Why so much hate for the Confederacy.? It can't be about slavery.

[Syriusly]

Nonsense. Your entire premise is false. As the seizure and control of an enemy's territory doesn't happen complete and in total from one day to the next. It happens incrementally.

And any territory that the Union seized resulted in freed slaves. As an added bonus, many slaves fled to the North after the Proclamation. Virginia for example lost 60% of its adult male slaves by 1865. With those pieces of Confederate territory that remained behind Union lines for most of the war having losses in excess of 70%.

What the fuck are you rattling on about? The map posted showing the status of slaves when the EP was issued is not happening incrementally. The blue areas are areas which were under Union control at the time EP became effective. Slaves there were NOT freed because it would have been unconstitutional. The government CANNOT seize property without due process.

Any territory seized by the Union resulted in CONFISCATED slaves who became property of the US Army for the duration of the war. They were NOT freed!

Yes... MANY slaves, in the chaos of war, managed to escape and flee North where they gained their freedom. That's a far cry from being liberated by the EP.

Again... for the not-so-bright... He could not Constitutionally free slaves belonging to legitimate law-abiding American citizens.

Sure he could. The Confiscation Acts, specifically those of 1862 allowed for the seizure of any slave contributing to the war effort. Which it defined as any slave in the Confederacy. The US government took possession of the slaves. And as the owners of said slaves had every authority to free them.

As remember, the Confederates weren't 'law abiding American citizens'. But criminals in rebellion waging war against their government. And as such any property they owned that contributed to that insurrection was forfeit.

Again.... for the millionth time... the Confiscation Acts were military actions approved by Congress. [...allowed for the seizure of any slave contributing to the war effort.] Slaves were NOT freed, hence the name, CONFISCATION Act. They were impressed by the Union Army and used to dig trenches and graves, dispose of corpses and amputated limbs, etc. Thousands upon thousands DIED under the "care" of the Union Army.
.

As pointed out before- and ignored by you- the Confiscation Act preceded the Emancipation Proclamation- and provided the legal framework for the freeing of the slaves.

The Confiscation Acts provided for the seizure of slaves to prevent their use by the Rebel states(and by the way- thousands died under the 'care' of the Confederacy also)

The Emancipation Proclamation freed those slaves who were confiscated.

“That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, (January 1, 1863) all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.

“That the Executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by proclamation, designate the States and parts of States, if any, in which the people thereof, respectively, shall then be in rebellion against the United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof, shall on that day be, in good faith, represented in the Congress of the United States by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the qualified voters of such State shall have participated, shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive evidence that such State, and the people thereof, are not then in rebellion against the United States.”

Now, therefore I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-in-Chief, of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed rebellion against authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days, from the day first above mentioned, order and designate as the States and parts of States wherein the people thereof respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, the following, to wit:

And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons.

Doesn't get much clearer than that- and of course- the result was that immediately tens of thousands of slaves were legally free, and millions more were freed as Federal troops liberated rebel held territories.

 

[Boss]

Racists and revisionists like you of course hate the Emancipation Proclamation- you still yearn for the 'good old days'

To be completely honest, I am very thankful for the emancipation of the slaves when it happened. That didn't come, however, until ratification of the 13th Amendment.

The reason I am so grateful is, I wouldn't be here right now if slavery had continued. I would have never been born because my father would have died during the Great Depression. You see, my Grandmother who is Cherokee and Black Dutch, was a widow with 8 children. Actually, 7... one of them died at age 5 from appendicitis.

She survived the GD by the skin of her teeth because she worked her ass off in a cotton field all day (as did her kids), went home and cooked dinner, sometimes for a group of black field hands who she worked along-side that day. They all worked in the fields of a black sharecropper who was the son of a former freed slave. He had 40 acres of cotton every year, and hired/paid people to tend it. I can't remember what ridiculously low amount of pay she received but it was hardly a "living wage."

But you see, if slavery had continued... The 40 acres would still belong to a big plantation owner and my grandmother would have had no job. Plantations would sometimes hire outside helpers... but not generally widows with 7 kids. My father was sort of a 'sickly' child, he would have been the first to go.

 

[Skylar]

Pretty good read. It covers Lincoln's EP and his rationale.

