• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the Confederate flag a symbol of treason?

Is the Confederate flag a symbol of treason?

  • Total voters
    82
Status
Not open for further replies.
Henrin said:
The claims I made are obvious and without fail, it does fall under the tenth. You need to show me evidence I failed somewhere. You are doing nothing but what you usually do. The courts are right, and you are wrong. That is not logic, its bull****. It doesn't matter how many times you do it, it is always going to be a poor excuse of an argument.
Click to expand...

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869)
 
Henrin said:
The act fell and still does fall under the tenth amendment. The courting ruling that it didn't was in the interest of the union that just waged an illegal war that killed thousands of people.
Click to expand...

You're missing the ultimate point of the Constitution. It was written to establish governing principles of a nation, not as an alliance between nations.

You are showing disrespect for the Constitution by saying that it basically carries the same weight as Kim Kardashian's wedding vows.
 
Paschendale said:
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869)
Click to expand...

That is the court case I was referencing yes. The argument that the phrase "to form a more perfect union" could be used as a case against the action taken by the south is a joke, then and now.
 
rocket88 said:
You're missing the ultimate point of the Constitution. It was written to establish governing principles of a nation, not as an alliance between nations.
Click to expand...

It was formed to establish the governing powers of the members of the union.

You are showing disrespect for the Constitution by saying that it basically carries the same weight as Kim Kardashian's wedding vows.
Click to expand...

It does. If the love is gone the commit can be broken.
 
Teamosil: "Succession is basically overthrowing the government in one part of the country." The word is Secession, not succession :2wave::peace
 
theplaydrive said:
My opinion is an informed opinion, but since you disagree with it, you call it political correctness and since LMR disagrees with it, he tries to make it a regional issue (even though many people in his region agree with me).
Click to expand...



Please, tell us where you got your information from.

The problem with both of you is that you are denying the flags history and only taking into account it's present meaning to many Southerners. I take both into account recognizing that it still retains it's history while also taking on the new meanings Southerners have given it over time.
Click to expand...

No, I've been trying to educate you on the flag's history for some time. You refuse to listen to the facts.

Fact #1: The Battle Flag was used as an identifier for Confederate units, whose ranks comprised of men who didn't own slaves and weren't motivated to serve in the Confederate army to preserve slavery.

Fact#2: Less than 1% of all Confederate officers and soldiers owned slaves. If the war was just about slavery, that would mean that every single soldier serving in the Confederate army and navy volunteered for no other reason, than to perserve slavery and that just ain't so.

Fact#3: The Stars and Stripes represented a country that allowed the existance of the institution of slavery alot longer than the Confederacy did, yet we don't hear anyone saying anything about that, which smacks of hypocrisy.

Fact#4: There was a very large and powerful abolitionist movement in England and England had all but officially abolished slavery by the time the Declaration of Independence was signed. There's evidence that the colonies saw this coming and slavery may have been one of the motivations for the Rev-War.
 
Paschendale said:
But that's the thing. Those who fly the Confederate flag today are Americans. They are living in one country and flying the flag of another.
Click to expand...

The folks living in the Confederate States were Americans, too.
 
Caine said:
Yeah... and screw those mexicans for doing it too....
Click to expand...

But...but...but...that's different!!

Now that you mention it, there should be a movement by the Libbos to remove the medicine shield from the Oklahoma state flag.
 
apdst said:
Please, tell us where you got your information from.
Click to expand...
A little thing I like to call history.

Also the rest of your post does absolutely nothing to contradict my point.
 
apdst said:
The folks living in the Confederate States were Americans, too.
Click to expand...

In so much that they lived on the continent of America. Their attempt, however, was to be recognized as NOT "American" in regard to being a citizen of the United States of America. They renounced that and set upon their revolution. They lost, and thus were not recognized as autonomous and sovereign.
 
haymarket said:
Utterly amazing that the US Supreme Court - the official body whose legal opinion counts - disagreed with you on both of your claims. Imagine that!
Click to expand...

You better call the gubmint and get some g-men to New Hampshire, because they've already set up preimptive articles of secession.
 
Henrin said:
The act fell and still does fall under the tenth amendment. The courting ruling that it didn't was in the interest of the union that just waged an illegal war that killed thousands of people.
Click to expand...

Yes, the fact remains that all powers not delegated to the union are reserved to the states. The power to compel membership was never granted to the union, hence the union has no legal authority to compel any state to remain in the union against its will.
 
Paschendale said:
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869)
Click to expand...

Check the date on that.....

The ruling was made AFTER the U.S.A. decided to attack the C.S.A. in order to preserve the union.
 
Caine said:
Check the date on that.....

The ruling was made AFTER the U.S.A. decided to attack the C.S.A. in order to preserve the union.
Click to expand...

Correction. The USA didnt attack the csa. the csa never existed. They attacked insurgents within in the usa. Secession is prohibited by the constitution and therefore the csa was never recognized.
 
Caine said:
Check the date on that.....

The ruling was made AFTER the U.S.A. decided to attack the C.S.A. in order to preserve the union.
Click to expand...

South Carolina fired the first shots. You can look it up.
 
99percenter said:
Correction. The USA didnt attack the csa. the csa never existed. They attacked insurgents within in the usa. Secession is prohibited by the constitution and therefore the csa was never recognized.
Click to expand...
Do you feel that repeating the same fallacy over and over again will some how make it true? You've been asked several times to give evidence that the US Constitution prohibits secession, and you have not. The fact is, you can't because no such wording exists in the Constitution. If you were to dig a bit deeper, which requires truth-seeking (for which you seem to have an aversion), you would find that the Founders actually voted on the issue of whether or not to include the words "perpetual union" in the Constitution, not suprisingly, they voted it down. What we are left with is a Constitution which does not expressly prohibit secession.

But don't let me stop you, go ahead, feel free to repeat the same nonsense again.........perhaps this time it will come true. :roll:

One final question for you my cognitively challenged friend. At the end of the Civil War, CSA President, Jefferson Davis was arrested but never put on trial for treason? I wonder why? Go look up what Chief Justice Chase said regarding charges against Davis. Then report back expeditiously and tell us what you found. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
99percenter said:
Correction. The USA didnt attack the csa. the csa never existed. They attacked insurgents within in the usa. Secession is prohibited by the constitution and therefore the csa was never recognized.
Click to expand...

And..... again. Prove it is prohibited by the constitution.
Why do you keep running from this argument?
 
rocket88 said:
South Carolina fired the first shots. You can look it up.
Click to expand...

Yes you are correct.

However, refusing to leave a military base, and in fact sending reinforcements to said base was viewed as an act of aggression.

The CSA went preemptive on them. Probably not the greatest idea, but they did.
 
This is getting stupid...

...Lincoln deliberately engaged the Civil War as a domestic insurrection.
 
Last edited:
theplaydrive said:
Actually it wasn't. My OP was about the flag being a symbol of treason waved by people who aren't traitors and the irony/stupidity of that phenomenon.

Try harder.
Click to expand...

No thanks. Not only is a flag is nothing but a symbol, but you explicitly talked about exhibiting the flag being treasonous as a demonstration of disloyalty.

You can try harder.
 
Henrin said:
The claims I made are obvious and without fail, it does fall under the tenth. You need to show me evidence I failed somewhere. You are doing nothing but what you usually do. The courts are right, and you are wrong. That is not logic, its bull****. It doesn't matter how many times you do it, it is always going to be a poor excuse of an argument.
Click to expand...

reality and the historical record show that you are incorrect in your opinion. My opinion on the issues of the Constitution means nothing when the Supreme Court says otherwise. The same for you or anyone else. All the mental gymnastics do not change that reality. All the convoluted logic in the world does not change that reality. All of the connecting the dots with your reasoning skills do not change that reality.

You see Henrin, the argument means nothing to me. What does mean something to me is the reality of the events as they actually did happen and that is reflected in the historical record.
 
theplaydrive said:
There are several threads on the Confederate flag that dance around this question.

Many people, usually, if not always, conservatives, argue in favor of the Confederate flag and the desire to fly it or place it within the public domain. Oftentimes, they refer to it as if it is merely an innocent symbol of United States history, a symbol of state's rights, a symbol of fighting against far reaching federal government and sometimes even a symbol of patriotism.

However, these arguments, to me, seem like revisionist nonsense. The Confederate flag represents treason. It was the flag of people whose actions were not based in love of their country, but in a decision to give up on their country and abandon it in order to form a new one. It was a flag flown by those who decided that they no longer wished to be a part of the United States and that they no longer wished to solve their problems while remaining Americans.

Consequently, it seems obvious to me that the Confederate flag is not one that would be flown proudly by Americans, but one that would be flown proudly by those who no longer wish to be Americans. For this reason, it seems ridiculous to allow such a flag to be present on anything belonging to or issued by the state as it represents those who want to disassociate themselves from the state. It also seems ridiculous for anyone who considers themselves a patriot to fly the flag of people who abandoned their patriotism. Am I right about all of this? If not, why not?
Click to expand...

The Confederate flag is as treasonous as the American flag is/was. In the end the CSA did no more to the USA than what the USA did to Britain. The CSA wanted the freedom to do things as their way of life instead of how the "North" wanted to do things which was their way of life. History is written by the winners. How would the Confederate flag be viewed today if the CSA won their bid for freedom as the USA had roughly a century prior? Probably no worse or better than the German flag is currently. I've heard that the Confederate flag is a symbol of slavery. If so then why isn't the German flag a symbol of Jewish hate?
 
maquiscat said:
The Confederate flag is as treasonous as the American flag is/was. In the end the CSA did no more to the USA than what the USA did to Britain. The CSA wanted the freedom to do things as their way of life instead of how the "North" wanted to do things which was their way of life. History is written by the winners. How would the Confederate flag be viewed today if the CSA won their bid for freedom as the USA had roughly a century prior? Probably no worse or better than the German flag is currently. I've heard that the Confederate flag is a symbol of slavery. If so then why isn't the German flag a symbol of Jewish hate?
Click to expand...

I think you are conflating the German flag with the Nazi Flag. The Nazi flag (Swastika) is most certainly viewed as a symbol of hate, in fact it is banned within the borders of the FRG.

I once bought the argument that the South was not fighting to preserve slavery, further study and reflection has led me to the conclusion that I was buying a revisionist history. Slavery was exactly the fight. Remember it is not the common soldier (or even professional soldier in a free society) or citizen that starts wars or decides their reasons, it is the elite (political, economic...) for the elite of the period it was slavery and its pepetuation that brought them to secession.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom