statues to racist let's tear down ones to progressive heros too, since many of them were pretty racist.

[ke7ejx]

There's plenty of historical job ads and pictures in which Irish were told not to apply. Modern ideas of race are different than ones from the 19th and even early 20th century. Several groups were subjected to what could be considered racism. Irish, Italians, Polish, Jews, Chinese, or Japanese are just a few immigrants that experienced some pretty harsh racism. My point is being upset about things that happened generations before you were born is rather silly. Plus, few people would hold up to progressive views on piety. If we want to tear down statues to racist let's tear down ones to progressive heros too, since many of them were pretty racist.

Sweetheart, I'm asking because I'm fifth-generation Irish-American. My anscestors were both enslaved by the British Empire and by the States when they showed up just as the Civil War was heating up. Please calm your hackles.

[lilpixieofterror]

Sweetheart, I'm asking because I'm fifth-generation Irish-American. My anscestors were both enslaved by the British Empire and by the States when they showed up just as the Civil War was heating up. Please calm your hackles.

I'm not angry at all or at you in any way and just presenting the evidence and the logical issues with the whole 'tear them down' crowd and their poorly thought out justifications. Pretty much every major historical figure had some sort of issue with modern sensibilities of racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamphobia, or several of these. I'm no confederate (most of my ancestors were Northerners, westerners, or still living in Europe), but I don't care for tearing down historical sites and statues merely because not all of them are perfect saints. About everyone can claim some of their ancestors were treated poorly by someone else's. They need to get over it and move on already.

[Tassman]

Jim, Jim, Jim.

They have never been rallying points UNTIL the left made a big deal about tearing them down. Neither the left nor the right paid any attention to them until then. And the KKK is not the alt-right nor the basket of deplorables, you racist commie.

[Rushing Jaws]

Not like anyone was worshiping them. They had long since passed from pagan religious icons to works of art much like relics from pharaonic Egypt aren't seriously regarded as pagan icons.

From a Muslim POV, they are totally illegitimate. From that POV, it is the fact of the statue that is offensive, not how people use it. So colossi of the Pharaohs, idols, images in churches, icons, and secular statues are all haram, and would all be subject to destruction. After all, a not-yet Muslim USA is in the same position as pre-Islamic Arabia: it is living in the "Time of Ignorance". A USA under the rule of Allah OTOH would have to be statue-free.

Muslims and Fundamentalists use the same logic: a statue is a graven image, and therefore wrong, regardless of the intentions of the people among whom it is found. The Lincoln Monument is as hateful to the Muslim God as a statue of a Saint in or near a Catholic Church is to the Fundamentalist God. The iconoclasm of 4th-century Christians, of 12th-century Cathars & Paulicians, of 16th-century Protestants, and of Muslims since their beginning, is essentially the same attitude - the evil is in the fact of the image's existence; not, or not only, in its use, whatever that may be (the Iconoclasts in the Byzantine Empire between 726 & 843 were selective in their iconoclasm - they were not against all images). So the image itself must go. Where there is a theology that assigns the making of the image to a time or place of spiritual darkness - as in the theologies of Reformation Protestantism, or of Islam - there is a further motive to destroy the images.

This last consideration would help to explain why modern Protestants accept the God of Luther & Calvin, and yet have no qualms about making statues that honour Luther and Calvin: it seems to be assumed that statuary made by own's group is legitimate. It seems impossible to deny that a large part of Protestantism has lost its iconoclastic fervour, and it would be very instructive to trace how and why this has come about. Engravings in books were never a problem, whether for depicting the sufferings of Protestant martyrs, the busts of Protestant teachers, or illustrations in commentaries - the sticking-point seems to be the use of images in the round, as found in Catholic churches. Protestants allowed imagery - Muslims allow only image-free representations, such as the (often very beautiful) calligraphic designs that incorporate the title of the Koran, or the name of its God.

