It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Teen Banned From Prom For Wearing Confederate Dress Sues School District

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Originally posted by Nygdan
I The only time warnings are said to be issued are when a poster personally and directly insults or threatens an individual poster.


Wrong. Blanket insults are no longer allowed. SO had a entire thread explaining it.


Originally posted by Nygdan

I am of Confederate decent, my intials are CSA ( Confederate Sons of America)- and my ancestors were killed by yankees, including one(ggrandfather) who was shot in the back by a union soldier.

How many 'yankees' did he kill in his traitorous acts?


Here you insult a mans grandfather

Wait. So it is that I refered to him as a traitor? he was a traitor, it doesn't matter that you don't like it, since when are unpleasantries punished on this board?

[quoe]and then tell them
Different guy.



What the hell are you going to do about it eh? Did I offend you and your 'southern sensibilities'? Well why don't you cry about it then.

So? This is not a blanket insult.


One of mine fought on each side so I guess one was a vile lying tratorist bastard and the other was a hero?

Yes, and the one on the confederate side would be the traitor.


The one that fought for the North had slaves and the one that fought for the South didnt.

Then one was a slave holding patriot and the other a non-slave holding traitor.


Neither side was murdering bastards both fought for the cause they believed in

The confederates were rebelling against the United States, how can you possibly claim that I am making an unfounded blanket insult merely because I am noticing that that is treason?


and any more blanket insults meant to belittle the sacrifices of EITHER group will get a warn.

Sacrifices, bah, the sacrifices of a group of judases. Lee and Davis would desrve to be gnawed upon by one of satans multiple heads like in Milton's work, along side judah, brutus and the other traitors. There never would've been a need for any sacrifices if the treacherous oath breaking confederates hadn't tried to bolt from the union merely because it was uncomfortable for them.

How can a topic like this possibly be discussed without risking offending one group or another? This is basically saying that we aren't permited to discuss it at all, or that we aren't allowed to criticise one group or another. How can the board possibly operate liek that? I'd agree that saying there analagous to used comdoms (scum-bags) is insulting, and that that shouldn't be permited, but not calling them traitors or murderers? How many times have practically any political person or group of people not been accused of treason and murder in this group? Are posters not allowed to talk about the Kennedy Assasination because somoene might get offended? The very epitome of conspiracy can't even be discussed? Are posters going to be warned for saying that bush knew about 911, which would be treasonous or not? Are bigots going to get clamped down on now for inferring that all muslims are wanton savages? Or are creationists going to be censured for suggesting that scientists are part of a hypocritical conspiracy?

Which is it? Actual insult or mere offense? Can I call people like Lee what they are, scumbag traitors, or just traitor or do I have to choose from some community approved list?

Which is it? I didn't come to this group to pick a fight or purposely argue with and insult anyone, i maybe went over board by using the term scum bag, but traitor?


If you wish to discuss it futher U2U me

I have already u2u'd you one the subject.




posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Right here



Originally posted by AboveTopSecret.com
. Insulting rhetoric, even when directed at political groups and not specific ATS members is strictly forbidden and will result in [url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread50585/pg1]warnings


I have not recieved ANY U2U from you.

Again if you wish to discuss it futher U2U me I will not respond to this thread again

You want to keep it up?


[edit on 23-12-2004 by Amuk]



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 08:17 PM
link   
For the record, Nygdan...
My ancestors were mountain folk, in W.Va. For the most part they didn't want to be involved. My ancestor, John "Crap" Allen, was the first captured in his area. He was told, as he was being marched to the union camp, that he could run for it, he was told this by the union soldiers. They were going over a mountain pass when this occurred.
When he headed for the woods at a fast run they shot him in the back.
He did not kill any union soldiers. And, he was not a traitor. I am PROUD to be his decendent.
This account was recorded by a Rev. Goode, when it happened. If you want the historical account, let me know, I'll br glad to send it to you.
And this is my final discussion on your, well, views.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Okay, enough is enough. You all got a play nice post from a Super Moderator, yet another Moderator, and now from me as well. Do not bring issues into the thread rather u2u the Moderator in question. Also, as Amuk pointed out blanket insults are not tolerated in any thread let alone ATSNN.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Well, calling traitors traitors is to be punished? IDK, doesn't make sense. It is like being warned for calling Hitler and all NAZIs evil, they are, and so are called so. The CSA was a traitor, all of it. They left the union, attacked Union forces, and 100+years later they whine when they aren't allowed to continue their little war. They started a war that killed millions, divivded a nation even worse then Bush/Kerry did, and now they crying cause they are being called on it?

Lee was a traitor, he fought the country he belonged to. Well, the one he use to anyways...... It would be like NYC saying we want to be our own country, seperating, then attacking Buffalo. Thats what the south did, seperated, then attacked Fort Sumter. And after they lost NYC whines about how their country flag isn't allowed to be worn to a certain event. Sorry, winners write the rules, losers, well, deal with it. If Washington had lost, do you think England would allow their people to hang the flags over thier City Hall building like the south does with the S&B? The Yankees invading the south would be like the USA invading NYC after they seperated illegally and attacked Buffalo.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 08:29 PM
link   
The argument that "the north views it as" (fill in whatever take you northerners have) is a lame, vaccuous argument in this.

I don't believe the little chubby-gal down south gives a flying farkle how you take it. And SHE SHOULDN'T.

That aside, I'm with the school on this...the dress was horrid - from a fashion standpoint. The fashion police are behind this...it has nothing to do with the confederate flag.


[edit on 12-23-2004 by Valhall]



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 11:03 PM
link   
As ive already commented on this specific flag/dress issue, ill leave it at that

But as to the censorship idea
I TOLD YOU SO!!!!

Now indeed some of the rhetoric was too hot,
Scumbag traitor = innaproproate

but i agree that someones opinion of being a traitor is legitimate speech (just saying traitor or traitorus)
yet someone, somewhere, without a known dictionary of banned terms will decide this in a non uniform fashion....I cant believe im siding with James on this one...calling a Nazi evil should be fine, as well as calling someone a traitor...weather in actuallity they are or arent.

Where's my rebel flag? cause i feel i need to unfurl it in the cause of liberty!
Prior restraint in speech....
censoring political thought...
No that would never happen in a place dedicated to denial of ignorance!!
the genie is not only out of the bottle, but the bottle is shatered!!!
(awaiting the "we own your speech rights here" speal again...well someone owns ALL the outlets for speech so its ok that they stifle it, the common mans speech gives way to pay to play....)

[edit on 23-12-2004 by CazMedia]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 03:51 AM
link   
I believe most on this thread know full well when they are using terms that would be considered insulting.

It's a game of wits.

When somebodies opinion is antagonistic in content the aim is to rile the opponent into using a more direct insult, with the ultimate aim being to get the person warned.

Now the initial antagonist cannot be held responsible for the reactions they invoke, responsibility lies soley with the party that is responding.

More often than not, this results in a off topic disscussion regarding the merits of posting without insults and can also result in further warnings as the discussion between the mods and the accused intensifies.

It's quite amusing that this should take place on a thread regarding the antagonistic attitude of the girl and the confederate flag dress, she new full well that she would offend, but was hiding behind, what she believed was her freedom to wear whatever she liked. Had she been honest about her reasons I believe we would have seen a whiter outfit with a pointy hood with acompanying burning cross.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 03:54 AM
link   
indeed this sidebar discussion of speech does reflect to this girls case.

she will loose because she has no reasonable expectation of free speech in the school controled environment.

Much like we all lose speech rights because we have no expectations of it in the environment controlled by ATS.

i just question how ignorance can be denied by sanitizing it from view, based upon loose "interpretational" circumstance, enforced by people of varying tolorances, and opinions on "acceptabillity".

P.S. i have thought that overall, the new politics forums have been SLIGHTLY looser in the verbage disipline which is cool, but i can see where some posts on this topic indeed are at least right on the line of "DECORUM".

Uh ohh i hear the heavy footfalls of S.O. comming with the hammer to hit me with the "we own your speech rights" thing...
Im outta here....(trying to hide and hoping S.O. doesnt have x-ray vision..or that my desk is lined with lead...crap even I can see thru this rebel flag.....LOL)

[edit on 24-12-2004 by CazMedia]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 04:17 PM
link   
*AHEM*

Consider this everyone's final warning in this thread.
The name-calling stops.
The blanket insults stop.
The off-topic derogatory posts stop.

All of them stop now.

Any further inappropriate posts in this thread will result in official warnings.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   
So what is the poor girl's family using for curtains in the front room now?

Next year, some techie will probably want a prom dress made out of Star Wars bedsheets, and will get in even worse trouble for that faux paux.

I tell ya whut. Lincoln ended the USA as a federation of states when he decided that the existence of the whole was more important that the wishes of it's individual members.

Freedom is the right of association. When states were not allowed to dissociate from the Union, they ceased to be free.

If you think the civil war is a dead issue, just go to a southern battlefield. Your Federal Government honors the Union dead with massive monuments, and individual markers. Often, as at Chickamauga and around Atlanta, the confederate dead are buried in mass graves, or if they do have individual markers, their markers are required to be flush with the ground...

They were all Americans, and they died fighting for a cause, even if it was the wrong one. It is small of our government to refuse to admit that Southerners fought with conviction, and made sacrifices, sometimes the ultimate sacrifice, for their homes and families.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

So what is the poor girl's family using for curtains in the front room now?

Next year, some techie will probably want a prom dress made out of Star Wars bedsheets, and will get in even worse trouble for that faux paux.

I tell ya whut. Lincoln ended the USA as a federation of states when he decided that the existence of the whole was more important that the wishes of it's individual members.

Freedom is the right of association. When states were not allowed to dissociate from the Union, they ceased to be free.

If you think the civil war is a dead issue, just go to a southern battlefield. Your Federal Government honors the Union dead with massive monuments, and individual markers. Often, as at Chickamauga and around Atlanta, the confederate dead are buried in mass graves, or if they do have individual markers, their markers are required to be flush with the ground...

They were all Americans, and they died fighting for a cause, even if it was the wrong one. It is small of our government to refuse to admit that Southerners fought with conviction, and made sacrifices, sometimes the ultimate sacrifice, for their homes and families.



Thank you Dr. for a very sensible and intelligent post that directly reflects what many ancestors of fallen Civil War heroes are trying to express.
*clicks the vote button*

Your last paragraph states what all should realize, and is one I will reflect on throughout the holidays.



posted on Dec, 25 2004 @ 01:05 AM
link   
I think that one of the hallmarks of civilization and true chivalry is to realize that just because a man is my enemy, doesn't necesarrily mean that he his evil incarnate or a tool of Satan. That no matter how implaccable the emnity between us, that the other person is a genuine human being with all the strengths and foibles that come along with humanity.

I cannot control another person's behavior. But I do control my own. Chivalry is about how I conduct myself. This means that I am magnanymous in victory, even if my foe doesn't really deserve mercy. It means that I cannot condone brutality inflicted on his family, his home, or his corpse, regardless of the brutality he practiced during life.

Here is another example: I am vehemently opposed to illegal immigration to the US. I vote according to those convictions. On the other hand, I assist my church in raising money and food for refugees who have crossed the border illegally into Texas. Why? because even if their actions are criminal, they are still human beings, many of whom have never seen snow, or been exposed to freezing windy Texas winters. I realize that their suffering will not end illegal immigration, and the immediate task is to address real human need. In the long term, I hope we can deter them, and help them find legal and positive options to escaping the economy of their homeland. But a child's empty stomach and freezing toes are more important than my convictions. THAT is what honor is really about.

Were all confederates traitors? yes. So were Washington and Jefferson. So was William the Conqueror. So was Julius Caesar (against Pompey). So was Spartacus. I consider Stauffenberg and Count Von Moltke as some of the truest Germans who ever lived, and they traitorously attempted to kill the head of their state, Adolf Hitler.

In a world gone mad, some days the traitors are the only true patriots.

*****

Incedentally, Nygdan might be interested to see Robert E. Lee's stance when the war broke out. Lincoln had him stationed at the Alamo in Texas, to keep him away from the successionists in Virginia. He wrote Lincoln, and told him that on his honor as a soldier he had sworn to defend the Union with his life, and would never raise a finger to harm it, and basically that as long as he was a servant of the republic he could be counted on.

Lincoln, advised by the secretary of War, fired Lee before the commencement of hostilities, and wrote to him specifically relieving Lee of the rights and responsibilities of a soldier of the US army. Lee took the letter to be an acknowledgment by Lincoln of the commonwealth of Virginia's greater claim to Lee's sympathies. Imagine how the war would have gone, if Lincoln had trusted Lee, but left him out in Texas at the Alamo. Texas would probably not have succeeded. Without Lee and the first Texas rifles, no Gettysburg . . .

I heartily recommend Bruce Catton's Trilogy on the Civil War. Though a northerner himself, and a chronicler of the Union cause, Catton is the historian who first brought the story of Lee's correspondence w/ Lincoln to public attention. His "Terrible Swift Sword" is probably one of the best books on warfare, period.



posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 12:03 AM
link   
My high school had a dress code and my prom also had a dress code and I imagine this school probably also has dress codes. I cant imagine a dress made out of any flag would fall into the realm of proper attire for a school prom. Prom was a very cool time. I have a lot of good memories and Im glad no one tried to mess it up to make a political statement. There are times to make a political stand and there are times when kids just need to cut loose and have fun without having to worry about the problems of the world.






[edit on 27-12-2004 by zerotime]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Wow! what a fight, jeepers


Let me try a straighten somethings out, as many things are being confused together that must be seperate.

1. The CSA flag, represents a political movement of the 1860’s
2. Some southerners, use this flag as a raciest symbol.
3. The U.S rebelled from England, good.
4. The CSA rebelled form the North, bad.
5. Free speech is only for some, non-racist or non-rebels
6. The CSA rebelled because of slavery
7. The northerners were perfect and good, and non-slave owners.

First, no one of the 1860’s cared enough about slave to fight a war. Before the civil war, the anti-slavery movement(a good thing) was almost non-existent.
The war was not about slavery.
The history of warfare is 98% of the time about money. So was the Civil war.

The North created a money vacuum in the south, by creating export tariffs on all raw goods, ie cotton.
The North created import tariffs on finished goods, ie. Cotton suits.
All of the industrial plants were in the North.
Thus the price of cotton was low, because if export charges, and the price of suits were high because of import charges.
This caused all of the money to move toward the North.
The South, tried to fight this politically, but, could not be the North owned the House and Senate, because agriculture states, the South have few people per state compared with the North. Thus, the House was full of Northern representatives.
Likewise the North has lots of little states, compared to the South and own the Senate also. They controlled the laws.
The South was left with no choice. If things were to continue, they would be bankrupted in a few years and the Northerners would own everything.
The North left them with one choice, fight.
They did.
Britain thought this war was wonderful, and wanted in on the side of the South. They told the South they would back them up with guns and ships. Please note the British style flag of the CSA.
Lincoln, got wind of this. He knew if Britain joined it was over for the Union. He had no choice but to win at all costs, or risk losing the Union to Britain.
In a brilliant political move, he said the war was about slavery. This was done, because Britain had just outlawed slavery, and was legally and politically bound, to stay out of it. Also, it gave the Northern fighting man something to rally around.
The South had counted on Britain help, as it was there only option. When Britain backed out they fought for life and limb, against a far greater military force. They knew they could not call a draw. The North attacked the South, first economical, then first militarily.
To this day the South has suffered at the hands of the North, economically.
Greater than all of this, it was an attack of the Masons against the Christians. This is why to this day the South is quite Christian.
Greater than all of this, it was an attack of the bankers against, the U.S. Government. Namely the Federal Reserve System, founded 1863.

The K.K.K. is racist group, it is not the CSA. These must be kept separated
The war was not about slaves, it was about money. Slaves were the cover. Do you really think that all those white people were going to die for slaves? 660,000 white guys giving their lives for 40,00 black slaves people, ha ha ha. That’s a good one. Except it is not funny.

Now, so what, that some southern girl is a racist, it is a free country. If someone does not like someone else too bad. We have to put up with some stuff.
Racism is evil, so was the greed of the North. The South was just fighting for survival. It was a big mess, that got out of control.
If art and freespeech can be steping on the America flag, then she can wear one. I agree it is in bad taste. I think wearing a U.S. Flag dress is in bad taste.
Black people can wear Black Power shrits, so what is the problem. We are all jerks.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
If you think the civil war is a dead issue, just go to a southern battlefield. Your Federal Government honors the Union dead with massive monuments, and individual markers. Often, as at Chickamauga and around Atlanta, the confederate dead are buried in mass graves, or if they do have individual markers, their markers are required to be flush with the ground...


Any pictures of this around the 'net?



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 08:55 PM
link   
[edit on 3/4/2007 by Rockpuck]



posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 06:20 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 07:29 PM
link   
The classic argument regarding free speech says that my right to it does not give me the right to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Why not? At the simplest level, I believe it is because someone could get hurt, and the person doing the yelling would reasonably be expected to know that.

Whether or not the negative perceptions attached to the Confederate flag are correct, appropriate, or "right," they do exist and most people are aware of them. Therefore, wearing a dress that looks like a Confederate (rebel) flag to a high school prom could result in someone getting hurt, and this girl would reasonably be expected to know that. In fact, it has been mentioned several times that her choice of attire was probably motivated by the reactions she expected - and intended - to get.

Therefore, in my opinion it is not correctly an issue of free speech, it is an issue of preventing potential harm to the other students at the prom. It is, of course, also true in my opinion that the school should have the right to determine what is appropriate attire at one of its functions.



posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Nygdan
 


I'm rather aghast at the lack of knowledge about the Civil War being displayed all over this thread. The war was fought by the South against a strong, centralized government, because they saw it as tyranny. It was a war for freedom, and freedom lost.
The Emancipation Proclamation was about undermining the economy in the South. Issues of racism and slavery were already being address in various appropriate forums prior to the war. However, with the proclamation, Lincoln bankrupted the South, and thus won the war.
The misunderstanding lies in poor education and the stigma that has been attached to slavery, blackening everything that ever came into contact with it. But, perhaps, if people would learn about slavery, then they might begin to understand history better, and then be able to understand the Civil War. Slavery was not some horrible white on black crime. It was far more complex and far less to do with race.
I find it ironic that some of the people Ive seen on here spouting ignorance about the Civil War fail to realize that the Union, in it's victory, sealed the fate of the US into having the very same powerful, centralized government that they rail against. I feel sometimes that there is simply no hope for this country.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join