The Emancipation Proclamation Abraham Lincoln s Constitutionally Modest Proposal - Online Library of Law Liberty

[excerpt]
Lincoln himself, however, asserted that the states could not leave the Union, and if he were to remain consistent to that argument, he was still faced with the problem that he had no Constitutional authority to interfere with slavery in the states where it existed. Lincoln found a solution to that problem in the commander-in-chief power granted to him by the Constitution. Although Lincoln accepted the proposition that the Constitution contained at least implicit protections for southern slavery, he now argued that there was another constitutional provision that pushed him in the opposite direction. If emancipation was necessary for military success against those in rebellion, than it would be his duty to pursue it as commander-in-chief.

Which was MY argument.

Again, the Confiscation Acts of 1862 were a legislative act. And it was this act that empowered the president to confiscate and free slaves. Additionally, the US wasn't at war at the time Lincoln made his statement about constitutional authority. Once at war, he can take executive action against anyone offering aid to the enemy or contributing to the war effort.

 

[Boss]

I'm going to attempt to ask you again and then I am giving up... HOW do you free something that you don't have in your possession to free?

Already answered.

Once again- the areas in red were the areas where humans (not things) were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- despite the revisionist history that some are trying to create-

The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves that were under Union protection at the time- and freed the slaves held by the rebels as the Union troops put down the rebellion.

No... You can't free something you don't have in your possession to free.... sorry.... can't be done.
...

Yet he did. Lincoln also signed the law in 1862 that gave freedom to all the slaves in D.C.

All the areas your map shows where slaves were freed is CSA territory which was not under Lincoln's control until the CSA was defeated.

It was Union territory all the time.
And the Union controlled those areas defeated by force of arms.

And yes, the slaves were freed.

Answer my question now... Why did Lincoln not free the slaves held in West Virginia?

Part of the deal with being allowed into the Union as a new state was on the condition West Virginia emancipate their slaves.

You are clueless on the Constitution and history. I seriously doubt there were many slaves in D.C. but it's not a state so there is the statutory difference. The president could abolish slavery in DC, just as many other states had done... any state could have voted to abolish slavery and be a free state. If they did and you wanted to have and keep slaves, you'd have to take them elsewhere.

No... the slaves WEREN'T freed... and we can keep repeating these lines to each other like 7-year-olds if you like, you're not going to bully me. Because Lincoln issued a piece of paper that said slaves in the South were free, did not mean the slave owners in the South rushed out to unchain their slaves! If that's what you think... you must be about 7 years old..

Hmmm yes- I can keep repeating the facts- and you of course can keep trying to ignore the facts- because that is what you Confederate Revisionists do.

• As I have pointed out- slaves were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation in specific regions held by Federal troops.
  
• As I have pointed out- the majority of slaves were freed from legal slavery as Federal troops liberated rebel territories.
• And slaves escaping their slave masters were immediately freed once they escaped to any territory held by Federal troops.

Millions of slaves were eventually freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- an amazing accomplishment from one single act.

Reciting bullet points you've been taught by your United States textbooks is not impressing me. NO ONE was freed by the EP! It took the 13th Amendment to end Slavery in America.... that IS a FACT!

 

[Asclepias]

Already answered.

Once again- the areas in red were the areas where humans (not things) were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- despite the revisionist history that some are trying to create-

The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves that were under Union protection at the time- and freed the slaves held by the rebels as the Union troops put down the rebellion.

No... You can't free something you don't have in your possession to free.... sorry.... can't be done.
...

Yet he did. Lincoln also signed the law in 1862 that gave freedom to all the slaves in D.C.

All the areas your map shows where slaves were freed is CSA territory which was not under Lincoln's control until the CSA was defeated.

It was Union territory all the time.
And the Union controlled those areas defeated by force of arms.

And yes, the slaves were freed.

Answer my question now... Why did Lincoln not free the slaves held in West Virginia?

Part of the deal with being allowed into the Union as a new state was on the condition West Virginia emancipate their slaves.

You are clueless on the Constitution and history. I seriously doubt there were many slaves in D.C. but it's not a state so there is the statutory difference. The president could abolish slavery in DC, just as many other states had done... any state could have voted to abolish slavery and be a free state. If they did and you wanted to have and keep slaves, you'd have to take them elsewhere.

