Confederate Flag License Plate Sparks Debate

Confederate Flag License Plate Sparks Debate

dfw.cbslocal.com

“When many look at that history, we think about it in terms of secession, that is we were seceding from the Union in the southern parts of the country,” explained Shelton. “Many would view that, quite frankly, as treason, because they meant to actually destroy the existing governmental structure. But when we dig deeper, the issue becomes even more offensive to many African Americans and those that sought freedom for those of darker skin in our country.”

(visit the link for the full news article)

This should be a non-issue. The first amendment is clear. Freedom of speech, especially political speech is guaranteed. Sorry, but sometimes "free speech" bruises feelings. Get over it. Besides, the civil war had very little to do with slavery anyway. The main reason for the Civil War was over tariffs. The South wanted free trade with Europe and the North wanted to levy heavy taxes and tariffs to pay for its infrastructure and growing government. Does this sound familiar??? Yes slavery was a part of it, but not the main issue. Today, the South is pro free trade; look at all the foreign manufacturing in the South versus the decaying industries in the North. I’m not a secessionist, but the words Jefferson Davis said “the cause for which we fight is bound to reassert itself in another time and in another manner” sure look look prophetic. A region that is becoming a financial power combined with a history independence, a separate culture and a mistrust of Washington DC and/or strong central government will eventually lead to an impasse.

dfw.cbslocal.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

If everyone actually studied what the civil war was really about, people would have a different point of view about it. The North was exploiting the South for its resources as well. But like they say, the winners are the ones that write history.

Originally posted by wardk28
If everyone actually studied what the civil war was really about, people would have a different point of view about it. The North was exploiting the South for its resources as well. But like they say, the winners are the ones that write history.

That's true. Everybody gets caught up in the "slavery" thing. Slavery was awful, and a terrible thing for men to do to each other, BUT it has been happening for thousands of years. The US did not start it, and it did not end with our civil war.

I don't know why they would all of a sudden want a plate that honors vets that no longer exist, but that's just my opinion. Id put it on the ballot for the next governors election and if it wins by popular vote then the people have spoken, let them have it.

Originally posted by EyesWideShut
I don't know why they would all of a sudden want a plate that honors vets that no longer exist, but that's just my opinion. Id put it on the ballot for the next governors election and if it wins by popular vote then the people have spoken, let them have it.

Maybe it is about the idea of freedoms lost? Maybe it is a not so subtle message to Washington that Texans are getting tired of the games? Either way, there is no reason that they should not be allowed to have the tag.

Slavery was already on the decline and nearly set to become abolished by the Southern states before Lincoln started the War of Northern Aggression. The old excuse that the war was about freeing the slaves is just that: an excuse.

The Confederate flag is not about racism, it never has been, and it certainly isn't today. It's about Southern PRIDE and nothing more. Fifteen years ago, my wife and I watched as the Grand Dragon of the KKK led a march down Main Street in Rutherfordton N.C. - him and about ten of his cohorts. You know what the beautiful part was? NOBODY even paid them any attention. There were no supporters other than those the GD brought with him, and no one even cared enough to stage a counter protest. He stood on the courthouse steps and railed for about 20 minutes (to nobody) and then he left, thoroughly dejected and irrelevant (as he and the Klan should be.)

Today, the Confederate flag is a symbol of state's rights and the sacrifices that my forefathers made to keep their country free from Northern aggression - and that is ALL.

INSTITUTIONAL RACISM IS DEAD! Get over it already.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
This should be a non-issue. The first amendment is clear. Freedom of speech, especially political speech is guaranteed.

This isn't about freedom of speech, there are no calls as I am aware to ban people from waving confederate flags or from sugarcoating confederate history. People are more than free to talk and display the confederacy as they want. The issue is stated clearly in the link you posted:

Would you buy a license plate with a Confederate flag on it? State officials are looking at possibly launching a new Texas state license plate honoring veterans of the War Between the States.

There are some Texan tax payers that are not all that keen on honoring the confederate states for their role in the civil war. The civil war still brings out deep feels, wounds, we see it alot here on ATS, and when we get government involved, whether it is in promoting one side of history or demonizing it, people, tax payers, will naturally react, and rightfully so.

It should noted though that many southern states already honor the role of the confederacy. We see the confederate flag within some state flags, and it's within the lawful bounds of state governments.

Sorry, but sometimes "free speech" bruises feelings. Get over it.

That's very interesting because there are alot of threads on this forum alone in regards to how unfairly the confederate states were treated and how it was unfair that they were invaded by the Union. Are you going to tell these folks to get over it?

Besides, the civil war had very little to do with slavery anyway. The main reason for the Civil War was over tariffs. The South wanted free trade with Europe and the North wanted to levy heavy taxes and tariffs to pay for its infrastructure and growing government.

The civil war had little to nothing to do with tariffs. Congress passed the new tariffs bill in 1828, a full 30 years prior to the civil war. Not to mention, tarriffs were not cited for the core reasoning of southern states seceeding in the declarations. Interesting point to the matter:

During the nadir of post-civil-war race relations — the terrible years after 1890 when town after town across the North became all-white “sundown towns” and state after state across the South prevented African Americans from voting — “anything but slavery” explanations of the Civil War gained traction. To this day Confederate sympathizers successfully float this false claim, along with their preferred name for the conflict: the War Between the States. At the infamous Secession Ball in South Carolina, hosted in December by the Sons of Confederate Veterans, “the main reasons for secession were portrayed as high tariffs and Northern states using Southern tax money to build their own infrastructure.

These explanations are flatly wrong. High tariffs had prompted the Nullification Crisis in 1831-33, when, after South Carolina demanded the right to nullify federal laws or secede in protest, President Andrew Jackson threatened force. No state joined the movement, and South Carolina backed down. Tariffs were not an issue in 1860, and Southern states said nothing about them. Why would they? Southerners had written the tariff of 1857, under which the nation was functioning. Its rates were lower than at any point since 1816.

www.washingtonpost.com...

The confederate states seceeding a mere month after the first Republican was elected. This was not coincidence as tariffs were not to the center of Lincoln's campaign agenda at all. Considering also, they didn't even give Lincoln a chance to assume office proves the point further.

In anycase, let people debate the issue, and let the Texan state officials pass laws some how honoring the confederate states. It's nothing new really, and personally, I know many southerners who proudly wave the confederate states flag and who are not racist at all. It's a cultural thing for the most part, some folks don't even realise the history behind the confederate flag.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
This should be a non-issue. The first amendment is clear. Freedom of speech, especially political speech is guaranteed.

This isn't about freedom of speech, there are no calls as I am aware to ban people from waving confederate flags or from sugarcoating confederate history. People are more than free to talk and display the confederacy as they want. The issue is stated clearly in the link you posted:

How about the NAACP's 11-year-long boycott of South Carolina? In 2000, lawmakers fearful of losing tourism dollars caved into their demands to remove the flag from the Statehouse dome. It was moved to a Civil War memorial on the grounds of the Statehouse, but the NAACP is STILL bitching, and STILL waging economic war on the state.

Even Democratic State Senator Robert Ford of Charleston has waved the flag from the podium on the Senate floor and declared that racism is dead, and that the flag is a proud symbol of the state's history.

Columbia, S.C. — With a Confederate flag in hand, a black South Carolina state senator said Thursday that African-Americans have cause to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Civil War, and he hopes discussions over the next four years can unite black and white South Carolinians. Democratic Sen. Robert Ford of Charleston said black and white students across South Carolina will start seeing lots of Confederate flags on Tuesday, the anniversary of the war's beginning in Charleston Harbor, and the sight shouldn't be divisive.

"For the next four years, you're going to see this and you're going to see a whole lot of it," he said at the podium on the Senate floor. "Instead of dividing yourself talking about why the war was fought, and I don't like this and I don't like that, understand this as an African-American: Before the war you was a slave, after the war you was free, and in 2012 you can do anything that you want to do." He said America was united after the war. "The Confederate soldiers go home, the Union soldiers go home, but the slaves are free," he said.

Ford said senators should get involved in anniversary commemorations to encourage understanding, to prevent misinformation and the spread of hatred. "If people died, and we're going to have this celebration, I want everybody in South Carolina to be united on it, to understand each other, to talk to each other," said the 62-year-old New Orleans native. "Don't be just mean-spirited. Be willing to talk to your white colleagues. Be willing to talk to your black colleagues. Be willing to go to the schools and talk to students, say, listen, we've got to move forward from what you think happened between 1861 and 1865."

In South Carolina, which begat the Jim Crow-era South, the Confederate flag has been the cause of protests and an 11-year tourism boycott of the state by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. A 2000 legislative compromise, which Ford helped broker, removed the flag from atop the Statehouse dome, and from Senate and House chambers, and put it on a 20-foot pole beside the Confederate Soldiers Monument on the front law of the Statehouse.

But the NAACP never approved of the location, more visible than before, and earlier this year renewed its call on legislators to remove it, saying the Confederate flag is a symbol of injustice, not heritage as many white Southerners argue. In December, Civil War buffs held a "Secession Ball" in Charleston to commemorate South Carolina's vote to secede from the United States. The NAACP held a protest outside, saying it made no sense to celebrate a heinous event that led to death and destruction, or to honor those who committed treason against their country.

The Rev. Joseph Darby, a Charleston NAACP leader, disagreed with Ford that the Civil War is anything to celebrate. "That's basically like saying we should celebrate the Pearl Harbor attack like it hastened the integration of the military," he said. Unless Ford is willing to put the Confederate flag on campaign literature, "he should not start that kind of rhetoric," he said. "I'm disappointed and disgusted. I think that Sen. Ford is woefully deluded. I think he has better things to do than be a Confederate apologist."

Ford, a former gubernatorial hopeful last year who lost in the Democratic primary, said people should embrace their heritage and honor ancestors who died in a war that ended slavery. "I got a lot of liberal friends who I know love their heritage but are afraid to embrace it. Why? Because they'll be called a racist," Ford said. "For the next four years, I don't care who embrace their heritage. I don't care. Because people died in your family four or five generations ago, just because you was living in the South." He touted his own history as cause for celebration, from being arrested 73 times during the civil rights movement, to being a state senator since 1993. "We came a mighty long way as black and white citizens," he said. SOURCE

There are some Texan tax payers that are not all that keen on honoring the confederate states for their role in the civil war. The civil war still brings out deep feels, wounds, we see it alot here on ATS, and when we get government involved, whether it is in promoting one side of history or demonizing it, people, tax payers, will naturally react, and rightfully so.

It should noted though that many southern states already honor the role of the confederacy. We see the confederate flag within some state flags, and it's within the lawful bounds of state governments.

So what if "some" are offended, especially over a non-issue? Personally I'm sick to death of the few telling the many how they should live their lives.

In anycase, let people debate the issue, and let the Texan state officials pass laws some how honoring the confederate states. It's nothing new really, and personally, I know many southerners who proudly wave the confederate states flag and who are not racist at all. It's a cultural thing for the most part, some folks don't even realise the history behind the confederate flag.

I would be one of those Southerners proud of his heritage who has no racist inclinations. I'll go one better that most who say "I have black friends" with: "The best man at my wedding was black," and "My former brother-in-law is black," and for the final bit, "I named my son after Gen. Colin Powell." This issue is NOT about race; once again it is about freedom. In this case, it is the freedom to chose whether you want to pony up the extra $70 to buy one of these OPTIONAL license plates. If you don't like them, don't buy them; but please don't tell ME what I can and can't do because it offends your sensibilities.

*Note, my use of the word "you" in no way related to the poster to whom I was replying, it was just a generic "you."

Originally posted by OldCorp

How about the NAACP's 11-year-long boycott of South Carolina? In 2000, lawmakers fearful of losing tourism dollars caved into their demands to remove the flag from the Statehouse dome. It was moved to a Civil War memorial on the grounds of the Statehouse, but the NAACP is STILL bitching, and STILL waging economic war on the state.

What about the NAACP? And why did you waste my time with such a long quoted article? The NAACP is a private organisation, those who decided to boycott south Carolina are private citizens, so what's the problem? They are using their rights to protest, their freedom of speech, so why are you complaining? Lawmakers made the choice to remove the confederate flag, they made a choice, they were more than free to ignore the protests, you and your buddies were more than free to go down there and protest for the flag.

You are more than free to voice your opinions, you have the right to boycott the NAACP.

Even Democratic State Senator Robert Ford of Charleston has waved the flag from the podium on the Senate floor and declared that racism is dead, and that the flag is a proud symbol of the state's history.

While I disagree with Mr Ford that racism is dead, that's alot BS, I do agree with him that the confederate flag is often used as a cultural symbol for some southerners, little of it is to do with racism. I made this point in my previous post, did you read it?

So what if "some" are offended, especially over a non-issue?

You don't care about how they feel? You think this is a none issue? Then I have to ask you, why are you getting so uptight about it? If you think this is a non-issue, why get uptight about the NAACP boycotting?

Whats the big deal? The liberals need to get over the confederate flag issue.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


What the hell?, come down to GA you'll see tons of these...

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
You don't care about how they feel? You think this is a none issue? Then I have to ask you, why are you getting so uptight about it? If you think this is a non-issue, why get uptight about the NAACP boycotting?

The only thing I'm uptight about is a few people trying to impose their will on the majority, which is happening all too often these days. All it took to ban a simple prayer from our local high school graduation ceremonies was for ONE student to complain that he was "offended." Well screw him and all those like him. Wanna know what happened? During the time when the prayer would have been said by a school official, the students themselves broke out in a not-so-spontaneous recitation of the Lord's Prayer. Needless to say, it's a good thing that young man was graduating as I doubt he would have been very popular next year.

