• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Carrying while defending a Confederate monument a no-no.

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
You would vote to have the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial taken down... Your response says so much more about you and your irrationality than anything I could possibly say...
It says, that, I don't revere people that keep other people in bondage. It says that I acknowledge their greatness in shaping America, however they were not my heroes..

So, let me guess, in your mind, I am un-American for not revering Washington and Jefferson?

I could also espouse the last sentence of your last post, in reference to you.. However I shall honor your opinion.

Do some research on Paine, Hamilton and Adams, than you shall find, who the really great man of our History truly were..

My .02
CCJ
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
7,541
Location
here nc
The Bos-Wash virtue signaling by making sure to link the Southern States Confederacy with Nazi Germany. Nicely done. You've revealed your disdain for southern culture while maintain plausible deniability since you never actually said "southerners == Hitler".

What has happened to the culture of the Incas as their buildings and religious idols were cast down and replaced with Spanish and Catholic replacements? What exists of the pre-Columbian American Indian culture or language of the Navajo? What is the effect of cochlear implants on the death community?

Culture and community are complicated things. At once, stronger than many opponents hope, yet more fragile than many believe. What is happening with these memorials has nothing to do with money or reducing racial bigotry. It is all about a full assault on a culture that the Bos-Wash and left coast elites despise and hold in utter contempt...as evidenced by the ubiquitous connections to Hitler among such elites.



How many of "your tax dollars" do you figure are being spent in Virginia, Louisiana, Mississippi, or even Utah and Arizona on memorials of any kind?

How many years of "upkeep" and "cleaning" do you figure it requires to remove these memorials?

Do you feel the same way about federal tax dollars being used to maintain Old Ironside, the USS Constitution, Faneuil Hall in Boston, the Battleship Arizona Memorial, or Arlington National Cemetery? What about the Lincoln, Jefferson, or Washington Memorials?

What is different about a statute of Jefferson Davis or General Lee?

This has nothing to do with money. It is about who is offended by and has deep bigotries toward cultures other than their own.

Charles
if dead, there is no need to have the implant now is there?

ipse
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
You would vote to have the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial taken down... Your response says so much more about you and your irrationality than anything I could possibly say...
Not sure if your a baseball fan, if yes, you shall understand what I espouse, if no, research Pete Rose.

Mr. Rose accumulated more hits than any player in baseball history 4,265, games played 3,562, and base hits 3,215.. A very impressive resume..

Mr.Rose is banned from the hall of fame. Why? For betting on baseball.. Therefore no hall of fame, no monuments, no statues etc.. All this for gambling.... Now harken back to 18th century America, Yes, Jefferson and Washington did some impressive things, however they were guilty of violating nature and the rule of their Creator, their violations were surely much worse than some guy placing a bet on a sporting event.. However, putting Mr.Rose in the hall of fame, would indeed indicate that gambling was accepted and ok, simply because he was a great hitter and player... Please connect the dots.

My .02
CCJ
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
Not sure if your a baseball fan, if yes, you shall understand what I espouse, if no, research Pete Rose.

Mr. Rose accumulated more hits than any player in baseball history 4,265, games played 3,562, and base hits 3,215.. A very impressive resume..

Mr.Rose is banned from the hall of fame. Why? For betting on baseball.. Therefore no hall of fame, no monuments, no statues etc.. All this for gambling.... Now harken back to 18th century America, Yes, Jefferson and Washington did some impressive things, however they were guilty of violating nature and the rule of their Creator, their violations were surely much worse than some guy placing a bet on a sporting event.. However, putting Mr.Rose in the hall of fame, would indeed indicate that gambling was accepted and ok, simply because he was a great hitter and player... Please connect the dots.

My .02
CCJ
The idea that you can try to connect two completely different situations -- comparing the Father of our Country and the Creator of our Constitution -- who lived according to the customs and mores of their society at the time, with a baseball player who violated the rules of his profession, simply demonstrates how vacuous your thinking is. Combine that with your consistent snide, paternalistic remarks toward those with whom you disagree has earned you the approbation you so richly deserve.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
However, putting Mr.Rose in the hall of fame, would indeed indicate that gambling was accepted and ok, simply because he was a great hitter and player... Please connect the dots.

The analogy, while interesting, is flawed. Pete Rose broke well established rules.

In contrast, owning slaves was socially, legally, and morally acceptable in most societies throughout most of history. To condemn otherwise great men, to diminish in any way their contributions or the appropriateness of remembering them because they were victims of their culture is to take a very callow view of history.

Indeed, it reminds me of those who would mock various Biblical accounts based on current standards. Some condemn the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve for engaging in incest as there was nobody to marry except their siblings. Or Abraham for having two concubines in addition to a wife.

As obviously evil as slavery is to us, today, it is grossly unjust to judge prior generations by our understanding. Might just as well claim that Washington's doctors "murdered" him by bleeding him to death or that the medical professionals who treated Touring "tortured" him. With any luck, we will one day look back on chemotherapy with as much horror as current do on blood letting and electroshock. But today's oncologists are not engaging in torture or murder no matter how bad the side effects or how often the treatment is ineffective. They are providing the best care of which they are capable given current knowledge. So too with mental health experts in 1950s/60s England and doctors in 19th century America.

And in like manner, Jefferson, Washington, and others of prior generations who owned slaves and treated them as justly as slaves were ever treated in such societies, cannot be condemned. Neither does honoring the good these men did, countenance slavery.

It is like the idiots who made the FDR memorial and refused to include any images of his almost ubiquitous cigarette holder for fear of encouraging smoking. For FDR, Churchill, George Burns, and Groucho Marx, their cigarette/cigar was as much as essential prop as anything to do with nicotine addiction.

It is a shame to hear such a narrow minded view of history as you put forth regarding some of our great founders and framers.

Charles
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
7,541
Location
here nc
The idea that you can try to connect two completely different situations -- comparing the Father of our Country and the Creator of our Constitution -- who lived according to the customs and mores of their society at the time, with a baseball player who violated the rules of his profession, simply demonstrates how vacuous your thinking is. Combine that with your consistent snide, paternalistic remarks toward those with whom you disagree has earned you the approbation you so richly deserve.
so james, whoring with the help and fathering bastard offspring was according to the customs and mores of the Anglican society at the time of our founding fathers, look at what is learned out here...

ipse
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
The idea that you can try to connect two completely different situations -- comparing the Father of our Country and the Creator of our Constitution -- who lived according to the customs and mores of their society at the time, with a baseball player who violated the rules of his profession, simply demonstrates how vacuous your thinking is. Combine that with your consistent snide, paternalistic remarks toward those with whom you disagree has earned you the approbation you so richly deserve.
You are making my argument for me James, yes, Rose violated some rules, hence no statue, no free tickets to ball games, no hall of fame.. Simply for violating some rule..( I am not a fan of Rose).. My point was and is that gambling is excepted in 21st century America, Casinos everywhere, however Rose violated the rules of his association.. Hence he is barred..

Washington and Jefferson, both great fathers, however, they made their wealth from the labor of human slaves.
Hence, I am not a fan of either of them, Ill take Paine, Hamilton and Adams over them as my heroes and the heroes of my posterity, just like I would take Mays, Williams and Aaron over Rose..

Clearly I am in the minority concerning Washington and Jefferson, but please let me pick my heroes, you and everyone else can pick their own heroes. Both violated the Golden Rule, both violated the Natural laws of nature, I only pray that our Creator, is as kind and beholding unto them as you are James.. Hopefully your heroes are resting peacefully in their graves, Im sure my 18th Century Heroes surely are at peace.

My .02
CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
The analogy, while interesting, is flawed. Pete Rose broke well established rules.

In contrast, owning slaves was socially, legally, and morally acceptable in most societies throughout most of history. To condemn otherwise great men, to diminish in any way their contributions or the appropriateness of remembering them because they were victims of their culture is to take a very callow view of history.

Indeed, it reminds me of those who would mock various Biblical accounts based on current standards. Some condemn the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve for engaging in incest as there was nobody to marry except their siblings. Or Abraham for having two concubines in addition to a wife.

As obviously evil as slavery is to us, today, it is grossly unjust to judge prior generations by our understanding. Might just as well claim that Washington's doctors "murdered" him by bleeding him to death or that the medical professionals who treated Touring "tortured" him. With any luck, we will one day look back on chemotherapy with as much horror as current do on blood letting and electroshock. But today's oncologists are not engaging in torture or murder no matter how bad the side effects or how often the treatment is ineffective. They are providing the best care of which they are capable given current knowledge. So too with mental health experts in 1950s/60s England and doctors in 19th century America.

And in like manner, Jefferson, Washington, and others of prior generations who owned slaves and treated them as justly as slaves were ever treated in such societies, cannot be condemned. Neither does honoring the good these men did, countenance slavery.

It is like the idiots who made the FDR memorial and refused to include any images of his almost ubiquitous cigarette holder for fear of encouraging smoking. For FDR, Churchill, George Burns, and Groucho Marx, their cigarette/cigar was as much as essential prop as anything to do with nicotine addiction.

It is a shame to hear such a narrow minded view of history as you put forth regarding some of our great founders and framers.

Charles
It appears the honorable folks of New Orleans have the same narrow minded view hence the statue of General Lee, is coming down, four down and zero left.. Good for the great diverse citizens of New Orleans.

Now put up a statue honoring William L. Garrison, the perfect " Coup de Grace"..

My .02
CCJ
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
... they were in fact violators of human rights and God's natural laws..
Violators of God's natural laws?

I think the Word of God may have a different view on slavery than you're willing to admit, Joe.

Genesis chapter 17, verse 12 reminds the pious to circumcise their slaves.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 1: reminds you to free your Hebrew slaves; but only after six years.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20: God's pretty comfortable with beating your slave as long as you don't kill him.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 32: God sets the market price of a slave gored to death by a bull at 30 shekels (between $150 and $15,000 in today's currency according to some sites). Oh, and the bull's gotta be stoned (groovie baby, groovie).
Leviticus Chapter 25, verse 44: God says you can purchase slaves and they can be bought, sold and handed down.


