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.

 

This Time, Confederates Lose Battle of Lexington

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Flag display on public property. It has become a major point here recently. At least one group of states now has a guideline out of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, it would seem. Another thread had recently come at this from the side of a Louisiana law looking to address a Gay event flying their flag.

So along comes another case where it's already gone through court and the right has been found not to exist in using public flag poles for display by a group, during an event.


The Sons of Confederate Veterans do not have a constitutional right to fly the Confederate flag on public property, the 4th Circuit ruled.

The fraternal organization, which is open to male descendents of any veteran who served honorably in the Confederate forces, filed suit after Lexington, Va., passed a law in September 2011 that put limits on what could fly from government-owned flagpoles.

It's a heritage thing in this case and for this group. Similar to the Louisiana case, it's a law written in response to the one group's public display.


Lexington passed the ordinance in response to the negative feedback it received after it allowed the group to fly the flag during a parade on Lee Jackson Day, a Southern holiday celebrating Confederate Civil War Generals Robert E. Lee and Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson.


The interesting thing is that it really is very narrow and specific beyond any question, as history of the city's use of flag poles and in this case, apparently ones mounted to light poles along a parade route, shows it wasn't an issue until this group and this time. Though by the 4th circuit's ruling, they aren't 'the people's' flagpoles. They are the city's and not open for general public access any longer.

Personally and thinking about it from this side of things as well as the other thread which so recently hit this issue from an entirely different direction, I believe simply making city/public ones for what this ruling ultimately upholds in the ordinance referenced below is probably the best route all around. I'd want to make sure that applies against any political or other event driven flags the city might, itself, want to fly in violation of it's own narrow ordinance though.


The 2011 ordinance says that only the flags of the United States of America, the commonwealth of Virginia and the city of Lexington can be flown from government-owned flagpoles.
Source: Courthouse News

Fair is fair if that's to be the law of the land within the 4th Circuit. Apply it to all and it's at least fair I suppose. It's a sad statement of affairs that it comes to this anymore, but it's a fair resolution, it would seem.




posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 11:54 PM
link   
This one is interesting they say the Confederate Flag has no right to be flown on public property but IT IS a part of their heritage.

As Abraham Lincoln said :


We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.


And that is exactly what the Confederate States did as they saw Lincoln as doing.

As wrong as it was it was the highest law in the land.
edit on 13-7-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You do know that the "Battle of Lexington" was fought during the Revolutionary War correct?

Not the Civil War.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Unless you're referring to the 2nd battle during the Civil, which was a minor skirmish.

That skirmish was won by the Union.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by freedom12
 


I'd direct all fact check issues to Courthouse News. I relay the reports I find interesting...and the headline is verbatim what they have on their headline. Interesting trivia on the battles though.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

Not exactly trivia.

It's American History 101.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by freedom12
 


...and I appreciate your very energetic diligence in fact checking the headline, as copied from Courthouse News.

It's always good to know when there may be more of interest to hear behind the headline a source site chose to use on an article. It's a rather long and in depth article beyond just the headline though. I hope anyone curious on the topic takes a moment to look over what they wrote beneath it.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 
My bad sir.

Thought US History was common knowledge for Americans as it is required to graduate in most states.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by freedom12
 


Well, now that you mention it and it seems clarification to the headline Courthouse News chose for this is helpful, I would say the headline is actually, especially accurate and fitting given that it was a parade of Confederate organization members in Lexington. Theirs is far from a mundane or boring history,

Lexington has one of the more colorful and interesting histories among the civil war cities. It's precisely by it's lack of any major battle that it's so unusual. Not unique, but unusual enough for the headline to be well in context to make sense.

This is out of one of the more enlightening historic narratives I've come across in looking around on specific history for Lexington between 1861 and 1865.


Lexington bore the conflict with mixed loyalties. The town was occupied by both sides, and the memory of the conflict was not soon forgotten. The Bodley-Bullock House, at 200 Market Street, was at different times the headquarters for both Union and Confederate forces during the occupation of the city.