Fundamentalist Protestants - those of them who are exercised about this issue - seem to have a variety of positions: the one universal seems to be a rejection of images in the round - but even that seems to be inconsistently applied, since they often quote Exodus 20.4 against Catholic use of images in the round, but seem to have no objection to public statues in the round. Since statues of Saints and of the Founding Fathers are equally "graven", are equally not taken for objects of worship, and have the same potential for usurping what is due to God alone, it is not clear why Fundamentalists spend a deal of energy rebuking the Catholic use of images in the round, but have no quarrel with Mt. Rushmore.

[rogue06]

There's plenty of historical job ads and pictures in which Irish were told not to apply. Modern ideas of race are different than ones from the 19th and even early 20th century. Several groups were subjected to what could be considered racism. Irish, Italians, Polish, Jews, Chinese, or Japanese are just a few immigrants that experienced some pretty harsh racism. My point is being upset about things that happened generations before you were born is rather silly. Plus, few people would hold up to progressive views on piety. If we want to tear down statues to racist let's tear down ones to progressive heros too, since many of them were pretty racist.

Several years back there was a show on PBS about the Irish immigrating to the U.S. In one part they mentioned that during the building of a canal near Washington D.C. that slave owners refused to let their slaves be used since it was extremely dangerous work and they were valuable property. So instead they hired Irish workers saying that nobody cared if they got killed or maimed.

[JimL]

Statues can represent lots of things Jimmy. Some of those statues were built as a memorial to those who died or for peace. You should really try reading dedication plaques on statues sometime.

A statue of R.E. Lee or Nathan Bedford Forest, first grand wizard of the KKK, are not memorials to those who died, they are memorials to racist men who revolted against their country in order to maintain the institution of slavery.

Likewise, many of my ancestors were Irish, Italian, and American Indians and we know how poorly these groups were treated. How should I feel about their treatment? Nothing because those events happened to them and not me. Same is true for the descendents of slaves. It was your ancestors who were locked into slavery, not you. So remember the past, make sure those events don't repeat, and stop trying to benefit from the suffering of your ancestors.

False equivalency Lilpix, the Irish were not brought over here in chains and forced into slavery. Many of the slave owners were themselves Irish. Ever see "Gone with the Wind?"

[Bill the Cat]

A statue of R.E. Lee or Nathan Bedford Forest, first grand wizard of the KKK, are not memorials to those who died, they are memorials to racist men who revolted against their country in order to maintain the institution of slavery.

False equivalency Lilpix, the Irish were not brought over here in chains and forced into slavery. Many of the slave owners were themselves Irish. Ever see "Gone with the Wind?"

You need to educate yourself Jimmy. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-299434

[JimL]

Who commisioned, designed or completed the monuments is irrelevant. Even the monument you cited was made some 60 years after the war. But as I said the great majority of the memorials were made in the Jim Crow era on into the 1960's in response to the civil rights movement.

You need to educate yourself Jimmy. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-299434

Why are you bringing up other countries, we're talking about the history of this country and the evils committed by men who you think should be honored for their treasonous support of those evils. Over 600,00 americans died due to that treasonous war over slavery. Like the Confederate flag itself, there is nothing to honor about these men or what they fought for.

[lilpixieofterror]

A statue of R.E. Lee or Nathan Bedford Forest, first grand wizard of the KKK, are not memorials to those who died, they are memorials to racist men who revolted against their country in order to maintain the institution of slavery.

Lee set his slaves free a decade before the civil war and you'll discover statues and monuments all over the country of questionable people. Welcome to history, where not everyone is a saint or devil.

False equivalency Lilpix, the Irish were not brought over here in chains and forced into slavery. Many of the slave owners were themselves Irish. Ever see "Gone with the Wind?"

Nah instead they were paid slave wages, forced to live in slums, had laws passed that kept them under thumb, and were hired to do jobs too dangerous for valuable slaves to do. Yep, they had it so wonderful and amazing. It would also depend on when you arrived too. I'm related to a revolutionary war captain, who was descended from Irish that arrived in the 17th century. He had it pretty decent, but most Irish arrived in the 19th century and didn't have it so good.

BTW Gone With the Wind is Hollywood fiction Jimmy. Try reading or watching non Hollywood fiction. Some slaves had it good and others bad. The world isn't as black/white as you want it to be. Blacks were not the only slaves nor the only ones that had it bad.