And what do you think would happen to me if I announced I was going to boycott the NAACP? Even if I was a black man, I'd be called an "Uncle Tom" or worse. Names don't bother me, but you and I know it wouldn't stop there. If I owned a business, then they would try to shut me down, just as they tried to damage the economy of South Carolina. There is no pleasing these people; they don't stop until you comply with everything they demand. Some might call that terrorism..

reply to post by OldCorp


Its called communism/marxism its just how these people operate. Name calling, bigot,racist,etc..And we all know how whites hate to be called these names, so the next thing you know your bending to their demands. Its time for people to stop giving in to communist gangs like the NAACP, enough is enough, and I think that people have come to the end of the line with these types of groups.

Originally posted by OldCorp
The only thing I'm uptight about is a few people trying to impose their will on the majority, which is happening all too often these days.

That is exactly what protesting and freedom of speech is all about, spreading a belief, protesting with a belief, and getting your voice heard. Welcome to freedom.

All it took to ban a simple prayer from our local high school graduation ceremonies was for ONE student to complain that he was "offended."

I don't blame that one student. He didn't come to his school graduation to attend a church service. I'm sure that you wouldn't want your kids to atten a school graduation if it involved an islamic prayer for a period of time. Now what I don't understand is why we need to display our faith and religious beliefs upon others? Can we not do this in private? Or among our own churches? Why must it be thrust upon the rest of us? Have you no faith in your own belief to pray in private or among the church with others?

During the time when the prayer would have been said by a school official, the students themselves broke out in a not-so-spontaneous recitation of the Lord's Prayer.

Thats strange, I never took christianity and the points of bible as something translated into an ego contest between students. To me, my faith is my personal journey, my relationship with others, my peace, my respect for others regardless of belief, my faith in private away from any display toward the public.

And what do you think would happen to me if I announced I was going to boycott the NAACP? Even if I was a black man, I'd be called an "Uncle Tom" or worse.

Well that's the thing about freedom of speech, you can say something and people will either like you for it or not. You seem to want others to cater to your sensitivities when it comes to constitutional rights, but when it's there's, they must just "get over it".

I Confederate flag in Calif is a non issue.

You would think blacks and liberals in Calif would make a big issue of it but the just ignore it and no one says anything.

In some parts of Calif i have seen hispanics flying the Confederate flag on there trucks. Don't understand but its funny.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776

Originally posted by EyesWideShut
I don't know why they would all of a sudden want a plate that honors vets that no longer exist, but that's just my opinion. Id put it on the ballot for the next governors election and if it wins by popular vote then the people have spoken, let them have it.

Maybe it is about the idea of freedoms lost? Maybe it is a not so subtle message to Washington that Texans are getting tired of the games? Either way, there is no reason that they should not be allowed to have the tag.

I fail to see the correlation between "freedoms lost" and the plate issue, maybe you can expand on that a bit. For the record I also don't recall saying there WAS a reason that the stars and bars shouldn't be on the plates, to the contrary I stated the PEOPLE should vote on it. The whole thing is divisive and polarizing and the timing of it seems suspect to me, just as the timing of OBL being captured seemed a little...convenient.

I dont see the issue here, im from the UK and i have a big confederate flag on my wall, i think its a cool looking flag ? & im from the south of the UK so in that respect its relelvant to me, being the southern states flag, but i dont have it on display as some sort of racial slur towards anyone whos ancestors might have been slaves, theres really no more to it, its a cool flag representing independence and the south, that is what it means to me, to everyone it means something different.

I am offended by Masonic symbols...there should be no Masonic symbols on plates.

I am offended by sail boats...there should be no sail boats on plates.

I am offended by stars and crescent moons...there should be none on plates.

I am offended by flip flops, sea gulls, wright brothers planes, light houses, bears, flowers, viet nam war ribbons, purple hearts, red hats, silhohuettes of washington, lobsters, etc..... there should be none on plates.

I am offended by numbers and state names....there should be none on plates.

If we make Confederate Flags illegal on license plates...this will immediately result in better lifestyles, better employment opportunities, ensure a rise in educational and IQs for all African Americans and Americans in general. In essence, our entire society will be uplifted to an enlightened level and all men will be looked upon as equals.

Yeah right....

Why not take all the money that is used to oppose thie flag on a license plate and apply it to scholarships for minorities that are challenged, or help with placing minorities in jobs, or buy computers for minority groups and teach computer skills and training,...if the cost of each bus ticket to an organized protest was spent instead on a vocational class or an economics class at a local community college...these things would do more in the long run to undercut the meanings of the flag than any march or protest would.

But that would require some effort and thought...nope, it is much easier to go out and blame all of your problems on an old flag from 140 years ago.