• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mississippi Governor Proclaims Confederate Heritage Month

Ignatius A

Well-Known Member
^^ This is the divisive stuff we're all talking about. ^^

And once again you talk past me and go on about some stereotypical rant about your idea of "leftists" instead of engaging with things I've actually said to you.

The problem seems to be that you're unable to engage in discussion one-on-one without wearing giant divisive political blinders. You don't see people - you see "leftists." Well, I ain't Hillary Clinton, and she ain't here. Go take up your problems with her ... with her. I'd prefer to have a discussion with someone who's actually engaging with what I'm actually saying.
Ah yes it's never a leftists problem. Someone else always to blame.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I never liked the "state's rights" angle, because then the inevitable question that follows is "state's rights to do what, exactly?"
That's limited by the Constitution, & SCOTUS
recognition of "incorporated rights" from the
Bill Of Rights.
 

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
According to Wikipedia (Confederate History Month), the first Confederate Heritage Month in Mississippi was in 1993, and it is the only state to officially declare April as Confederate Heritage Month in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Six other southern states have apparently designated April as Confederate History Month (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, and Virginia). Four states—Mississippi, Alabama, North Carolina, and South Carolina—still celebrate Confederate Memorial Day. Honestly, I'm not keen on celebrating the Confederacy, but I've personally known and met some WASP southerns who are.
 

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
Correct. Same sex "marriage" is like a marriage in the same way a bicycle is a motorcycle. As to gender there's two genders. Everything else is an anomaly.

If by answered you mean not answered then yes.

I'm talking about actual day to day survival like when people in the "wrong" groups speak out and say things that people in the correct group dont like. The people in the correct group feel completely justified in ruining the lives of people in the wrong groups when they speak up.

This is where you and I part ways in this discussion because I wholeheartedly support LGBTQ+ civil and human rights, as well as same-sex marriage.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Honestly, I'm not keen on celebrating the Confederacy, but I've personally known and met some WASP southerns who are.
The wildest thing to me was the military bases named after Confederate generals. I'm glad your country finally fixed that.

I can't think of any other country that would ever even consider naming their army bases after people whose main claim to fame was taking up arms against their country.

It would be like naming a navy installation Naval Station Osama bin Laden. It boggles the mind.
 

Secret Chief

Veteran Member
Correct. Same sex "marriage" is like a marriage in the same way a bicycle is a motorcycle. As to gender there's two genders. Everything else is an anomaly.

If by answered you mean not answered then yes.

I'm talking about actual day to day survival like when people in the "wrong" groups speak out and say things that people in the correct group dont like. The people in the correct group feel completely justified in ruining the lives of people in the wrong groups when they speak up.
@Ignatius A

Ok. And what is your answer to me regarding:

Do you only care about things that affect you? Do you not care about others in society, who may be different from you, who may be negatively impacted by things that don't affect you?
 
Last edited:

Soandso

ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
To do whats best for their own citizens. Your point is well taken though that a state shouldn't be able to infringe on the rights of citizens outlined in the Constitution. The problem is the feds have far over reached their authority.

Are we still talking about why the south left the union?
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
It was mostly over states rights but slavery was definitely a factor as free and slave states bickered for political clout.
Have you read the Articles of Secession or Confederation in full?
I never liked the "state's rights" angle, because then the inevitable question that follows is "state's rights to do what, exactly?"

State's right to own slaves.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Have you read the Articles of Secession or Confederation in full?


State's right to own slaves.
I found it to be a bit more complicated when I researched the history.

It really was about states rights, but I discovered slavery was also a central issue used in fighting for states rights as slave states didn't want a minority voice in federal government when making policies as free states would outnumber slave states, where in the past it was more an equal voice between free and slave states from my understanding in driving federal policymaking.

It was really all about having political power on the federal level.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
It really was about states rights, but I discovered slavery was also a central issue used in fighting for states rights as slave states didn't want a minority voice in federal government when making policies as free states would outnumber slave states, where in the past it was more an equal voice between free and slave states from my understanding in driving federal policymaking.
Of course if they would have simply freed the slaves and given them full rights as citizens, then those states would have had a much greater voice in federal government.

But obviously they couldn't do that.
 
Last edited:

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I found it to be a bit more complicated when I researched the history.

It really was about states rights, but I discovered slavery was also a central issue used in fighting for states rights as slave states didn't want a minority voice in federal government when making policies as free states would outnumber slave states, where in the past it was more an equal voice between free and slave states from my understanding in driving federal policymaking.

It was really all about having political power on the federal level.
Well, now, don't be disingenuous - that's not all it was about.
 
Top