Originally Posted by sob

Constructive, no. However, it's quite revealing of the mindset and lack of accurate historical knowledge of those denigrating the Confederacy in this thread.



It would have been more accurate to have added the word "anymore" after the word "disagree."

Superbelt, in post #24, made the claim that the South betrayed their country. When his statement was proven false, he quickly changed his story to the position that they didn't secede in the way "Our Constitution does provide for the separation of the union." I pointed out that this is inaccurate as well, and it is pretty [edit: "much"] my basis for the following statement: How can a person be labeled a "traitor" or a "criminal" or "dishonorable" for exercising their legal rights?



My response is based on this interpretation of the above: you're unsure that Lincoln was a traitor to the Constitution.

Lincoln ignored the right of the states to secede (a condition some states stipulated before they would sign on), suspended Habeas Corpus, made a shambles of the 9th and 10th amendments, proclaimed that Southern states couldn't have slaves (but Northern ones could), made plans to ship slaves out of the US, and made war against women, children, and the elderly by destroying their food so they would starve. Don't forget, according to Lincoln, those were citizens of HIS country. How much more do you need?

I hope you're not one of those who clings to their opinion in spite of a mountain of evidence to the contrary.



"Why is that, because you say so? I think we've been having an interesting debate over just that, but noone from any perspective has brought up anything that does what you claim. Are you one of those who says 'my side has some evidence so we must be 100% right without question!' ? I would hope not."




I'm very unsure why this was brought up again, but in an effort to get back to the topic of the thread, my "clincher" would be the following.

When I lived in another town, a movement was underway to change the name of a street to "Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd."

Some people and businesses on this street opposed the move. They did not like the thought of having the name of a documented philanderer and plagiarist in their address.

Would those who support the eradication of references to the Confederacy side with the residents and businesses? Or is it only minorities that are allowed to be offended?