Confederate Flag vs. Ground Zero Mosque?

[manifold]

Once again for those ignorant of history...


The southern states seceded before Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

Chronology matters

This may very well the most retarded talking point you parrot.

It doesn't matter when the EP was signed or even dreamed up.

The Southern states saw the writing on the wall.

You're entitled to your opinion.

My point is still fact. Whether or not you consider it pertinant is up to you, but it's still a fact chumley.

 

[boedicca]

Wow.

This thread is a veritable petri dish of moonbat moral relativism.

 

[manifold]

Wow.

This thread is a veritable petri dish of moonbat moral relativism.

...while at the same time condemning moral relativism.

But then again hypocrisy is the hallmark of all moonbats.

 

[Ravi]

Once again for those ignorant of history...


The southern states seceded before Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

Chronology matters

This may very well the most retarded talking point you parrot.

It doesn't matter when the EP was signed or even dreamed up.

The Southern states saw the writing on the wall.

You're entitled to your opinion.

My point is still fact. Whether or not you consider it pertinant is up to you, but it's still a fact chumley.

There was a month in 1864 called December. Fact.

And just as immaterial to the discussion as your fact.

 

[jillian]

Once again for those ignorant of history...


The southern states seceded before Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

Chronology matters

not so much. they already knew the days of slavery were numbered.

and just to respond to the o/p without getting bogged down in the pages and pages of posts here, it's not that complicated a question.

a mosque overlooking ground zero, which i might view as insensitive (and i do view it as insensitive) is protected by the 1st amendment. and the vast majority of people who lost their minds over it would have a nervous breakdown if anyone tried to ban a church for any reason.

the confederate flag over a statehouse is an entirely different issue. it is representative of a traitorous movement and anyone who says any different is deluding themselves. it is also offensive to people because it does raise the spector of slavery, whether it should or shouldn't. now, that flag is certainly protected by the free speech provisions of the 1st amendment when it is a private thing. but i don't believe that such provisions should allow a governmental entity, with taxpayer dollars, to fly that flag.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Manifold you sure got your money's worth out of this thread.


This thread is shameful for both sides of the political spectrum.

 

[manifold]

This may very well the most retarded talking point you parrot.

It doesn't matter when the EP was signed or even dreamed up.

The Southern states saw the writing on the wall.

You're entitled to your opinion.

My point is still fact. Whether or not you consider it pertinant is up to you, but it's still a fact chumley.

There was a month in 1864 called December. Fact.

And just as immaterial to the discussion as your fact.

If the chronology of events matters, and it almost always does, then something happening in December 1864 rather than say, July 1864 could be very material. You'd need to provide context before dismissing the events of December 1864 as immaterial.

But you are certainly entitled to ignore facts that challenge your pre-supplied opinion in order to make your always biased case. Just know that I've learned not to have my opinion influenced by your biasly constructed cases that seem to always begin with the desired conclusion.

True story

 

[Sheldon]

and just to respond to the o/p without getting bogged down in the pages and pages of posts here, it's not that complicated a question.

Probably 300 of the posts are about the why's of the South's secession.

 

[manifold]

and just to respond to the o/p without getting bogged down in the pages and pages of posts here, it's not that complicated a question.

Probably 300 of the posts are about the why's of the South's secession.

It is riddled with nuance.

 

[Sheldon]

Well from my view it was me typing the same thing in about five different ways, bigred posting links that didn't support his conclusions, and you and Ravi squabbling over how facty something from history is.

 

[manifold]

You're entitled to your opinion.

My point is still fact. Whether or not you consider it pertinant is up to you, but it's still a fact chumley.

There was a month in 1864 called December. Fact.

And just as immaterial to the discussion as your fact.

If the chronology of events matters, and it almost always does, then something happening in December 1864 rather than say, July 1864 could be very material. You'd need to provide context before dismissing the events of December 1864 as immaterial.

But you are certainly entitled to ignore facts that challenge your pre-supplied opinion in order to make your always biased case. Just know that I've learned not to have my opinion influenced by your biasly constructed cases that seem to always begin with the desired conclusion.

True story

 

[manifold]

All you have to do is read the first page to know that kgrill is definitely NOT Allie.

 

[xotoxi]

Bumping your outdated threads again?

 

[rdean]

I've heard people decry the Confederate flag flying on statehouse grounds in SC, saying that it is insensitive.

I've also heard people decry the would be Ground Zero mosque, also saying it is insensitive.

Not surprisingly, there is very little overlap among the two groups doing the decrying.


What I'd like to have explained, by anyone taking any side, is why one is indeed insensitive while the other is not.


note: Thread inspired by Ravi's self-pwnage in another thread.

Making Republicans take down their flag is insensitive.

 

[manifold]

Bumping your outdated threads again?

That's just how I (T)roll.

But whatcha gonna do?

 

[bodecea]

I've heard people decry the Confederate flag flying on statehouse grounds in SC, saying that it is insensitive.

I've also heard people decry the would be Ground Zero mosque, also saying it is insensitive.

Not surprisingly, there is very little overlap among the two groups doing the decrying.


What I'd like to have explained, by anyone taking any side, is why one is indeed insensitive while the other is not.


note: Thread inspired by Ravi's self-pwnage in another thread.

government vs. private.


Next question?

 

[Againsheila]

I've heard people decry the Confederate flag flying on statehouse grounds in SC, saying that it is insensitive.

I've also heard people decry the would be Ground Zero mosque, also saying it is insensitive.

Not surprisingly, there is very little overlap among the two groups doing the decrying.


What I'd like to have explained, by anyone taking any side, is why one is indeed insensitive while the other is not.


note: Thread inspired by Ravi's self-pwnage in another thread.

2 reasons against the ground zero mosque. 1) they tore town an historical building, one that had been on the underground railroad. 2) they got their permit to build while the church that was destroyed at ground zero on 9/11/01 still has no permit to build.

As for the confederate flag...the reason people seem to think it's insensitive is that some think it stands for slavery when the union flag flew over slavery many years more than the confederate flag. In fact, the slaves in the north (and there were 4 slaveholding states that remained with the north, giving the lie to the idea the war was about slavery) were not freed until AFTER the civil war and long after the Emancipation Proclamation.

 

[manifold]

I've heard people decry the Confederate flag flying on statehouse grounds in SC, saying that it is insensitive.

I've also heard people decry the would be Ground Zero mosque, also saying it is insensitive.

Not surprisingly, there is very little overlap among the two groups doing the decrying.


What I'd like to have explained, by anyone taking any side, is why one is indeed insensitive while the other is not.


note: Thread inspired by Ravi's self-pwnage in another thread.

government vs. private.


Next question?

Fail

'Legality' isn't part of the discussion. The question is why is one insensitive and the other isn't.

Please, by all means, try again.