Well,,, that was the original God, not the re-imagined one that appeared after everyone told him he was a :censored: and decided they only wanted to obey some of the Bible.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Violators of God's natural laws?

I think the Word of God may have a different view on slavery than you're willing to admit, Joe.

Genesis chapter 17, verse 12 reminds the pious to circumcise their slaves.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 1: reminds you to free your Hebrew slaves; but only after six years.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20: God's pretty comfortable with beating your slave as long as you don't kill him.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 32: God sets the market price of a slave gored to death by a bull at 30 shekels (between $150 and $15,000 in today's currency according to some sites). Oh, and the bull's gotta be stoned (groovie baby, groovie).
Leviticus Chapter 25, verse 44: God says you can purchase slaves and they can be bought, sold and handed down.


Well,,, that was the original God, not the re-imagined one that appeared after everyone told him he was a :censored: and decided they only wanted to obey some of the Bible.
Please don't try to compare voluntary slavery of 5th and 6th century BC, with the buying and selling of slaves in 18th century America..

The buying and selling of slaves in 5th and 6th century BC, was punishable by death..

Please read all of the bible, not just what you feel justifies your personal believes..
Clearly you are not a fan of the " Golden Rule"..

My .02
CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Let's get back to 18th century America.. Ill pick my heroes and you can also pick..

Ill take,, Paine, Hamilton, and John Adams... please be my guess and pick any other three, or one, more honorable or moral.. Than my picks..

Than we can debate.. Im waiting..

CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Looks like Alabama folks are more partial to their monuments than the folks in NO..

I guess ignorance is still truly bliss..

My .02
CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
And Hell is freezing ...
I gave you my three 18th century heroes , Paine, Hamilton and John Adams

You pick three and we can try a civil discourse on their morals and honor or lack thereof.

Ill be waiting word-salad, you can also ask for assistance from that quasi intellectual from Georgia.

CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
As much as Country Club Liberal Joe goes on about reading historical philosophy, one might think that he had become familiar with hermeneutics and its value in our understanding of our predecessors, the giants of the Earth upon whose shoulders we stand.

A milestone in my philosophical journey is Alan Sokal's essay, Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity (Social Text #46/47, pp. 217-252 (spring/summer 1996). http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/index.html

The literary genre that it inspired may be the largest selection in my space-constrained print-book collection. Norman Levitt's book convinced me that not all avowed leftist academics are idiots.

On this date in 1856, slavery argument leads to blows in Senate..

As the abolitionist movement gained momentum and tensions between the North and South escalated, pro-slavery Democratic congressman, Representative Preston Brooks of South Carolina, attacked abolitionist senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts. Sumner had infuriated Brooks by speaking out against the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act-- a compromise measures that had paved the way for possible reemergence of slavery in the Kansas Territory-- all insulting Brook's cousin in the process. Brooks confronted the Northerner in the Senate chamber, striking him repeatedly with his cane.. When the cane broke, Brooks and a supporter left.. Per the History Channel..

The pro slavery folks of the mid 19th century, were and are worst than the anti gun folks of 21st century America..

Surely a part of our History, that is appalling to the decency of all humans.. A part of our History, that all decent American's should be ashamed thereof.. A part of our History that should be put to rest.. The problem is simply that many folks that have the same mentality of the ignorant representative from South Carolina, Mr. Brooks, are alive and living amongst us today.. We don't need monuments or statues or flags as a reminder of said ignorance, their actions are the interpreters of their thoughts.

My .02
CCJ
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
11,824
Location
White Oak Plantation
I have always thought the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts.. John Locke

CCJ
John Locke was not all that a a bag of chips.

G.A. Custer - his actions were heroic in one setting and disastrous in another. but one example, requiring more would use up too much band width. I have little use for the social contract theory. Individual liberty is my preference and let history judge my actions.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
John Locke was not all that a a bag of chips.

G.A. Custer - his actions were heroic in one setting and disastrous in another. but one example, requiring more would use up too much band width. I have little use for the social contract theory. Individual liberty is my preference and let history judge my actions.
Thank you for your honest reply.. What Founding Fathers in your opinion were supporters of ' Individual liberty" in 18th century America?.

Regards
CCJ
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
11,824
Location
White Oak Plantation
The topic at hand is in regards to removing historical markers and the open (concealed) carry of firearms.

The markers are on public property, and are "owned" by the government...:rolleyes:

The law that forbids the carry of firearms near a demonstration are the result of the faux concern for a social contract, that the state has a duty to protect society from mental harm. :rolleyes:

The defenders of the markers should have been more proactive and gotten out the vote to have elected representatives, that represented the defender's values and ideals, elected to city council. Liberals control that city and liberals wanted the markers removed. Repealing the law that forbids the carry of a firearm near a demonstration should be made a priority.

If the defenders get their folks in the city council the "city" could replace the markers to their respective locations.

https://www.municode.com/library/LA/new_orleans/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIICO_CH54CRCO_ARTVIOFAFPUGE_DIV2OFAGPUSAWE_S54-342ILPOWEDE
 
Top