(06-09-2020, 04:29 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(06-09-2020, 03:57 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: Robert E. Lee was a hero in the Mexican/American war.  He was reluctant to join the confederacy and only did so because that was what his home state chose to do.  In fact, he was very much against secession.


Did Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull give up their "right" to be called American when they took up arms against the U.S. military?  Was their fight honorable or treasonous?  Should we remove monuments to them since they took up arms against the U.S.?


I disagree.  It wasn't until perhaps 10 years or so ago that the monuments, school names, etc. were deemed "offensive" or "repressive".  We are told by those on the left that there should be an "open and honest" dialog about black history.  What better way to start a conversation than to have someone ask the question as to why a piece of art 100+ years old is displayed where it is?

Much like the definition of "hate speech" the definition of a "proper monument" is purely subjective.

Just because YOU learned that it was offensive 10 years ago doesn't mean it hasn't been that for MUCH longer.
You were just late to arrive there and you unfortunately had to be notified of your ignorance to the pain of others. 

That conversation you think "needs starting" has been being played out in the streets since 1954, man. 

The conversation has been had. It's over. 

I don't find it proper to erect monuments that serve to divide the populace where they stand. This one did  - as evidenced by the opinions being expressed by African American Jacksonvillians today. 

You should think past this "well it doesn't offend ME" stance.  Many people have lived a very different experience than you and see those monuments very differently than you do.

Again I point to other things in our nation's history that may or may not be "offensive" to some people.  I get and understand why some black people might find a statue of a Confederate soldier "offensive".  Just like I think that some people might find monuments to others "offensive".

For the record I didn't "learn that it was 'offensive' 10 years ago".  I simply pointed out that from what I recall there were no complaints regarding the statue, school names, etc. as being "offensive" until around 10 years ago or so.  There may have been some prior to that, but I'm certainly not aware of it.  The statue had been there over a century.

Regarding the part in bold, I don't think that the statue was erected for the purpose that you state.

Much of the problem today is people think about the actions that happened back then in "today's terms" regarding race and culture.  The fact of the matter is slavery was "normal" back then to many people.  I'm not saying that it was right, but that's the way that it was back then.

I have had things done in a historical perspective to people of my heritage in the past.  Do I hold a grudge against the very (like) people that did it back then today?  Of course not.  It's HISTORY.

I know that I might be in the minority in some cases, but I tend to adhere to one of the things that Dr. Martin Luther King talked about.  I personally "judge" people not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.  I have actually had friends tell me that "they weren't sure" about me when they initially learned my last name.  My own wife was introduced to me as a blind date.  When her friend told her of my ethnicity at first it was a big "no".  30+ years later we have been happily married.

---