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.

 

Can someone explain the whole Banning of the Confederate Flag issue?

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: abe froman
a reply to: DarkStormCrow

Ok, just searched e-bay and found they are not selling the Confederate or Rebel flag.

That's also some BS.
I don't think amazon is either. Businesses make business decisions. Like Warner Bros and the licensing of model car kits of the General Lee with the flag. They all may change their minds in the future. Businesses look at their bottom line. I think americanflags dot com is still selling them along with hundreds, if not thousands of others.




posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Greathouse

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: reldra

That's the difference between many people on this opinion. I fully support the freedom of speech. I don't agree with people burning the American flag . But I can respect their right to feel that way . Our constitutional rights are not supposed to be hypocritical . Hell even though I do not support the neo-Nazis or white supremacist . I still believe that they are entitled under the Constitution to speak their minds .


That is where the problem arises for me . I can understand/support people viewing the rebel flag as racist though I don't agree with them , but they are entitled to their civil rights .

What I can't understand is that even though people support the rebel flag for a different causes than racism . It still needs to be banned even though I support people that oppose it ?


Think about what I said there does that on even ground make any sense ?

Clarification? You think it should be banned? You think it should not? I got lost in the wording .


I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough . But my position is nothing should be banned . Under the First Amendment unless aggressive everyone should be able to express or say what is on their mind .

Banning one position is just another way of silencing opposition .


Of course, unless it is something like owning one's own nuclear warhead or 10 lbs of heroin..to give extreme examples..obviously flags should not be banned. Businesses have the choice of what symbols they will tolerate for sale via their forums. People can demand a certain flag not be flown on government property...but you are quite right.
You are normally voice of the sane here.


And I liked the previous avatar...it was like you were hunting down idiots lol


Thank you for the compliment. But I have two drawbacks on this site . Number one is the sane disposition you referred to. ( nobody likes actual facts and a hypothetical discussion )


The second issue is honesty. Although I have ran into posters like you and some others that have no problem admitting fault in their self or their opinion .


That seems to be a rare quality anymore ? I only take sides on two issues I know of. Those are the Russian aggression in Eastern Europe and terrorism. To my knowledge everyother stance I offer is dealt with on a case-by-case basis .





LOL. Drawback? Don't stop. You might get that Mod invite. Do what you do



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:23 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I don't believe your request is unreasonable - what I will say is that we are generally appealing to everyone else, and totally steamrolling everyone else. For example - the Indiana laws and policies that people threw a stink about. Those policies basically allowed people to decline service to those who made them feel uncomfortable. It allowed the business owner the right to choose who they do business with. People got upset over that.

I don't "like" gay marriage, but that doesn't mean I don't like and am not friends with people who choose/were born into that lifestyle. It also doesn't mean that I oppose their right to do so. However, I would not wish to participate in any way in any kind of union - simply because it's a contradiction to my personal beliefs. That shouldn't offend anyone, if we were really a society of "equality for all, free speech for all", but it does. People scoff at that. However, if someone of the LGBT persuasion didn't want to come to my wedding for the same reason, that'd be just fine.

Another poster in another thread said the same thing in a different manner:
It's okay for a gay club owner to say the club is for gays only...but if a straight club owner did that for his club, they'd be boycotted. It doesn't make sense. It's totally illogical.

Apologies for using this as an analogy - it might seem a bit off topic. It just was one of the most prominent ones that stand out in my head right now, considering current events.
edit on 28.6.2015 by Shugo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

You're right, it's still for sale at some companies.

I don't want one, but I believe those that want one should have the right to buy one.

Whew, had a 1984/Fahrenheit 451 moment there. Scary.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: VictorVonDoom
For many, it is not a nonsense issue and intelligent people can think about many issues at one time. You are minimizing an issue not of import to you, but is of import to others. I am a liberal democrat through and through and don't want this flag banned and it hasn't been. I am not distracted from other issues, as I have said in other forums- I can walk and chew gum at the same time- I imagine you can too.


Sure, many people can think about many issues at one time. I tend to focus on issues that actually affect me. Whether or not someone likes a Confederate battle flag does not affect me. The only people that are really affected by a Confederate battle flag are the people who are told they should care. From what I've read on the threads on ATS, most people have no idea of what it's really about. It was simply a flag used to distinguish Union from Confederate on the battlefield.

Some people are told it's a symbol of white supremacy. Some people are told it's a symbol of slavery and oppression. It is neither of those things. It was simply a flag used to distinguish Union from Confederate on the battlefield, the Stars and Bars was too confusing in the heat of battle. The flag of the Confederacy was the Stars and Bars. Being offended by the battle flag and not the Stars and Bars would be like Native Americans being offended by the First Army Calvary Patch but not the American flag.

But even if someone understood what the Confederate battle flag was about, and chose to be offended by it, I don't really see why that is more important than other things going on today. The American people can worry about things that affect us all, like NSA spying, torture in Gitmo, war crimes committed by both the USA and Israel, unemployment, the economy, transparency in government, homelessness, income inequity, illegal immigrants, the decline of the middle class, veteran's health care, etc. etc. etc.

