• 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.
apdst said:
And, there were statewide votes, either in the form of a referendum, or special elections for conentions. Why is that so hard for some folks figure out?
Click to expand...

Its not hard at all. What is hard to take is you pontificating about the civil war era as it you actually know something when your credibility has been trashed and smashed, crushed and flushed, and destroyed beyond any semblance of recognition.

You LIED. Pure and simple. Here it is from apdst

What I will do, however, prove that all 11 Confederate states and 3 border states had state wide referendums on secession.
Click to expand...

You will able to provide proof for three. Thats it. three. You lied about what you could do and you still lie now in perpetuating this fraud.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Its not hard at all. What is hard to take is you pontificating about the civil war era as it you actually know something when your credibility has been trashed and smashed, crushed and flushed, and destroyed beyond any semblance of recognition.

You LIED. Pure and simple.
Click to expand...

yes, his claim that all the states of the CSA had a referendum on secession, appears to have been a lie.
 
Thunder said:
yeah, still waiting for you to condemn the use of the word "nigger".
Click to expand...
I already have...

what does my condemning of a term have to do with your bigotry?... are you going to stop being a bigot if i condemn a term?... I'm thinking no...what say you?
 
FluffyNinja said:
Don't misquote me. I did not say that it was #1,,,,,,just one of FIVE, which were all equally important to the average Southerner.
The other four reasons being: (1) the tariff (2) location of the trans-continental railroad (3) states rights and organization of the western territories and perhaps the single-most important and immediate cause of Secession (4) the election of Abraham Lincoln.
Click to expand...
1. Not a big deal
2. Not a big deal.
3. States' right to own slaves and which western territories could have slavery.
4. Because they were afraid Lincoln would stop the expansion of slavery.

Slavery was #1. Most of the other issues revolved around slavery.
 
theplaydrive said:
1. Not a big deal
2. Not a big deal.
3. States' right to own slaves and which western territories could have slavery.
4. Because they were afraid Lincoln would stop the expansion of slavery.

Slavery was #1. Most of the other issues revolved around slavery.
Click to expand...

i'm not sure we can discount the railroad issue out of hand.... hell, railroads were probably the primary reason why the south lost.
 
Thrilla said:
I already have...

what does my condemning of a term have to do with your bigotry?... are you going to stop being a bigot if i condemn a term?... I'm thinking no...what say you?
Click to expand...

I am not bigoted against poor whites. My family was lower-middle class for the longest time.

However, I am against white racists. And yes, I call them hicks, hillbillies, white-trash, and other derogatory names. But this is due to their beliefs, not who they are.
 
Thunder said:
states' rights....to own slaves????

and why was the election of Lincoln such a problem? slavery.
Click to expand...
The abolition of slavery was not a part of Lincoln's platform. The Republican Party in 1860, simply wanted to stop the expansion of the institution into the western territories.
 
Thunder said:
I am not bigoted against poor whites. My family was lower-middle class for the longest time.

However, I am against white racists. And yes, I call them hicks, hillbillies, white-trash, and other derogatory names. But this is due to their beliefs, not who they are.
Click to expand...

what do you call black racists?
 
theplaydrive said:
1. Not a big deal
2. Not a big deal.
3. States' right to own slaves and which western territories could have slavery.
4. Because they were afraid Lincoln would stop the expansion of slavery.

Slavery was #1. Most of the other issues revolved around slavery.
Click to expand...
If you honestly believe that the tariff and the ralroad were "not big deals" then perhaps you should do a bit of research. I suggest starting with some of the writings/speeches of John C. Calhoun and Henry Clay.
 
FluffyNinja said:
The abolition of slavery was not a part of Lincoln's platform. The Republican Party in 1860, simply wanted to stop the expansion of the institution into the western territories.
Click to expand...

ah...so the South hated Lincoln and secedded, partially because Lincoln would not allow the spread of slavry to the West.

looks like slavery was a damn significant issue for the South.
 
Thunder said:
what do I call black racists? certainly not "niggers".

do you call black racists, "niggers"?
Click to expand...
The question isn't what you don't call them. It's what DO you call them?
 
Thunder said:
did the CSA negotiate with Lincoln to preserve the Union...but keep slavery?
Click to expand...
No, the CSA attempted to send diplomats to Washington to negotiate a peaceful separation, but they were turned away. This was followed shortly by the Union Declaring War on the Confederate States. Or are you going to deny both of these facts as well.
 
FluffyNinja said:
No, the CSA attempted to send diplomats to Washington to negotiate a peaceful separation, but they were turned away. This was followed shortly by the Union Declaring War on the Confederate States....
Click to expand...

who began hostilities?

Dixy did, when they launched an unprovoked attack against Federal property, Ft. Sumter.
 
Thunder said:
who began hostilities?

Dixy did, when they launched an unprovoked attack against Federal property, Ft. Sumter.
Click to expand...
Actually, the fort being occupied was the agressive act.
 
Thunder said:
who began hostilities?

Dixy did, when they launched an unprovoked attack against Federal property, Ft. Sumter.
Click to expand...
Wrong again. We've already been down this road, but likely due to thread tardation syndrome, it seems you've made a U-turn somewhere. :shrug:
 
FluffyNinja said:
Wrong again. We've already been down this road, but likely due to thread tardation syndrome, it seems you've made a U-turn somewhere. :shrug:
Click to expand...

you are lying. the South started hostilities with the unprovoked attack upon Ft. Sumter, after the CSA demanded its surrender.
 
FluffyNinja said:
Wrong again. We've already been down this road, but likely due to thread tardation syndrome, it seems you've made a U-turn somewhere. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I think our side is looking at this the wrong way. We are trying to look at the whole truth which makes each side look bad but quite possibly makes the north look a little worse. Maybe we should all just try to make history fit our ideology like the other side and then this thread can just close since we'll all "be right" no matter what.

Sarcasm off.
 
Thunder said:
you are lying. the South started hostilities with the unprovoked attack upon Ft. Sumter, after the CSA demanded its surrender.
Click to expand...
Keep repeating that, it may come true. It probably won't, but it just might if you really really believe it in your heart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom