Monument Contemplation

[Reynolds]

My ancestors fought on both sides, and none of them were slave owners.

My ancestors fought for the CSA and owned a lot of slaves. Both my Cherokee and my white ancestors were slave owners. My fourth great grandfather was a huge slave owner. He treated his slaves so bad that they all stayed with him after the war. Stayed and complained about how much better they had it before they became sharecroppers.

 

[Reynolds]

Hi Reynolds, the war was fought over slavery. No one said there were not slaves in northern states. Note today there are no slaves in the Union of north and south.

The war was not fought over slavery. What date was the Emancipation Proclamation signed?

 

[Van]

Hi Reynolds, I have no interest in debating the obvious. This thread is about why the monuments should be replaced with one honoring those who died to make men free. This action might begin to alter the culture and put it on a more biblical path. As I have noted before, the Bible advocates for freedom.

 

[Lewis]

My ancestors fought for the CSA and owned a lot of slaves. Both my Cherokee and my white ancestors were slave owners. My fourth great grandfather was a huge slave owner. He treated his slaves so bad that they all stayed with him after the war. Stayed and complained about how much better they had it before they became sharecroppers.

I wouldn't doubt your own family history. The percentage of slave owners varied by state, my state was at the low end. Anyway none of my CSA family fought to keep slaves because they didn't have any.

 

[Lewis]

Some of my ancestors (living in Pennsylvania) fought for the north. They were at Cold Harbor. But I fear other ancestors, farther back in American history, who lived in North Carolina about 1800 were engaged in seafaring. Most probably, the cargo included if not slaves, the products of slaves. Again, those who were born into and grew up in the slave culture (and were not black) probably thought the culture was not an abomination. But folks, it was.

There is hardly anyone today in America who advocates slavery. Times change. But remember that if African tribes had not sold captured men and women of other tribes into slavery we wouldn't be having this conversation. There is blame enough for all.

 

[HankD]

Hmm, what about those of us whose ancestors came via Ellis Island and not Plymouth Rock?

My heritage goes back to 1895 and later.

Slavery is wrong of course whatever the culture but I can't identify culturally with the Civil War except to say hundreds of thousands of my fellow Americans died in that tragic war.

Being part Jewish and descendant from eastern European Jews (Although my grandmother came over long before the holocaust) I can identify at least intellectually with the holocaust. Some of her family did remain in Prussia and suffered the horror of the holocaust.

There are memorials at several of the Nazi concentration camp sites to honor and memorialize the dead and I have no problem with that and Lord willing I might visit one.

So perhaps these Civil War monuments may be preserved for a memorial to the dead, the placards being changed to indicate such.
Robert E. Lee was an American. He made a wrong choice.

Oh you say he renounced his citizenship when he became a rebel.

Well such were our founding fathers - they rebelled against the British crown. A tyrannical crown but they did rebel.

We need to analyze the historical and cultural situation before we (like the Jihadist) rush to judgement and destroy historical artifacts and beat those in the immediate area.

At least move them to a protected but private site so that when the emotions die down a decision can be made as to the outcome of these historical entities and monuments to our rich (but sad - in the case of this historical event) heritage.

Especially when the motives are so mixed with the political.

HankD

 

[Lewis]

Hmm, what about those of us whose ancestors came via Ellis Island and not Plymouth Rock?

Well then you don't have a dog in this fight

 

[Van]

There is hardly anyone today in America who advocates slavery. Times change. But remember that if African tribes had not sold captured men and women of other tribes into slavery we wouldn't be having this conversation. There is blame enough for all.

Blaming others for our failures is not an attribute to be sought. The professing Christians who first settled America tolerated slavery. But, as time went on, and the true nature of the abomination became better known (Uncle Tom's Cabin) there was a sea change among those who held no or very few slaves. Eventually the reality of the brotherhood in Christ made slavery untenable. For example, try reading Philemon.

So one message of the needless monuments is that people (southern pastors) could turn scripture into something that tolerated slavery. We have multiple posters here who deny the very essence of the civil war. But the Bible is crystal, we are to treat our neighbors (black and white, yellow and brown, and all the mixtures) as we want others to treat us. Shackles anyone?

Last point, if you have not seen "Amazing Grace" take some time and view it.

 

[carpro]

2) I have no interest to listening to the disingenuous arguments aimed at claiming the war was not about slavery.

Understandable. I have no interest in listening to the disingenuous arguments aimed at claiming the war was all about slavery.

 

[HankD]

I am not saying the Civil War was ONLY about slavery either.

HankD

 

[Lewis]

Blaming others for our failures is not an attribute to be sought. The professing Christians who first settled America tolerated slavery. But, as time went on, and the true nature of the abomination became better known (Uncle Tom's Cabin) there was a sea change among those who held no or very few slaves. Eventually the reality of the brotherhood in Christ made slavery untenable. For example, try reading Philemon.

So one message of the needless monuments is that people (southern pastors) could turn scripture into something that tolerated slavery. We have multiple posters here who deny the very essence of the civil war. But the Bible is crystal, we are to treat our neighbors (black and white, yellow and brown, and all the mixtures) as we want others to treat us. Shackles anyone?