There are many, many things where the American people can agree on something, but the government (Republicans and Democrats) are either opposed or seemingly indifferent. And what do we get from the main stream media? A piece of cloth with ink on it. And we're supposed to think that's important?

I think we are being played like a fiddle.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:28 AM
link   
a reply to: abe froman

Lol. I think people should be able to buy it too. A few larger companies, at this time, stopped. I can see how some could get a little nervous about not being able to find a legal item for sale at big companies.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:30 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

You might want to go read some news, there are plenty of people wanting to ban the flag and tear down and replace monuments, there are actually a few threads on this website about it.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: VictorVonDoom
For many, it is not a nonsense issue and intelligent people can think about many issues at one time. You are minimizing an issue not of import to you, but is of import to others. I am a liberal democrat through and through and don't want this flag banned and it hasn't been. I am not distracted from other issues, as I have said in other forums- I can walk and chew gum at the same time- I imagine you can too.


Sure, many people can think about many issues at one time. I tend to focus on issues that actually affect me. Whether or not someone likes a Confederate battle flag does not affect me. The only people that are really affected by a Confederate battle flag are the people who are told they should care. From what I've read on the threads on ATS, most people have no idea of what it's really about. It was simply a flag used to distinguish Union from Confederate on the battlefield.

Some people are told it's a symbol of white supremacy. Some people are told it's a symbol of slavery and oppression. It is neither of those things. It was simply a flag used to distinguish Union from Confederate on the battlefield, the Stars and Bars was too confusing in the heat of battle. The flag of the Confederacy was the Stars and Bars. Being offended by the battle flag and not the Stars and Bars would be like Native Americans being offended by the First Army Calvary Patch but not the American flag.

But even if someone understood what the Confederate battle flag was about, and chose to be offended by it, I don't really see why that is more important than other things going on today. The American people can worry about things that affect us all, like NSA spying, torture in Gitmo, war crimes committed by both the USA and Israel, unemployment, the economy, transparency in government, homelessness, income inequity, illegal immigrants, the decline of the middle class, veteran's health care, etc. etc. etc.

There are many, many things where the American people can agree on something, but the government (Republicans and Democrats) are either opposed or seemingly indifferent. And what do we get from the main stream media? A piece of cloth with ink on it. And we're supposed to think that's important?

I think we are being played like a fiddle.

sources of what it is really about? I have seen many people supply sources on other forums today, leading to the good idea that it should NOT be on government property.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: DarkStormCrow There are a lot of people that want to do a lot of things. There are a lot of things that have little to no chance of happening. I want Madonna to play in my backyard for my birthday and I could get a lot of people to say she should. The thing you are talking about has about that much chance.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shugo
a reply to: reldra

I don't believe your request is unreasonable - what I will say is that we are generally appealing to everyone else, and totally steamrolling everyone else. For example - the Indiana laws and policies that people threw a stink about. Those policies basically allowed people to decline service to those who made them feel uncomfortable. It allowed the business owner the right to choose who they do business with. People got upset over that.

I don't "like" gay marriage, but that doesn't mean I don't like and am not friends with people who choose that lifestyle. It also doesn't mean that I oppose their right to do so. However, I would not wish to participate in any way in any kind of union - simply because it's a contradiction to my personal beliefs. That shouldn't offend anyone, if we were really a society of "equality for all, free speech for all", but it does. People scoff at that. However, if someone of the LGBT persuasion didn't want to come to my wedding for the same reason, that'd be just fine.

Another poster in another thread said the same thing in a different manner:
It's okay for a gay club owner to say the club is for gays only...but if a straight club owner did that for his club, they'd be boycotted. It doesn't make sense. It's totally illogical.

Apologies for using this as an analogy - it might seem a bit off topic. It just was one of the most prominent ones that stand out in my head right now, considering current events.
You lost me at choice and lifestyle. So you can start again.

NO club owner banned straight people. It was a suggestion on a sign. Do you know how many night clubs discriminate at the door based just on how someone looks/is dressed/is not skinny enough/doesn't look cool enough? You have no idea about night clubs in large cities.
edit on 28-6-2015 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Honestly I am a mod on another site . I quit going there because it was such a thankless demeaning task and no one appreciated anything I did .



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:41 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Whether you believe that it's a choice or not - I don't admit to know whether or not it's a choice - if that's what you're referring to. It is a lifestyle/belief structure. (I updated that post, as I could see it being a little insensitive. My apologies.) It all comes down in that regard to the fact that there are double standards.

You can tell group a, they can't harass or think badly of group b, but group b can harass or think badly of group a. Make more sense?

