Flying Confederate flag ends in suspension for high school junior - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40670725]who gets to deteremine what is and isnt decent and what are the criteria? if it was placed on a state vote, many deep south states would deem gay pride flags indecent and confederate flags A-okay its dangerous to give anyone the right to decide whats right and wrong for the people to believe in[/QUOTE] eh, i'm not saying noone is allowed to be a racist or a fascist, just that they shouldn't be allowed to wave their flags around at schools. i guess when it comes to law i can't just say 'common sense' so maybe the whole yeah no political shit allowed at all would be the best approach

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;40670815]except that's not what the USA stands for, it's just what it does. the CSA literally stood for the belief that blacks are inferior to whites and that slavery is their natural state of being. see the difference here?[/QUOTE] technically the csa never based its government on the belief that blacks were inferior to whites it was just "what it did" the csa stood against big federal government and the lack of federal respect for the political interests of the south while yes, slavery was a key part of their economy, and they felt threatened by the concept of it being revoked, that was by NO means the basic premise of the founding the entire csa was based upon the ideology that the north and south had distinct personal interests and that the federal government favored the north this was seen in issues beyond slavery, ie the bank of the united states, the erie canals, the railroads which existed almost solely in the north, high taxes and tariffs that hurt southern farmers this is much deeper than the shallow "its because of slavery" deal

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;40670825]What you do in a certain period of time, is what you did stand for. I understand what you mean, but I'm just pointing out that for some it's a completely different story.[/QUOTE] Some of the reasons he listed was the sole reason of its creation to begin with. It represents nothing good and deserves the same of the people who originally carried it. [QUOTE=Loriborn;40670852]technically the csa never based its government on the belief that blacks were inferior to whites it was just "what it did" the csa stood against big federal government and the lack of federal respect for the political interests of the south while yes, slavery was a key part of their economy, and they felt threatened by the concept of it being revoked, that was by NO means the basic premise of the founding the entire csa was based upon the ideology that the north and south had distinct personal interests and that the federal government favored the north this was seen in issues beyond slavery, ie the bank of the united states, the erie canals, the railroads which existed almost solely in the north, high taxes and tariffs that hurt southern farmers this is much deeper than the shallow "its because of slavery" deal[/QUOTE] Slavery was one of the MAIN REASONS THEY SPLIT to begin with. It was very much a basic premise of the founding or do I need to bring up what they said themselves?

yes the csa was dumb and yes the government and (minority or rich) plantation owners believed in slavery [editline]16th May 2013[/editline] automerge

[QUOTE=Jacen;40670773]Why does everyone bring up "fire in a theater", or the "bomb on an airplane"? Freedom of speech is for protecting opinions and ideologies. Yelling "fire" or "bomb" is not an ideology and doesn't need protected. It's also illegal for a legitimate reason, it causes mass panic, a flag does not. All flying on offensive flag would do is get people pissed at you and that would be it. Threatening people is illegal because that's actual concrete proof that they want to cause damage. You can't just assume that someone who flies these flags take up their ideologies, for instance, I like to collect Soviet imagery, badges, and other stuff. I find what the soviets did to be atrocious, but I like the look of it all.[/QUOTE] you can collect as much nazi memorabilia as you want but when you decide you want to see what your swastika flag looks like on your flagpole out front you're promoting an atmosphere of violence and uncertainty in your neighborhood, same would go for school.

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40670852]technically the csa never based its government on the belief that blacks were inferior to whites it was just "what it did" the csa stood against big federal government and the lack of federal respect for the political interests of the south while yes, slavery was a key part of their economy, and they felt threatened by the concept of it being revoked, that was by NO means the basic premise of the founding the entire csa was based upon the ideology that the north and south had distinct personal interests and that the federal government favored the north this was seen in issues beyond slavery, ie the bank of the united states, the erie canals, the railroads which existed almost solely in the north, high taxes and tariffs that hurt southern farmers this is much deeper than the shallow "its because of slavery" deal[/QUOTE] let me just quote the vice president of the CSA here 'Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition'

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;40670886]let me just quote the vice president of the CSA here 'Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition'[/QUOTE] I'll never understand why people continue to want to sugar-coat what the CSA was responsible for.

[QUOTE=galenmarek;40670908]I'll never understand why people continue to want to sugar-coat what the CSA was responsible for.[/QUOTE] because being a "confederate" these days isn't just about racism. it's more about southern nationality.

