If you oppose the Confederate flag you oppose the American flag too

[Faun]

There is no simple or 100% correct t answer because valid arguments can be made over several dates. Obviously, 7.4.1776, which is the date we celebrate; but what we actually celebrate is the date we declared our independence. That in itself did not render us independent of England. We still had to fight and win our independence. We weren't even formally known as the United States of America yet. That wouldn't come until the ratification of the Articles of Confederation on 3.1.1781. So that could be considered the birth of our country. However, technically, we had still not won our independence from England. That didn't happen until 9.3.1783. So that too could be considered the birth of our country. Personally, to me, the last one makes the most sense. I see declaring our independence like conceiving a baby. And like the baby is not born until it's free from it's mother's womb, we weren't a country until we were free from England.

As far as Palestine, they too declared their independence. In 1988. According to the logic that merely declaring one's independence establishes a country, then Palestine would have been a country since 1988; yet no one considers that to be the case. They formed a government in 1994, yet still not considered a country. I'm not sure if they're recognized now as a country, though they were admitted to the U.N. a few years ago (not sure to what capacity?).

We declared our independence on July 2nd 1776, they just announced it to the public on the 4th (sorry this is a huge pet peeve of mine LOL), and while I disagree with your opinion on when we became a country-at least you're consistent.

When do you think we first became known as the United States of America?

July 4th 1776, I view fighting the war as being independent, and winning the revolutionary war as maintaining that independence.

The Declaration specifically refers to us as the "thirteen united States of America". Now was the formally giving us that name? No. But it certainly is referring to us as that.

The Declaration of Independence also refers to us as the United Colonies. Furthermore, it declares us not as a single country, but as 13 individual states, united in declaring independence. Even the signatories were separated by state, there was no representation as a single nation.

So on 7.4.1776, we had no name as a nation, no borders as a nation, no representation as a nation. I don't see how that can be the birth of our nation merely because we declared the 13 independent colonies to be independent of England?

We had a centralized congress. Granted it wasn't as powerful as it is today, but it did exist.

Again, so did Palestine. that still didn't make them a country.

 

[Boss]

Yet up until now, you claimed he did.

No, I claimed he couldn't because it's unconstitutional.

 

[Faun]

'Nation' is a much less precise term than country. The Kurds are a 'nation', a group sharing a history, culture, etc.
The occupants of the colonies had come to think of themselves as Americans more or less, so had become a nation in that sense. This coalesced into formal government, territory, etc. It was an evolution and, like the beginning of life debate, is rather arbitrary about deciding when it began. Why not the fourth of July?

Sure, why not? That is the point I was making earlier. There are several dates one can pick from which could be argued as the birth of the U.S.

 

[Boss]

You remain a ******* imbecile. Only to the most brain-dead conservative is "freeing," "seizing."

I provided the definition but there's nothing I can do to help you understand it.

Tell ya what do... Find me the caveat in the 4th Amendment that gives government the authority to render my property worthless as opposed to seizing it.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The government couldn't "free" something that didn't belong to them. In order to "free" it, they would first have to logically seize it and possess it. Otherwise, they have nothing to "free."

Holyfuckingshit!

Lincoln didn't seize the slaves. Words have meaning.

Just how ******* rightarded are you??

I know Lincoln didn't seize anything, he didn't have the Constitutional authority to.

Slaves were only freed after passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution.

I own some horses... the government cannot free my horses. Only I can choose to do that. In order for them to free my horses, they would have to first seize my horses and they can't because of the 4th Amendment.

And hey... shouldn't it be obvious by now that I don't really care what names you call me or how many insults you hurl at me? So why don't we cut that crap out and try to have a civil discourse?

Why would I expect you to care when I call you names? I point out you're a ******* retard because that's what your posts reveal about you. Stop saying dumbass shit and I'll have no reason to point it out.

Like your idiocy that the South wasn't fighting the Civil war over slavery. Anyone with a brain knows that was, by far, the main reason why they seceded; which led to the Civil war. Even South Carolina knows that even though you don't. They still teach that in their schools...

South Carolina: One of the United States

The focus for social studies in grade eight is the history of South Carolina and the role that the state and its people have played in the development of the United States as a nation. Students learn about the state’s development during colonial times; the growth of the American ideal, which led to the break with England; and the rising controversy about slavery, which led to the Civil War.​

I never said there wasn't a controversy or that slavery wasn't one of several reasons cited for secession. Now... really and truly, I wish that the US had passed legislation recognizing slaves as people with Constitutional rights and the South responded by rebelling and fighting a war... but that isn't what happened. You can't pretend that's what went down. We can't rewrite history to make that the case. It would be great if we could because then we could totally blame the South for fighting the liberation of slaves.

The reason slavery was an issue for the North AND South was money. Slaves represented property... not according to those who owned them, but according to the SCOTUS and US law. Well before the war, some of the border states were actively engaged in a deal with the Federal government where the Feds paid the slave owners for their slaves in order to emancipate them. This "gradual emancipation" plan was working in Delaware and Maryland. Most slave owners in the South would have been fine with that deal, but it wasn't ever offered to them because it would have cost the Feds a fortune.

So like just about every war, it was really about money.

 

[Unkotare]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

The people taking down the flags are the decedents of those Confederates.

I am a Confederate who lives in the occupied CSA.

No, you're not, boy.

 

[Boss]

That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.

Point of order, Rabbi....
THIS is the Stars and Bars:

THIS is the "Southern Cross" sometimes mistakenly called the Stars and Bars:

 

[BlueAlchemy17]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

I have to politely disagree. To a point. I personally think it is perfectly acceptable for individual citizens to fly the Stars and Bars, as an exercise of their freedom of expression and speech. After all, they are protected rights under the Federal Constitution (that of the United States of America, I don't know if the CSA had an equivalent). I also have no issue with statues and other memorials commemorating the CSA. Personally, I think they're beautiful in Richmond.

Here's the however. The Bill of Rights does not provide protections for government. It only provides protections TO citizens FROM government. Not the other way around. Therefore, displaying the CSA flag on ANY government structure is not protected and in my belief, tantamount to treason. Now let me reiterate, I only consider it wrong for governments to display the flag, and only in a non historic or memorial capacity. Again, I think it's completely acceptable and protected for individuals. But Governments ARE NOT individuals, and DO NOT have protection under the USA Constitution.

Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk