bzzzzzzt The TRUTH wrote:

Nothing can further exemplify the deep roots of a Christian need to force others to accept Jesus Christ as savior than the gory, bloody rampage of the Crusades, which over years left countless "infidels" slain*. Or one can look at the inquisition where non-believers in Christ were tortured and executed.

Add to that, just for the sake of example, the missionary slaughter that took place when Spain and Portugal colonized Central and South America for Christ (and gold and other riches). Or the savagery of European Christian nations conquering Africa and engaging in slavery.

The percentage of the world slaughtered in Jesus' name far and away is greater than those symbols you rail against. Until you put the cross in with your lot of things to hate ... you need to hang your head in shame.


*Clyde you might look up what percent of the word's population of Jewish were slaughtered in the Crusades and compare to the Nazi's. We await the history teachers math while we wait for Godot.

---

Still no sign of godot.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

How many vile symbols here?

Well asked.

What about this one?



Is it still vile? If not, why is the swastika? Does context matter?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Almost had it... then Trump came along. (whew! from my perspective, that was close. Most people don't understand how close we came this time to losing this country, possibly forever.)

It's already lost & so has most of the West...

...big business & corruption.

How many vile symbols here?

Well asked.

What about this one?

Is it still vile? If not, why is the swastika? Does context matter?

LOL
if Symbol vile is true {
then
"missing statement";
else
"why is the swastika?";
}

try {
"swastika again";
}
catch and finally blocks . . .

There was an attempt to a nationally syndicated talk radio network whose purpose was to support the enslaving liberal/democrat/socialist/marxist/communist party of the USA. "Air America" IT FAILED. Because 1) listening to a radio broadcast requires a bit more activity in the brain from the listeners and 2) everybody/anybody on Air America found out very quickly trying to support/defend their enslaving ideas was impossible.

Liberalism/socialism/marxism/communism can't be implemented under the light of truth. It can only be implemented by force.

Hollywood dominates the rest of media because of 1) the Screen Actors Guild (a closed shop union) and 2) nobody gets promoted in hollywood unless you support the enslaving liberal/democrat/socialist/marxist/communist party of the USA. They're currently losing the monopoly they've had in the past because of the internet.

The liberalism/socialism/marxism/communism thought they had power and control "in the bag" for the next generation with that felon, hillary, and was thinking within that time it would be no problem to completely erase our democratic republic from the history books.

Almost had it... then Trump came along. (whew! from my perspective, that was close. Most people don't understand how close we came this time to losing this country, possibly forever.)

I am very aware of Air America, I've referenced it here before. It failed because it was MISMANAGED- you seem to overlook that several of the most popular people from Air America moved on to do other things (Rachael Maddow- MSNBC, Al Franken- an AWESOME senator, etc.).

You act as if it failed because of it's LIBERAL (NOT MARXIST) agenda. HA.

The network's demise was due to financial issues, and overall mismanagement. Also, they leased their air time conservative run media moguls, I wonder if they were given a fair price or if they were intentionally treated like crap?

---

#resist

The liberalism/socialism/marxism/communism thought they had power and control "in the bag" for the next generation with that felon, hillary...

Hillary was not a liberal, neither was Obama. I'll point out once more that what you consider 'liberal' is actually more akin to progressive republicans. This country has been shifting rightwards for what, sixty+ years? That's what money and power and cronyism and a long term plan on world domination get you.

Maybe Hilary would have taken the win had she been a little more of a liberal and a little less of a conservative =P. Or maybe Hilary would have taken the win if it weren't for FBI and foreign interference in the campaigns...

---

#resist

How many vile symbols here?

Well asked.

What about this one?

Is it still vile? If not, why is the swastika? Does context matter?

LOL
if Symbol vile is true {
then
"missing statement";
else
"why is the swastika?";
}

try {
"swastika again";
}
catch and finally blocks . . .

Good call on the "missing statement", I guess for that it could be "please tell the gay pride movement that their use of the symbol is offensive (presumably to gay people)". Hopefully I don't need to explain the link between the pink triangle and the swastika.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

This is a very objectionable symbol.

And this one of course.

“There is no god but Allah [God]. Mohammad is the messenger of Allah.”

Good call on the "missing statement", I guess for that it could be "please tell the gay pride movement that their use of the symbol is offensive (presumably to gay people)". Hopefully I don't need to explain the link between the pink triangle and the swastika.

I have to admit, I had to Google that one myself. Such a very sad association with it. Will we see such a return with 45 and his intolerant supporters?

If the main reason that the American Civil War was fought was Slavery.
Then isn't the flag under which the pro slavery states fought, the Confederate flag objectionable?

---

If the main reason that the American Civil War was Slavery.
Then isn't the flag under which the pro slavery states fought, the Confederate flag objectionable?

That flag sure has been the subject of much debate, even in recent years...

---

#resist

If the main reason that the American Civil War was fought was Slavery.
Then isn't the flag under which the pro slavery states fought, the Confederate flag objectionable?

*IF* the only reason was slavery, you would be correct...

But...

Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.

Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.

I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.

As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

Yours,
A. Lincoln.

What Lincoln decided to do was 'freeing some and leaving others alone' in his 'Emancipation Proclamation' which went into effect on Jan 1, 1863. President Lincoln did not have the power to free ALL the slaves in the USA, and he knew it. His Emancipation Proclamation did not affect slaves in the 4 'slave' States that did NOT go into rebellion, nor certain other areas. It only had a maximum effect of freeing about 3 million of the 4 million slaves in the USA, and initially affected (when it went into effect) only 30,000 to 50,000 slaves.

Lincoln did not live to see all the slaves freed. That was done with the ratification of the 13th Amendment (Dec. 6, 1865). The freed slaves were not given citizenship until the ratification of the 14th Amendment (July 9, 1868), and they did not have the right to vote until the ratification of the 15th Amendment (Feb. 3, 1870).

Yes, slavery was one of the main causes of the Civil War, but only one. There were three other main causes as well.

1. Sectionalism. There were quite a number of differences between the North and the South, including (but not limited to) economic, cultural, and political differences.

2. Protectionism. Interestingly, the agricultural South favored free trade, and the industrial North favored protectionist tariffs.

3. State's Rights. Was the Union perpetual, or did States have the right to leave the Union? What level of Sovereignty did the States possess?

and

4. Slavery.

Slavery WAS the cause célèbre, but WHY?

My (and quite a number of others') take on the subject:

From 1800 to 1860, there was an increasing amount of Sectionalism in the USA, between the increasingly industrialized North and the agricultural South. The Northern industrialists wanted protective tariffs on imported industrial goods. The Southern agricultural businessmen opposed this, fearing that an ensuing trade war with the rest of the world would harm their exports of agricultural goods. The Northern interests, realizing that they could not contain the problems of 'free trade' advocates in the South, decided to fight back and began to beat the abolitionist drums to discredit and contain the Southern interests.

Yes, on the surface, the Civil War *appeared* to be about Slavery, but on looking deeper it was really about *other* factors. Remember, not all of the 'slave' States tried to leave the Union (4 did not: Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri).

Consider today. We have sectionalism (the elites of the north-east and west coasts vs. 'fly-over territory'), protectionism vs. globalist free-trade, and State's Rights flying around. Today's cause célèbre is (illegal) immigration. Suggest any possibility of future events, such as another wave of secession/civil war or at least a good amount of civil unrest, especially after the election of the unpopular Trump? Be afraid.

So, yes. In the eyes of some, the Confederate flag is objectionable, due to its association with slavery. While it has other associations, slavery kind of overrides it in my opinion. I do not personally display that flag, That said, I see no reason to forbid it to others.

We need a thicker skin and more tolerance of others. One person's objectionable symbol is another person's celebration of history. We SHOULD be considerate of the feelings of others, but said consideration should not be legally (or otherwise) *required*. Deal with it.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

...We need a thicker skin and more tolerance of others. One person's objectionable symbol is another person's celebration of history. We SHOULD be considerate of the feelings of others, but said consideration should not be legally (or otherwise) *required*. Deal with it.

Nicely said. reminds me of (paraphrase): 'I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend 'til death your right to say it.' (Something certain large amounts of hypocrites on the far right seem to have forgotten)

---

#resist

Wasted effort.

It is not me you have to convince. It is the Millions, more likely Billions of others around the World, that the US Civil War was about other issues beside Slavery, and that it was not the main item on the list.

---

All of your attempts to place extra significance on a single symbol.

I give you the single finger salute.
Now, it totally depends upon the fingers used.
We all know what the single middle one upraised means.

But, do you also remember the 'peace' salute?

Different fingers, same hand.

It seems to me that some are just using the current administration as an excuse for being little petty weinie biting little snowflakes.
That is all they were before the election, and that is all they shall ever be, and forgotten in the coming spring when they all melt away.

Goodby, little snowflakes, goodby.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

The V sign comes to mind.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_sign



Flakes but perhaps not Snowflakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgyeUHH_V0g

He is dead now................if only we could hear His comments today................

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

America's answer to "objectionable" images...

...Napalm

Where's your Morals & Ethics Clyde?