I have seen clubs do this in my town. It does happen (gay clubs that is). And it's perfectly fine for them to do so - no one complains about it. How they would test that, I have no idea. I've been to plenty of shares of night clubs.

edit on 28.6.2015 by Shugo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: reldra

Honestly I am a mod on another site . I quit going there because it was such a thankless demeaning task and no one appreciated anything I did .
It is a thankless job. Much like Host or GM of a guild on a gaming site. I did that for years, I am a 'retired guildmaster' now, though I still play daily. I had a massive group on Yahoo that I owned in the late 90s early 2000s. About 4k members. The infighting and the spam and the daily maintenance took me from what I wanted to do, just hang out and chat. So I closed it. I know how you feel. I know how the mods here probably feel..magnified by like 1k.
edit on 28-6-2015 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shugo
a reply to: reldra

Whether you believe that it's a choice or not - I don't admit to know whether or not it's a choice - if that's what you're referring to. It is a lifestyle/belief structure. It all comes down in that regard to the fact that there are double standards.

You can tell group a, they can't harass or think badly of group b, but group b can harass or think badly of group a. Make more sense?

I have seen clubs do this in my town. It does happen (gay clubs that is). And it's perfectly fine for them to do so - no one complains about it. How they would test that, I have no idea. I've been to plenty of shares of night clubs.
Sigh. I imagine that you are straight. Is that the lifestyle you choose and tell me when you chose it?

You do know what a protected class is, do you not?
edit on 28-6-2015 by reldra because: (no reason given)


It happens in many night clubs in big cities, gay or not.
edit on 28-6-2015 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

That's why I went back to correct my previous post, it was not my intention to make it seem that way. I don't favor one idea over the other - I just don't invest that amount of time into understand the personal lives of other people where it's none of my business.

So, am I understanding correctly that because homosexuality is "a protected class", that means they're totally off limits, but anyone else is fair game. That's the hypocrisy.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

sources of what it is really about? I have seen many people supply sources on other forums today, leading to the good idea that it should NOT be on government property.


Really? That's a toughie.

en.wikipedia.org...


At the First Battle of Manassas, near Manassas, Virginia, the similarity between the "Stars and Bars" and the "Stars and Stripes" caused confusion and military problems. Regiments carried flags to help commanders observe and assess battles in the warfare of the era. At a distance, the two national flags were hard to tell apart.


As to why it should be on government buildings, I really don't care. It's not on my property. Nothing I have has a Confederate battle flag on it. It's not on my state flag. I don't even know which state has it on their flag. It could be on the state flag of Oregon, for all I know. If it is on the state flag of Oregon, I won't lose any sleep over it. There are more important things I can lose sleep over.

But, the main stream media will tell us that this is something we should lose sleep over. Because they want us to believe that this is important. More important than congressmen getting bribed to pass the TPP, or police getting away with cold blooded murder.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
It happens in many night clubs in big cities, gay or not.


I guess I'm having difficulty understanding what it is that you aren't understanding then. Sorry.



Sigh. I imagine that you are straight.


So that invalidates everything that I'm saying?
edit on 28.6.2015 by Shugo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 01:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shugo
a reply to: reldra

That's why I went back to correct my previous post, it was not my intention to make it seem that way. I don't favor one idea over the other - I just don't invest that amount of time into understand the personal lives of other people where it's none of my business.

So, am I understanding correctly that because homosexuality is "a protected class", that means they're totally off limits, but anyone else is fair game. That's the hypocrisy.

I did not say that. What I mean to say is that heterosexuals have not been scrutinized and shamed and at times beaten to death because they are heterosexual. That is why heterosexuality is not a protected class. There is no hypocrisy.

I am heterosexual and white. Those things do not place me in a protected class. I am a female, and since females still do not have wage equality and had to fight tooth and nail for the right to vote, I would fall into a protected class there. However, the hypocrisy lies in the continued prejudice against homosexuals and the people that cry the opposite.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: reldra

sources of what it is really about? I have seen many people supply sources on other forums today, leading to the good idea that it should NOT be on government property.


Really? That's a toughie.

en.wikipedia.org...


At the First Battle of Manassas, near Manassas, Virginia, the similarity between the "Stars and Bars" and the "Stars and Stripes" caused confusion and military problems. Regiments carried flags to help commanders observe and assess battles in the warfare of the era. At a distance, the two national flags were hard to tell apart.


As to why it should be on government buildings, I really don't care. It's not on my property. Nothing I have has a Confederate battle flag on it. It's not on my state flag. I don't even know which state has it on their flag. It could be on the state flag of Oregon, for all I know. If it is on the state flag of Oregon, I won't lose any sleep over it. There are more important things I can lose sleep over.

But, the main stream media will tell us that this is something we should lose sleep over. Because they want us to believe that this is important. More important than congressmen getting bribed to pass the TPP, or police getting away with cold blooded murder.


That flag is still a symbol of racism and hate. It should not be on any government property be it Oregon or Alabama. I understand the TPP and do not like it and am actually almost an addict when it comes to speaking against the militarization of the police. See...walking and chewing gum at the same time.



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 02:02 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

So that's just it. It's oppressing a mindset that disagrees with another. An evangelical can't publicly state that they oppose gay marriage without being barraged by hateful rebuttals. To hell with free speech there.

If the system that you describe worked, there shouldn't be any protected classes. But, I digress as I fear we are going off topic.
edit on 28.6.2015 by Shugo because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join