Supreme Court deals blow to Rebel Flag

[bodecea]

In solidarity with my heritage I am changing my Avatar.

Your heritage is a four year period where your ancestors started a war in support of slavery and got their asses kicked?

you should study up a bit on history before you make the comments.
slavery was only a part of the war, it was started by the north when they fired on Ft Sumpter in Carolina.
Carolina being the first state to leave the union.
Up until the fall of 1862 slavery was not the reason for the war, so basically, the war was not fought over slavery.
The Federal government had explicitly declared that it was fighting solely to save the Union.
Slavery was brought into the equation in order to bring support from the French. At that time, Europe was very much against slavery and the thought of it was a moral travesty.
Since the confederates had already sent representatives to both Britan and France, James M. Mason of Virginia and John Slidell of Louisiana, Mason in England and Slidell in France, the north played the race card to stop the threat of external help for the south.
basically, the north at the time did not really care about slavery, but it was a valued tool of persuasion to foreign governments.

Oh, so many things wrong with your post.
1. Slavery was the reason for the war....even the South said so by word (VP Stephens) and by each state's articles of secession.
2. The South fired on the North at....
3. Fort Sumter, not Fort Sumpter
4. And it was South Carolina.
5. And SOUTH Carolina left the Union months before they decided to start the war by firing on the Union Fort Sumter.
6. The French? Since when did the North seek the help of the French? The French were busy messing with Mexico which pissed the U.S. off (remember the Monroe Doctrine?)

Too funny! You got a Southern edumacation, didn't you?

who said the North wanted help from the French? do you also have a reading problem? The north brought up slavery because the South had send representatives to France for support. The French finding slavery morally wrong, would then refuse to help maintain slavery.
See how that works?

The French found slavery "morally wrong"? Tell that to Haiti.

 

[hipeter924]

 

[bendog]

In solidarity with my heritage I am changing my Avatar.

Your heritage is a four year period where your ancestors started a war in support of slavery and got their asses kicked?

you should study up a bit on history before you make the comments.
slavery was only a part of the war, it was started by the north when they fired on Ft Sumpter in Carolina.
Carolina being the first state to leave the union.
Up until the fall of 1862 slavery was not the reason for the war, so basically, the war was not fought over slavery.
The Federal government had explicitly declared that it was fighting solely to save the Union.
Slavery was brought into the equation in order to bring support from the French. At that time, Europe was very much against slavery and the thought of it was a moral travesty.
Since the confederates had already sent representatives to both Britan and France, James M. Mason of Virginia and John Slidell of Louisiana, Mason in England and Slidell in France, the north played the race card to stop the threat of external help for the south.
basically, the north at the time did not really care about slavery, but it was a valued tool of persuasion to foreign governments.

For the South it was all about slavery. The only reason the Slave States declared their independence from the Union was to be able to keep their slaves.

Not really. Lincoln explicitly promised we could keep our slaves. (-: But, geographically, there would be more northern senators than southern in the future. I think No Tea Party is largely right. The North was going to exercise political power to curtail imports, and that would hurt us selling our cotton to Europe. But, really, we'd imported something like 7 million slaves to the South v. 11 or 12 million whites. It was untenable, and a moral and political clusterfk that his nation may never recover from.

it was actually both, the economics of the cotton trade, and the south feared that adding more states ( remember Carolina almost pulled out when California got statehood) that had voice in congress would eventually over rule the southern states, and they would lose their slaves and their cotton profits.
so it was a bit of both.
However, the government did not go into the war with the thought of slaves at the time. Slavery was NOT the reason behind the war.

Certainly the North was unconcerned with slavery, or the plight of the slaves. Imo, it was more complicated in the South. While some studies may underestimate the number of southern households had slaves, the vast majority had few, and in those the standard of living of the slaves was not a lot worse than the subsistence farmers. However, emancipation would result in a massive flood of ill trained freedmen in economic competition with the southern poor, and that was the ultimate result, and the core of the nation's racial problems today. But, for the southern aristocracy which owned the big big load of slaves, and slaves were the biggest asset in the South, slavery was an issue. And what was happening economically was the eastern most southern states were selling them off to the west, like Mississippi, where crops that were slave dependent were still king. And Texas had rice. With no more slave state expansion, there was nowhere to go to sell them to a new buyer. And they were breeding.

It was a moral and economic corruption. And it was an is indefensible. And the North wasn't gonna let us just leave. So we had to fight to try and keep all them slaves locked up.

 

[occupied]

In solidarity with my heritage I am changing my Avatar.

Your heritage is a four year period where your ancestors started a war in support of slavery and got their asses kicked?

you should study up a bit on history before you make the comments.
slavery was only a part of the war, it was started by the north when they fired on Ft Sumpter in Carolina.
Carolina being the first state to leave the union.
Up until the fall of 1862 slavery was not the reason for the war, so basically, the war was not fought over slavery.
The Federal government had explicitly declared that it was fighting solely to save the Union.
Slavery was brought into the equation in order to bring support from the French. At that time, Europe was very much against slavery and the thought of it was a moral travesty.
Since the confederates had already sent representatives to both Britan and France, James M. Mason of Virginia and John Slidell of Louisiana, Mason in England and Slidell in France, the north played the race card to stop the threat of external help for the south.
basically, the north at the time did not really care about slavery, but it was a valued tool of persuasion to foreign governments.