No... the slaves WEREN'T freed... and we can keep repeating these lines to each other like 7-year-olds if you like, you're not going to bully me. Because Lincoln issued a piece of paper that said slaves in the South were free, did not mean the slave owners in the South rushed out to unchain their slaves! If that's what you think... you must be about 7 years old..

Hmmm yes- I can keep repeating the facts- and you of course can keep trying to ignore the facts- because that is what you Confederate Revisionists do.

• As I have pointed out- slaves were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation in specific regions held by Federal troops.
  
• As I have pointed out- the majority of slaves were freed from legal slavery as Federal troops liberated rebel territories.
• And slaves escaping their slave masters were immediately freed once they escaped to any territory held by Federal troops.

Millions of slaves were eventually freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- an amazing accomplishment from one single act.

Reciting bullet points you've been taught by your United States textbooks is not impressing me. NO ONE was freed by the EP! It took the 13th Amendment to end Slavery in America.... that IS a FACT!

Wrong.

The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free."

Slavery is still legal. Read the 13th amendment you just used as proof.

 

[Skylar]

Already answered.

Once again- the areas in red were the areas where humans (not things) were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- despite the revisionist history that some are trying to create-

The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves that were under Union protection at the time- and freed the slaves held by the rebels as the Union troops put down the rebellion.

No... You can't free something you don't have in your possession to free.... sorry.... can't be done.
...

Yet he did. Lincoln also signed the law in 1862 that gave freedom to all the slaves in D.C.

All the areas your map shows where slaves were freed is CSA territory which was not under Lincoln's control until the CSA was defeated.

It was Union territory all the time.
And the Union controlled those areas defeated by force of arms.

And yes, the slaves were freed.

Answer my question now... Why did Lincoln not free the slaves held in West Virginia?

Part of the deal with being allowed into the Union as a new state was on the condition West Virginia emancipate their slaves.

You are clueless on the Constitution and history. I seriously doubt there were many slaves in D.C. but it's not a state so there is the statutory difference. The president could abolish slavery in DC, just as many other states had done... any state could have voted to abolish slavery and be a free state. If they did and you wanted to have and keep slaves, you'd have to take them elsewhere.

No... the slaves WEREN'T freed... and we can keep repeating these lines to each other like 7-year-olds if you like, you're not going to bully me. Because Lincoln issued a piece of paper that said slaves in the South were free, did not mean the slave owners in the South rushed out to unchain their slaves! If that's what you think... you must be about 7 years old..

Hmmm yes- I can keep repeating the facts- and you of course can keep trying to ignore the facts- because that is what you Confederate Revisionists do.

• As I have pointed out- slaves were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation in specific regions held by Federal troops.
  
• As I have pointed out- the majority of slaves were freed from legal slavery as Federal troops liberated rebel territories.
• And slaves escaping their slave masters were immediately freed once they escaped to any territory held by Federal troops.

Millions of slaves were eventually freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- an amazing accomplishment from one single act.

Reciting bullet points you've been taught by your United States textbooks is not impressing me. NO ONE was freed by the EP! It took the 13th Amendment to end Slavery in America.... that IS a FACT!

So you say. But the evidence contradicts you. You ignoring the territory held by the union troops on the day the EP came down doesn't change the fact that the slaves in that territory were freed. You ignoring the Union army gaining ground and freeing more slaves as they went doesn't change the fact that it happened.

 

[Syriusly]

Racists and revisionists like you of course hate the Emancipation Proclamation- you still yearn for the 'good old days'

To be completely honest, I am very thankful for the emancipation of the slaves when it happened. That didn't come, however, until ratification of the 13th Amendment.

The reason I am so grateful is, I wouldn't be here right now if slavery had continued..

Lovely story.

Doesn't explain why you choose to ignore that slaves were emancipated prior to the ratification of the 13th Amendment.

 

[Syriusly]

Already answered.

Once again- the areas in red were the areas where humans (not things) were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- despite the revisionist history that some are trying to create-

The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves that were under Union protection at the time- and freed the slaves held by the rebels as the Union troops put down the rebellion.

No... You can't free something you don't have in your possession to free.... sorry.... can't be done.
...

Yet he did. Lincoln also signed the law in 1862 that gave freedom to all the slaves in D.C.

All the areas your map shows where slaves were freed is CSA territory which was not under Lincoln's control until the CSA was defeated.

It was Union territory all the time.
And the Union controlled those areas defeated by force of arms.

And yes, the slaves were freed.

Answer my question now... Why did Lincoln not free the slaves held in West Virginia?

Part of the deal with being allowed into the Union as a new state was on the condition West Virginia emancipate their slaves.

You are clueless on the Constitution and history. I seriously doubt there were many slaves in D.C. but it's not a state so there is the statutory difference. The president could abolish slavery in DC, just as many other states had done... any state could have voted to abolish slavery and be a free state. If they did and you wanted to have and keep slaves, you'd have to take them elsewhere.

No... the slaves WEREN'T freed... and we can keep repeating these lines to each other like 7-year-olds if you like, you're not going to bully me. Because Lincoln issued a piece of paper that said slaves in the South were free, did not mean the slave owners in the South rushed out to unchain their slaves! If that's what you think... you must be about 7 years old..

Hmmm yes- I can keep repeating the facts- and you of course can keep trying to ignore the facts- because that is what you Confederate Revisionists do.

• As I have pointed out- slaves were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation in specific regions held by Federal troops.
  
• As I have pointed out- the majority of slaves were freed from legal slavery as Federal troops liberated rebel territories.
• And slaves escaping their slave masters were immediately freed once they escaped to any territory held by Federal troops.

Millions of slaves were eventually freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- an amazing accomplishment from one single act.

Reciting bullet points you've been taught by your United States textbooks is not impressing me. NO ONE was freed by the EP! It took the 13th Amendment to end Slavery in America.... that IS a FACT!

It did take the 13th Amendment to end legal slavery in America.

But the Emancipation Proclamation freed most of the slaves in America- and that is a fact.

 

[Jackson]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

 

[Asclepias]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Already answered.

Once again- the areas in red were the areas where humans (not things) were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- despite the revisionist history that some are trying to create-

The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves that were under Union protection at the time- and freed the slaves held by the rebels as the Union troops put down the rebellion.

No... You can't free something you don't have in your possession to free.... sorry.... can't be done.
...

Yet he did. Lincoln also signed the law in 1862 that gave freedom to all the slaves in D.C.

All the areas your map shows where slaves were freed is CSA territory which was not under Lincoln's control until the CSA was defeated.

It was Union territory all the time.
And the Union controlled those areas defeated by force of arms.

And yes, the slaves were freed.

Answer my question now... Why did Lincoln not free the slaves held in West Virginia?

Part of the deal with being allowed into the Union as a new state was on the condition West Virginia emancipate their slaves.

You are clueless on the Constitution and history. I seriously doubt there were many slaves in D.C. but it's not a state so there is the statutory difference. The president could abolish slavery in DC, just as many other states had done... any state could have voted to abolish slavery and be a free state. If they did and you wanted to have and keep slaves, you'd have to take them elsewhere.

No... the slaves WEREN'T freed... and we can keep repeating these lines to each other like 7-year-olds if you like, you're not going to bully me. Because Lincoln issued a piece of paper that said slaves in the South were free, did not mean the slave owners in the South rushed out to unchain their slaves! If that's what you think... you must be about 7 years old..

Hmmm yes- I can keep repeating the facts- and you of course can keep trying to ignore the facts- because that is what you Confederate Revisionists do.

• As I have pointed out- slaves were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation in specific regions held by Federal troops.
  
• As I have pointed out- the majority of slaves were freed from legal slavery as Federal troops liberated rebel territories.
• And slaves escaping their slave masters were immediately freed once they escaped to any territory held by Federal troops.

Millions of slaves were eventually freed by the Emancipation Proclamation- an amazing accomplishment from one single act.

Reciting bullet points you've been taught by your United States textbooks is not impressing me. NO ONE was freed by the EP! It took the 13th Amendment to end Slavery in America.... that IS a FACT!

You're simply wrong.

From my link.


More than a year after the proclamation took effect Lincoln declared that clearly no harm had been done by it.

"On the contrary, it shows a gain of quite a hundred and thirty thousand soldiers, seamen, and laborers. These are palpable facts, about which, as facts, there can be no cavilling. We have the men; and we could not have had them without the measure.

And now let any Union man who complains of the measure, test himself by writing down in one line that he is for subduing the rebellion by force of arms; and in the next, that he is for taking these hundred and thirty thousand men from the Union side, and placing them where they would be but for the measure he condemns. If he can not face his case so stated, it is only because he cannot face the truth."

 

[Jackson]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

 

[Asclepias]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

Why would it bother me? A flag cant do anything to me.

 

[Syriusly]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

Why would you care if he was bothered by your t-shirt?

I see many people wearing t-shirts I find offensive- but cares?

 

[Jackson]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

Why would it bother me? A flag cant do anything to me.

Since a flag cannot do anything to you, what's the problem with it being on a government building?

 

[Asclepias]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

Why would it bother me? A flag cant do anything to me.

Since a flag cannot do anything to you, what's the problem with it being on a government building?

Its disrespectful to my ancestors. The government should not support disrespectful displays especially with a flag that was used by traitors.

 

[Jackson]

When I moved South, I bought a t shirt with the Confederate flag. I wasn't thinking of slavery, I was thinking of Dixie, southern plantations and southern gentlemen. There was more to the flag than slavery. It was Southern Pride. Something that shouldn't be erased from our memory.

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

Why would it bother me? A flag cant do anything to me.

Since a flag cannot do anything to you, what's the problem with it being on a government building?

Its disrespectful to my ancestors. The government should not support disrespectful displays especially with a flag that was used by traitors.

I can see the aspect of it disrespecting your ancestors...but if it weren't for the South, there would be very few blacks in this country,

 

[Boss]

Pretty good read. It covers Lincoln's EP and his rationale.

The Emancipation Proclamation Abraham Lincoln s Constitutionally Modest Proposal - Online Library of Law Liberty

[excerpt]
Lincoln himself, however, asserted that the states could not leave the Union, and if he were to remain consistent to that argument, he was still faced with the problem that he had no Constitutional authority to interfere with slavery in the states where it existed. Lincoln found a solution to that problem in the commander-in-chief power granted to him by the Constitution. Although Lincoln accepted the proposition that the Constitution contained at least implicit protections for southern slavery, he now argued that there was another constitutional provision that pushed him in the opposite direction. If emancipation was necessary for military success against those in rebellion, than it would be his duty to pursue it as commander-in-chief.

Which was MY argument.

Again, the Confiscation Acts of 1862 were a legislative act. And it was this act that empowered the president to confiscate and free slaves. Additionally, the US wasn't at war at the time Lincoln made his statement about constitutional authority. Once at war, he can take executive action against anyone offering aid to the enemy or contributing to the war effort.

I SAID it was a legislative act passed by Congress. The US WAS at war in 1862. IT WAS an act passed on the Constitutional authority of war powers. There was no other Constitutional authority for the government to seize slaves or free them.

The SAME thing applied to the Emancipation Proclamation... it was a 'war powers' act from the commander-in-chief of the military, and couldn't Constitutionally be anything else.

Slaves were NOT freed Constitutionally under the laws of this country until ratification of the 13th Amendment.

 

[Asclepias]

No cares if you remember it. However, my tax dollars shouldnt go to maintenance of your memories. Put up the flag in your home and wear it on a shirt. I know I dont care. On government property? Thats disrespect to my memories.

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

Why would it bother me? A flag cant do anything to me.

Since a flag cannot do anything to you, what's the problem with it being on a government building?

Its disrespectful to my ancestors. The government should not support disrespectful displays especially with a flag that was used by traitors.

I can see the aspect of it disrespecting your ancestors...but if it weren't for the South, there would be very few blacks in this country,

Who told you that? Blacks have been in this country before Columbus ever made it here. Blacks came here with Columbus as well.

 

[Jackson]

Are you sure that it wouldn't bother you if I wore it to a store you were also in?

Why would it bother me? A flag cant do anything to me.

Since a flag cannot do anything to you, what's the problem with it being on a government building?

Its disrespectful to my ancestors. The government should not support disrespectful displays especially with a flag that was used by traitors.

I can see the aspect of it disrespecting your ancestors...but if it weren't for the South, there would be very few blacks in this country,

Who told you that? Blacks have been in this country before Columbus ever made it here. Blacks came here with Columbus as well.

But the onslaught of blacks began with the slave traders. Honestly, you could be in Africa right now if it hadn't been for the slave trade.