Third World Skeptical Kid

Omg, submit that on it's own. I can just see all the SJW having aneurysms.

Excellent point!

:D

Just a thought :)

Yes it would, sir.

There seem to be a lot of memes going around lately that present a spectrum of increasingly mundane monuments and icons that could/should be taken down if we are to follow the same logic that leads people to tear down confederate statues. I don't necessarily disagree with this kind of reductio ad absurdum argument, but I still think it would be an interesting thought experiment to see how far you can take it in the other direction; that is, if we start from the presumption that it is ok to memorialize confederate leaders despite any negative ideologies that might pertain to them, then what is the worst kind person that could potentially be justifiably memorialized despite their negative ideologies? Just a thought :)

I guess that I am not seeing a big push to create new and improved civil war statues. So until we see that big push, with all due respect, I find your argument moot. On the other hand, civil war statues that have been around for many, many years, are really not causing more harm today than they were in past years. But the millennials have learned that being offended by anything warrants an over-the-top public display. Just my 2 cents.

I'm not trying to argue anything; I was just voicing a thought that interested me, not trying to make a point.

I just found out that a lot of these Confederate statues went up around the time of the civil rights movement in the 60's as a way to intimidate blacks and let them know who is in charge.

There's statues of Stalin and Lenin in Seattle honoring them

Lol. Brings me back to the last time I was in Cuba.

Lol, I'm sure Spock could have written better music than that weird shit Leonard Nimoy wrote XD

I was going make a similiar meme after a friend mentioned MLK was anti gay. Although I tend to believe he was, I could not find any real evidence MLK made any statements to that effect. In the 1960 homosexuality was still very much "in the closet" and not really a big controversy. Gay marriage was not even a concept back then.

But that's the problem. These people today are applying today's morals to the past. King will get a pass because he is part of the group that's most "in" today, i.e., blacks, but lots of blacks, then and now, think he was too soft in promoting non-violence.

Blacks are "in?" Good grief was everyone on this page born in the turn of the century?

I was born in 1977, thank you very much, and I've seen the rise of the victim groups that are untouchable. Can you crap on white people, Christians, and, men all day long? Yes. Can you say one word against blacks, women, gays, trans, Islam, Jews, other minorities without being labeled a bigot, even if it's something as simple as pointing out, you know, FACTS? No. So who is "in" and who is protected? I have read the most horribly racist things out of some members of BLM and no one bats an eye because "blacks are oppressed," I've seen black commentators on TV say horribly racist, insensitive things (like on CNN, one commentator, who still has her job there, saying, "oh, poor white guy" after an old guy was beaten up by a group of young black men), but a white person saying something 1/50th as bad would be outed and lose their job instantly. Now either it's all all right or none of it is. These hypocritical double standards are pissing people off and unless the left cuts it out, you are damn sure going to see a rise in a reactionary right wing, no matter how many times you decide to go out there and march and try to beat your beliefs into people. It's not going to work.

It's been a hundred years and we haven't learned a thing. Trump and the nazis are trying to make America great again by preserving the racial divide in this country. Do you have any idea what's been said about blacks over the years? What's still being said? Have you ever heard or seen white bodies swinging from trees? You're crying now because the status quo has been shifted. You're complaining after just getting a taste of what other races have experienced in this country for years. But you know nothing about real oppression.

It's not difficult to explain gay marriage. I mean, just look at Octavia's reply; simple. Defending or rejecting it is the difficult(ish) part.

It was a joke once again. I just wanna do something with my google images

They are binding assays- looks awful though. probably because of crappy antibodies from abcam.

https://elifesciences.org/articles/02046/figures

We did have a statue of P**is Satan erected (see what i did there?) by pranksters in Vancouver a few years back. It was taken down by city officials the same day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay It dates back well before the 60's.

he is black so no

Yes 1uen4a.jpg (click to show)[/img

This is a FALSE EQUIVALENCY! MLK didn't fight and die so that gay people wouldn't have rights. Robert E Lee lead a WAR against his country(treason)for the right to own black people! Do you see how that is not close to the equal?

Gay people have the same rights as everyone else. I simply do not accept your premise. And Robert Lee didn't lead a war to protect slavery. He was an abolitionist who freed his own slaves. He was fighting for states rights, as well as several in the Confederacy including blacks. Even the founder of the KKK recruiting his slaves and promised to free them if they won, saying that they were going to be freed either way. He even told them afterwards to be outstanding citizens and to go vote. He even said I'm not going to tell you who to vote for. It's not nearly as black and white as slavery. No pun intended. Robert Lee, as many others felt that they couldn't fight against their home country, their own state. That's why he turned down the request form Abraham Lincoln. It was only after the Emancipation Proclamation that the War became about slavery, (only in the North). It had no jurisdiction in the South whatsoever. In fact Abraham Lincoln, an abolitionist himself said, that he would keep slavery if he thought it would save the union. Even he understood that it wasn't just about slavery. Many, even in the North thought of him as tyrannical. Disobedience to tyrants is obedience to God. That was the prevailing thinking if the day. Abraham Lincoln pardoned the Confederacy because he knew that American had been punished enough. Robert Lee went on to be a great American hero and he served to rebuild the South and improve relationships on both sides. The Civil War was a blemish on our history for both sides. Many do not support the monuments for supremacy. They support it for history and for heritage and better understanding. If you're so quickly to spew the word treason, then you must be consistent. The first American Patriots were all treasonous for breaking away from Great Britain. Learn your history.

Three things:
1. I've read and watched many programs about this about this topic and history in general so I know that what you're saying is made up foolishness
2. Lincoln supported banning slavery so before he was even inaugurated many southern slave states secceded b/c they believed owning slaves was a states rights issue.
3. I believe that it's only treason if you loose. Since we won the war for independence we get to say we're patriots. #losersdontgetstatues