Well that was sort of interesting. But you still left out the reason why everybody got mad at each other in the first place.

That would be cotton, and who grew it and who sold it.

The northern states and their textile mills, which were the backbone of the economy in the early 19th century, couldn't grow it but they would make sure they would control it. Northerners didn't give a phlying phuck about the slaves, most had never even SEEN one. They just wanted to keep the mills open.

If the south had seceded and just sold their cotton crops to Europe as they wanted to do, because they got a better price, the rest of the country would have gone into an unrecoverable economic crash. Everything is always about money.

600,000 Americans died. I can't help but think somebody couldn't have come up with a better solution than killing each other over cotton.

There was no solution other than fighting, the south had pipe dreams of armed conquest further south, out west and even up north. Dumb-asses.

 

[BlindBoo]

In solidarity with my heritage I am changing my Avatar.

Your heritage is a four year period where your ancestors started a war in support of slavery and got their asses kicked?

you should study up a bit on history before you make the comments.
slavery was only a part of the war, it was started by the north when they fired on Ft Sumpter in Carolina.
Carolina being the first state to leave the union.
Up until the fall of 1862 slavery was not the reason for the war, so basically, the war was not fought over slavery.
The Federal government had explicitly declared that it was fighting solely to save the Union.
Slavery was brought into the equation in order to bring support from the French. At that time, Europe was very much against slavery and the thought of it was a moral travesty.
Since the confederates had already sent representatives to both Britan and France, James M. Mason of Virginia and John Slidell of Louisiana, Mason in England and Slidell in France, the north played the race card to stop the threat of external help for the south.
basically, the north at the time did not really care about slavery, but it was a valued tool of persuasion to foreign governments.

For the South it was all about slavery. The only reason the Slave States declared their independence from the Union was to be able to keep their slaves.

Not really. Lincoln explicitly promised we could keep our slaves. (-: But, geographically, there would be more northern senators than southern in the future. I think No Tea Party is largely right. The North was going to exercise political power to curtail imports, and that would hurt us selling our cotton to Europe. But, really, we'd imported something like 7 million slaves to the South v. 11 or 12 million whites. It was untenable, and a moral and political clusterfk that his nation may never recover from.

Southern conservative trusted Lincoln about as much as they trust Obama. They believed their own propaganda about what was going to happen if he were elected. The deep south didn't wait until he was sworn in before we voted to secede.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

holy smokes. these people won't be satisfied until they take away all OUR RIGHTS in this country
drip drip drip all over some freaking flag

If you want a rebel flag on your car, slap it on the bumper. Or in the back window. Or fluttering from your radio antenna. Paint it on the roof like the General Lee.

You have every freedom to express yourself. What you can't do is force the State to express your beliefs.

Right, but the state can force a baker to express your beliefs, right? The state is offering a service for a fee, just like the baker, so why would they be exempt from public accommodation laws?

That's different, because those bakers have been invoking religious freedom, which is at odds with anti discrimination laws...and the bakery is not a religious institution.

Furthermore, this is like complaining about a war on Christmas. You can't swing a dead cat between Novermber and February without knocking over someone's Xmas decorations.

And you can't get from your house to the car without seeing some Confederate flag waving around anywhere in the south.

Funny I live in the south, I've seen more confederate battle flags on this forum than I have in my area.

Also the supreme court held in the Hobby Lobby decision says that a closely held company has religious freedom rights, so if a baker finds a message to religiously offensive they have just as much right to refuse the service as a bunch of state bureaucrats who arbitrarily find a message offensive on a license plate, especially when the state custom plates are a for profit endeavor.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

The Hobby Lobby case concerned Federal law, not state law, where states and local jurisdictions enact public accommodations laws whose provisions prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, among other criteria.

And because state and local public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, they can be neither ignored nor violated with 'religious liberty' as 'justification' for doing so. Moreover, because the intent of public accommodations laws is regulatory as authorized by the Commerce Clause, they in no way violate religious expression. (Employment Division v. Smith)

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

holy smokes. these people won't be satisfied until they take away all OUR RIGHTS in this country
drip drip drip all over some freaking flag

If you want a rebel flag on your car, slap it on the bumper. Or in the back window. Or fluttering from your radio antenna. Paint it on the roof like the General Lee.

You have every freedom to express yourself. What you can't do is force the State to express your beliefs.

Right, but the state can force a baker to express your beliefs, right? The state is offering a service for a fee, just like the baker, so why would they be exempt from public accommodation laws?

You are complaining about PA laws...what have you done to get them repealed in your state?

No, I'm complaining that a state when engaged in for profit activities are not held to the same standards as any other business.

Obviously you're unaware of how ignorant and ridiculous this is.

 

[Flash]

In solidarity with my heritage I am changing my Avatar.

Your heritage is a four year period where your ancestors started a war in support of slavery and got their asses kicked?

My great, great great grandfather never own a slave in his life but he joined the 5th Florida Regiment when the filthy union threaten to attack his state and threaten his family.

He fought at the Battle of Olustee when an invasion force of filthy union troops were trying to kill Floridians. He later fought at the defense of Richmond when the the filthy union army was trying to kill Southerners. He was in the Battle of Cold Harbor.

His letters are in the library at the University of Florida. You should go read them. It will tell you a lot more about the reasons the Southern patriots fought than that stupid Jr High School history book that you read that was written by the winners.

 

[SwimExpert]

The flag hurts no one. It's just another "politically correct" statement to pacify the masses.

Well enough. But under what circumstance can the state be forced to provide license plates it chooses to not produce?

 

[JakeStarkey]

One, the state is not a for-profit entity.

Two, this issue is a state rights one.

Three, no constitutional issue was involved.

Four, anyone can move to SC where the flag is flown.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Flash, your ancestor fought on the wrong side and lost.

That's all that matters. In no way shape or form are our public schools going to honor the South or its cause.

 

[SwimExpert]

"Treason" against a filthy out of control tyrannical government is a good thing, Moon Bat.

The United States of America is the greatest nation this Earth has ever known. Traitorous swine like you should be hanged, and I hope you are.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Treason" against a filthy out of control tyrannical government is a good thing, Moon Bat.

The United States of America is the greatest nation this Earth has ever known. Traitorous swine like you should be hanged, and I hope you are.

Nah, convict him for life, shackle his feet, and put him to work on the state plantation.

 

[SwimExpert]

selling the right to individuals

Then it's not a right.

 

[Kondor3]

Actually I agree with this ruling.

I do think people who's knee jerk reaction to the Rebel Flag is of derision and spite are as bigoted as they insist the display of the flag is.

In this case however the State of (any state) TX should not be forced to emblazon an image in a plate if it has a concern that it would be found offensive to a significant percentage of it's population for rational reasons.

I think black people particularly have a rational reason to be offended at the flag. Not everyone who displays it is a racist though. Some people feel it is a symbol of rebellion and heritage, not hate.

Now if the atheitards started getting butthurt about Christian symbols on plates they can just go get some Preparation-H and fuck themselves. There is no rational reason to be offended by religious symbols.

Communist BS. The flag hurts no one. It's just another "politically correct" statement to pacify the masses.

Then why dont we have Nazi license plates?

I haven't figured that one out yet, but it may be coming soon. Everything else is going to hell in a hand basket in this country. I wouldn't be shocked if they came on the market tomorrow.

You KNOW why. And you would NOT be defending it for those same reasons

I'm a Northern Boy, and a Union Man, through and through, by nature and by heritage.

I understand the point made by very large numbers of Southern Whites who see the Confederate Flag as more of a symbol of Rebellion and Independence than anything else.

I also understand the negative connotations that this imagery dredges up for many Black folk.

I wish there was a Middle Ground, but I, for one, have not encountered such a critter yet.

 

[SwimExpert]

No, I'm complaining that a state when engaged in for profit activities are not held to the same standards as any other business.

Do you have any evidence that bakeries in Texas are forced to make cakes for gay weddings?

 

[Flash]

Flash, your ancestor fought on the wrong side and lost.

That's all that matters. In no way shape or form are our public schools going to honor the South or its cause.

He lost but he was on the right side. It is always the right thing to do to defend your homeland.

Lincoln raised his filthy ass regiments to invade and kill.

The Southern regiments were raised to defend.

Big difference.

 

[Flash]

"Treason" against a filthy out of control tyrannical government is a good thing, Moon Bat.

The United States of America is the greatest nation this Earth has ever known. Traitorous swine like you should be hanged, and I hope you are.

The US has a terrible government. It has always been that way. Even President George Washington started a war because of opposition to taxes. Imagine that after the Revolution was started over excess taxation.

The traitors were the northern Libtards that invaded the South to kill Americans and impose tyranny.

The South was right.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, I'm complaining that a state when engaged in for profit activities are not held to the same standards as any other business.

Do you have any evidence that bakeries in Texas are forced to make cakes for gay weddings?

Immaterial. Move along.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Flash, your ancestor fought on the wrong side and lost.

That's all that matters. In no way shape or form are our public schools going to honor the South or its cause.

He lost but he was on the right side. It is always the right thing to do to defend your homeland. Lincoln raised his filthy ass regiments to invade and kill. The Southern regiments were raised to defend. Big difference.

(1) The South began the war at Ft Sumter, firing on unarmed ships, and even worse, on Old Glory itself at the fort. (2) That made them filthy traitors. (3) They were treated accordingly, and the Old South was executed, never to rise again. Good riddance.