Stop the madness

Well, the 13th Amendment pretty well took care of that issue as far as the Constitution goes

Amending the Constitution is cash money

But the Constitution was written and endorsed by people who owned slaves. If that is the justification for removing statues/monuments and renaming schools and sport teams, how far will the justification be pushed? When does it go too far?

I think it’s fine to frankly discuss the failings of our Founding Fathers. They were great but weren’t perfect.

The slavery issue was one big way in which they failed to live up to the American Revolution’s ideals of freedom and political equality for all. Women had to wait until 1920 for the right to vote. Natives continued to be discriminated and warred against, and in effect victims of genocide.

That said, the Founding Generation was quite “progressive” for their times. No nation had ever successfully rebelled against a colonial power before, and for examples of democracy in practice, you would have had to have gone pretty much all the way back to Athens.

The American Revolution has directly inspired freedom movements ever since, including the abolitionist movement.

So I think we should grade the likes of Washington, Jefferson, etc. on a curve to an extent.

....It seems there may be some common ground in our opinions. Given how many things we have disagreed upon in the past, I was not expecting that.

"Grade on a curve" I'd like see this idea developed and spread like a virus. Whether we're talking about racism or sexually inappropriate behavior, the all or nothing approach that has dominated the national response is unsatisfactory. How do we avoid dismissing all the good ( pro--social, benefitting many, enhancing communities) that a person has done while still holding them accountable for their objectionable behaviors? Are we all to be judged only by our worst moments?

Former NFL owner Jerry Richardson sold the Carolina Panthers when his sexually inappropriate behavior came to light. He didn't touch anyone, with or without consent. He didn't make a quid pro quo. He did treat women in his organization as sexualized objects. He also completely revitalized Charlotte, NC, by locating the team there, creating opportunity for who knows how many. Al Franken was reportedly sexually inappropriate as well with several women, but it's hard to avoid the idea that during his time in office he did a lot of good for a lot of people.

So I like your idea and I think that you are on to something. We cannot use positive behaviors to justify racism or sexual misconduct, but neither is justice served by painting with a broad brush.

At the risk of sounding like some sort of apologist, African Americans and women are far from the only ones affected. Those many today lump "whites" into one category, the truth is that many ethnicities and religious groups faced discrimination and abuse. That's not an excuse for what is occurring today.

As an example, Irish Americans were stereotyped and discriminated against both for being Irish and being Catholic for over 100 years. It didn't really end until the election of JFK. Examples from other groups are abundant.

The systemic racism that folks are upset about today (glad to see them phase out "white privilege") would seem to have been present since the beginning.

This was made so because they wanted to avoid such a controversial topic (and civil war) as much and as long as possible.