Last point, if you have not seen "Amazing Grace" take some time and view it.

So basically you would not allow any monuments to the dead if they are the "bad guys". I know of several statues that memorialize , "Our Confederate dead" and apparently you wouldn't allow even that. People make mistakes, even those who consider themselves very moral. You know, on both sides.

 

[JonC]

I agree. Slavery was an issue, but it was not The Issue. The issue was money. The Northern states wanted to oppress the Southern states with grade restriction and tariff. The slaves were part of the economic engine of the South. Abolition, for the most part, was not based in morality, it was an attempt by the north to further exert control over the South.

Most of these issues are connected. The "Tariff of Abomination" (1828) forced the South to purchase goods from Northern states. Only 4 years later another tax was imposed, causing South Carolina to threaten to seceed (which resulted in the tax being nullified).

There was debate over the role a federal government would play in regards to state rights. This manifested itself in the issue of slavery. With expansion, slave states lost influence as more free stated were added. Fast forward to the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) and tensions were right on both sides.

Simply, it was not as simple as slavery.

 

[HankD]

Most of these issues are connected. The "Tariff of Abomination" (1828) forced the South to purchase goods from Northern states. Only 4 years later another tax was imposed, causing South Carolina to threaten to seceed (which resulted in the tax being nullified).

There was debate over the role a federal government would play in regards to state rights. This manifested itself in the issue of slavery. With expansion, slave states lost influence as more free stated were added. Fast forward to the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) and tensions were right on both sides.

Simply, it was not as simple as slavery.

Granted.

Now is the time to let the dead stay buried, remembered but in the graves
These are fallen Americans lets leave them be. Shed some tears but let leave them be.

Each state will decide concerning historical monument entities.

Like someone said I have no dog in this hunt apart from fellow Americans dying for their convictions.

HankD

 

[Reynolds]

Hi Reynolds, I have no interest in debating the obvious. This thread is about why the monuments should be replaced with one honoring those who died to make men free. This action might begin to alter the culture and put it on a more biblical path. As I have noted before, the Bible advocates for freedom.

The only thing "obvious" to me is your lack of understanding of the full causation of the war.

 

[JonC]

Granted.

Now is the time to let the dead stay buried, remembered but in the graves
These are fallen Americans lets leave them be. Shed some tears but let leave them be.

Each state will decide concerning historical monument entities.

Like someone said I have no dog in this hunt apart from fellow Americans dying for their convictions.

HankD

I only have two dogs in this hunt. I enjoy walking through history. Removing monuments based on what they mean to some people strikes me as dangerous. Second, I agree with some of the views the South held as represented by those monuments (chiefly concerning the rights of states and taxation).

 

[HankD]

I only have two dogs in this hunt. I enjoy walking through history. Removing monuments based on what they mean to some people strikes me as dangerous. Second, I agree with some of the views the South held as represented by those monuments (chiefly concerning the rights of states and taxation).

If you are being critical of my post (which I don't know) I will say by vindication go back and read where I say every state will have to decide the fate and/or the recognition of those who died in battle in the Civil War and whatever monuments.

To simply ignore it and sweep it under the historical rug is wrong. The southern soldiers were in the final analysis (at least to me with no dog in the hunt) Americans whose blood remains unrequited in the earth, many no doubt (on both sides) the children of God.

HankD

 

[JonC]

If you are being critical of my post (which I don't know) I will say by vindication go back and read where I say every state will have to decide the fate and/or the recognition of those who died in battle in the Civil War and whatever monuments.

To simply ignore it and sweep it under the historical rug is wrong. The southern soldiers were in the final analysis (at least to me with no dog in the hunt) Americans whose blood remains unrequited in the earth, many no doubt (on both sides) the children of God.

HankD

I wasn't being critical of your post at all. I was stating my two concerns about the removal of these monuments. Like you I stand in the spirit of those monuments and say that this is a matter for each state to decide.

 

[Reynolds]

I only have two dogs in this hunt. I enjoy walking through history. Removing monuments based on what they mean to some people strikes me as dangerous. Second, I agree with some of the views the South held as represented by those monuments (chiefly concerning the rights of states and taxation).

The defeat of the CSA was the beginning of the demise of the USA. Lincoln began the process of raping The Constitution. He centralized vastly more power than the founders intended be centralized. He blatantly defied the known and accepted intent of the founders.

 

[JonC]

The defeat of the CSA was the beginning of the demise of the USA. Lincoln began the process of raping The Constitution. He centralized vastly more power than the founders intended be centralized. He blatantly defied the known and accepted intent of the founders.

It was a no win situation. A loose union of independent States would most likely have perished long ago, but the strength of the federal government (which proved necessary to see us through 2 world wars) was not a without its own cost.

Just goes to show God is indeed in control.

 

[Van]

Understandable. I have no interest in listening to the disingenuous arguments aimed at claiming the war was all about slavery.

Don't you think it was disingenuous to add "all" to my view that the Civil war was about slavery?