They also have another feature which isn't especially common to find in civil war history.


There are at least seven Civil War Generals buried in the cemetery, which also includes the graves of numerous soldiers from both sides.


Kentucky held above average importance geographically for both sides as well as perhaps personally for Lincoln, as a matter of fact.


By this point, Lexington, along with the rest of Kentucky, had formed state guard companies to keep the state neutral. Indeed, the situation in Kentucky was so important to both the Confederacy and the Union that in September 1861, Kentucky-born President Abraham Lincoln wrote, "I think to lose Kentucky is nearly the same as to lose the whole game."
Source

It's not any lack of knowledge to history. In fact I enjoy my history related courses as much or more than anything else. (Anthropology and World History in the Fall should be fun) I just hadn't intended to go back to the 1860's with the thread, that's all. What the heck though. The actual history is quite interesting when so much media makes the Civil war lines sound more organized and clear than they ever were in many places.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


The confederate flag is a flag of an enemy of the United States. To fly that flag is to spit in the face of every single American soldier that has ever fought and died to preserve freedom in this country.

That being said, I don't think it's appropriate to fly a LGBT flag on a flag pole on public property.

The old adage "it's heritage not hate" is complete and total BS though. It is hate.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


It's all in how it's seen and more importantly, how and why it's presented. If it's a truckload of Bubba's tearing up town with the 'Stars and Bars' flying on a CB Antenna, then yeah..it's a pretty hateful and detestable symbol.

However, I'm fairly close to battlefields here and watched some of the reenactments. It's really something for how deeply into character both sides get in many cases. It's further amazing to learn how many of the families have either Confederate or Union ..or both in their history around here. So it's something I see and definitely do appreciate as the part of American history an organization like the thread here is about was intending it be presented as.

Some may never see it as anything but hateful, no matter what historic meaning or context..but a good % don't and tolerance has to run all directions to mean anything, IMO.
edit on 13-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: minor correction



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Oh don't be fooled, that flag is flown in hate. It's not necessarily hate just for black people, it's hate for the United States of America, it's hate for the US Constitution, and it's hate for the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution. Outside of a civil war re enactment flying that flag is an affront to every single veteran who ever took the oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

It's a flag of an enemy state. Plain and simple.

That being said, again the LGBT flag should not be allowed to be flown on government flag poles. The only flags that should be allowed on those poles are federal, state, and local flags.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


I find your answer sad and just a bit depressing because I can tell by your tone and type that you're sincere. You mean and believe this yourself. (sigh)

I may not have known better before moving to Missouri and getting to see both those with Union and Confederate backgrounds up the family tree but now that I have? Well, I don't mean to offend here but you're simply flat wrong and there isn't another way to put that.

To you and in your personal perception it's a hateful symbol. I'm sorry you'd feel that way. To millions of Americans it's a symbol of historic sacrifice and a period of struggle in our nation and their own families. Many go a bit further than that but I've yet to bring myself to call it the War of Northern Aggression. lol.... I live in Missouri. I'm not from here..and we were a split state anyway. I guess it shows.

Anyway, nothing I say will change your mind or even get you to think again on your position. I can see that. However, this side had to be said nonetheless. There are too many people who take historic accuracy and pride in what happened during the Civil War from their own family's little piece of it that it's a travesty for anyone to think the Confederate Battle or National flag was/is simply a message of hate.

*** By the way, it's a pretty sore spot with me for the level of misconception around this...but the Civil War was absolutely NOT about Slavery. That was one of several issues and even General Grant, "hero" of the Union, held slaves to around the end of the War. Hardly the defining issue to set the whole event when leaders on both sides held them to different levels, near to the end.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 
I think if they want to fly the flags from the light poles on the parade route that this ruling could be challenged. Even though the electric poles along Main Street in my town technically are positioned on property that the City has the "right of way" to, the property is still technically owned by the original deed holders, and the poles themselves are owned by the electric company. I believe these facts would make a difference in an appeal- but only if the deed holders and the electric company were "on board" with the group.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join