[QUOTE=galenmarek;40670908]I'll never understand why people continue to want to sugar-coat what the CSA was responsible for.[/QUOTE] southern pride, states rights and shit, i don't get why they don't just make some new organization to preach these things rather than piggy back on one of the most shameful political institutions of america

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;40670943]southern pride, states rights and shit, i don't get why they don't just make some new organization to preach these things rather than piggy back on one of the most shameful political institutions of america[/QUOTE] the vice president can say what he wants to say that the csa was founded solely on the principle of black inferiority isnt true disagree with them all you want, but again, no justification to censor that opinion, regardless of how uncouth and offensive it is [editline]16th May 2013[/editline] and there are some rednecks who legitimately fly the flag for states' rights reasons, hell, a good deal of csa members themselves were openly against slavery but only allowed it to continue because they knew the economy of the south relied on it jefferson did the same thing during his presidency as well

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40671002]the vice president can say what he wants to say that the csa was founded solely on the principle of black inferiority isnt true disagree with them all you want, but again, no justification to censor that opinion, regardless of how uncouth and offensive it is[/QUOTE]this guy is right, actually most families in the antebellum south didn't own slaves it was really more of a state's rights issue if you look at the broader picture

also lynyrd skynyrd. that's as good of a reason as any to wear the confederate flag i guess. [editline]17th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Meatpuppet;40671019]this guy is right, actually most families in the antebellum south didn't own slaves it was really more of a state's rights issue if you look at the broader picture[/QUOTE] erghm..."state's rights" was a code word for racism back in the day. also it doesn't matter how many people owned slaves. the rich slave owners were the ones with political power and they are the ones that pushed for succession...over their "right" to own slaves.

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40671002]the vice president can say what he wants to say that the csa was founded solely on the principle of black inferiority isnt true disagree with them all you want, but again, no justification to censor that opinion, regardless of how uncouth and offensive it is[/QUOTE] Are you seriously trying to be an apologist for the CSA? Have you bothered to read the CSA constitution? They're pretty big on slaves. Also it would be a stupid idea to start waving swastikas just because someone likes the way they dealt with fixing their economy and so it's a stupid reason to wave around this flag as well. If someone cares about state rights so much why not just wave around their state flag instead of a flag that has represents one of the worst things in American history?

[QUOTE=galenmarek;40670853]Slavery was one of the MAIN REASONS THEY SPLIT to begin with. It was very much a basic premise of the founding or do I need to bring up what they said themselves?[/QUOTE] um most southern families didnt even own slaves the vice president had that opinion sure, but its not like the union was any better lincoln didnt even want to abolish slavery take any post-highschool history course and you realize that the south seceding was NOT founded on slavery and that the majority of individuals who pushed for it didnt even own slaves its like saying the US is full of racists because of the Westboro Baptist Church

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40670262]I suppose this is why Stormfront members go around with Swatztikas. Just a harmless bit of fun. Show it to a Jewish kid while grinning and touching yourself, just a harmless bit of fun.[/QUOTE] That's why most institutions have rule against harassment, christ you're dense

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40671021] erghm..."state's rights" was a code word for racism back in the day. [/QUOTE] no it wasn't, are you telling me anti-federalists' cause was just for slavery?

[QUOTE=galenmarek;40671034]Are you seriously trying to be an apologist for the CSA? Have you bothered to read the CSA constitution? They're pretty big on slaves.[/QUOTE] uh lol so was the US constitution prior to the civil war? again, im not justifying them, but slavery was by no means the major part in the csa's founding it was the catalyst yes, but the rift between north and south existed far beyond slavery

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40671035]um most southern families didnt even own slaves the vice president had that opinion sure, but its not like the union was any better lincoln didnt even want to abolish slavery take any post-highschool history course and you realize that the south seceding was NOT founded on slavery and that the majority of individuals who pushed for it didnt even own slaves its like saying the US is full of racists because of the Westboro Baptist Church[/QUOTE] lincoln didn't want to abolish slavery? what are you smoking? the republican party was primarily an abolitionist party and lincoln was a very staunch abolitionist. the whole reason for the civil war was slavery. anything else is history revision.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40671066]lincoln didn't want to abolish slavery? what are you smoking? the republican party was primarily an abolitionist party and lincoln was a very staunch abolitionist. the whole reason for the civil war was slavery. anything else is history revision.[/QUOTE] lincoln's main goal was to preserve the union. not abolish slavery. take a fucking college history course, dude

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40671066]lincoln didn't want to abolish slavery? what are you smoking? the republican party was primarily an abolitionist party and lincoln was a very staunch abolitionist. the whole reason for the civil war was slavery. anything else is history revision.[/QUOTE] youre rejecting all modern insight into historical accuracy the south seceding was more than about slavery, and the two regions had had distinct conflict way before slavery being abolished became an issue slavery was more the "straw that broke the camels back" but it was not the whole reason for secession secession was not justified, but to say it was simply "because of slaves" is being ignorant to the prior history between north and south

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40671002]the vice president can say what he wants to say that the csa was founded solely on the principle of black inferiority isnt true disagree with them all you want, but again, no justification to censor that opinion, regardless of how uncouth and offensive it is [editline]16th May 2013[/editline] and there are some rednecks who legitimately fly the flag for states' rights reasons, hell, a good deal of csa members themselves were openly against slavery but only allowed it to continue because they knew the economy of the south relied on it jefferson did the same thing during his presidency as well[/QUOTE] the csa was literally founded on that principle, even read their constitution, virtually every difference between it and the USA one is about slavery, and are we going back to the censorship thing? i said i don't believe it should be censored just that it shouldn't be allowed in schools. and yes some rednecks do that, you know why these people are considered rednecks? because they're fucking morons, i could be flying the nazi flag 'legitimately' for german pride reasons, still doesn't change what the nazi flag REALLY stands for.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40671066]lincoln didn't want to abolish slavery? what are you smoking? the republican party was primarily an abolitionist party and lincoln was a very staunch abolitionist. the whole reason for the civil war was slavery. anything else is history revision.[/QUOTE] Lincoln wanted to keep the country together, he initially had no major stance on slavery one way or the other

[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;40671080]lincoln's main goal was to preserve the union. not abolish slavery. take a fucking college history course, dude[/QUOTE] lincoln was a staunch abolitionist. just because he compromised doesn't change anything. and you are telling me to take a history class when you are saying the civil war wasn't over slavery lmao [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_civil_war[/url]

[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;40671080]lincoln's main goal was to preserve the union. not abolish slavery. take a fucking college history course, dude[/QUOTE] College history? Man I learned that in 8th grade, it's amazing how he doesn't know this

anyone who took history outside of 8th grade knows from personal letters that lincoln only emancipated the slaves to distract the south as a way to win a losing war he had no interest in freeing the slaves, only keeping the country together he personally did not like slavery spreading, but he didnt want to eradicate it entirely, and he was still slightly racist [editline]16th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=No Party Hats;40671094]Lincoln wanted to keep the country together, he initially had no major stance on slavery one way or the other[/QUOTE] lincoln wanted to curb the spread of slavery, not abolish it

[QUOTE=No Party Hats;40671094]Lincoln wanted to keep the country together, he initially had no major stance on slavery one way or the other[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_lincoln#Slavery_and_a_.22House_Divided.22[/url] ffs can you guys do a google search of "american civil war" and "abraham lincoln" before you pretend to know anything about these things?

[QUOTE=Winters;40670305]People who go so far as to fly a flag of hate ARE harming people. Just because they're not goong out and lynching people does not mean their message is free of consiquence. It's fear mongering and creating an enviroment of fear. The ideals of the CSA are clear an racist, acting as if a person who supports these ideas wont act on them in some way shape or form; be it Physical, mental, or verbal is not only an unrealistic understanding of how people act, but an unrealistic understanding of how the world works as a whole.[/QUOTE] You and the other people in this thread opposed to freedom of expression do realize that the flag in question, the "Stars and Bars", is in fact the battle flag of the Confederate army, and not the whole CSA, right? An army which included quite a few blacks. And hopefully y'all also know that very few people in the south were rich enough to afford slaves. Only the well off had them. And I'm sure you've heard of the emancipation proclamation, which only freed the slaves in the south.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40671104]lincoln was a staunch abolitionist. just because he compromised doesn't change anything. and you are telling me to take a history class when you are saying the civil war wasn't over slavery lmao [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_civil_war[/url][/QUOTE] [quote]To Northerners, in contrast, the motivation was primarily to preserve the Union, not to abolish slavery. Abraham Lincoln consistently made preserving the Union the central goal of the war, though he increasingly saw slavery as a crucial issue and made ending it an additional goal.[/quote] from your link, good job friendo

the south didnt want lincoln in power because he wanted new states admitted to be free, he did not want to abolish slavery the south felt this would upset the balance in congress and promote northern free-state interest over southern interest

[QUOTE=Loriborn;40671085]youre rejecting all modern insight into historical accuracy the south seceding was more than about slavery, and the two regions had had distinct conflict way before slavery being abolished became an issue slavery was more the "straw that broke the camels back" but it was not the whole reason for secession secession was not justified, but to say it was simply "because of slaves" is being ignorant to the prior history between north and south[/QUOTE] 'Four of the seceding states, the Deep South states of South Carolina,[21] Mississippi,[22] Georgia,[23] and Texas,[24] issued formal declarations of causes, each of which identified the threat to slaveholders' rights as the cause of, or a major cause of, secession. Georgia also claimed a general Federal policy of favoring Northern over Southern economic interests. Texas mentioned slavery 21 times, but also listed the failure of the federal government to live up to its obligations, in the original annexation agreement, to protect settlers along the exposed western frontier. Texas further stated: We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable. And again: That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states' i know i'm being a jerkoff and just quoting the wikipedia article but i mean that gets the point across doesn't it