Trying To Erase All References To The South

[alismith]

More people are trying to get anything that references the South removed from public view.

Even celebs are joining in, and leading, the bandwagon to erase history and any mention of those horrible generals that led the South against the North during the War of Northern Aggression.

As Julienne Moore says, about her VA high school,

"We name our buildings, monuments, and parks after exalted and heroic individuals as a way to honor them, and inspire ourselves to do better and reach for more in our own lives," she said. "It is reprehensible to me that in this day and age a school should carry and celebrate the name of a person who fought for the enslavement of other human beings. I think the students of this school deserve better than that moniker."

p.s. Perhaps, instead of making out with the football team in the locker room, she should have paid a little more attention in history class as to why the South left the Union.

https://celebrity.yahoo.com/blogs/ce...194849672.html

[Helen Keller]

If you're in love with PC (socialism) please eat my cock.








I approve this message, anyone that disagrees can eat 180 FMJ.

[N/A]

I am waiting till one of those idiots watches a movie long enough to see that the closing credits list some people as belonging to CSA...and get all bent out of shape.

Yes, Tank Monkey, I know what it means,...but they won't.

[5.56NATO]

At this rate the founders will be smoothed off of Mt Rushmore and Marx, Darwin, Che, and Satan's faces superimposed thereon.

[alismith]

At this rate the founders will be smoothed off of Mt Rushmore and Marx, Darwin, Che, and Satan's faces superimposed thereon.

Uh, you are behind the times. The new faces will be Obama, Holder, Sharpton, and Jesse. THESE are the TRUE leaders liberals and progressives want immortalized.

[jet3534]

At this rate the founders will be smoothed off of Mt Rushmore and Marx, Darwin, Che, and Satan's faces superimposed thereon.

Why Darwin?

[ltorlo64]

Why Darwin?

Because his notion of evolution has been the single most destructive idea against morality. Morality is based, not on God and His laws, but on who is strongest. In fact, with evolution, God does not even need to exist meaning that His law does not exist, so we can be truly free, no laws to bind us and keep us from having fun and to remind us that there truly is a right and a wrong, good and evil, God and Satan.

[5.56NATO]

Well addressed!

[paulo]

More people are trying to get anything that references the South removed from public view.

Even celebs are joining in, and leading, the bandwagon to erase history and any mention of those horrible generals that led the South against the North during the War of Northern Aggression.

As Julienne Moore says, about her VA high school,

"We name our buildings, monuments, and parks after exalted and heroic individuals as a way to honor them, and inspire ourselves to do better and reach for more in our own lives," she said. "It is reprehensible to me that in this day and age a school should carry and celebrate the name of a person who fought for the enslavement of other human beings. I think the students of this school deserve better than that moniker."

p.s. Perhaps, instead of making out with the football team in the locker room, she should have paid a little more attention in history class as to why the South left the Union.https://celebrity.yahoo.com/blogs/ce...194849672.html

This^

[paulo]

As a matter of fact fuck Hollyweird. Who gives a rats ass what any of those asshats have to say?

[l921428x]

Well were are still here after 150 years and the new reason is that we vote Red.

[Altarboy]

We are way too charming to erase. Fear not.

[tank_monkey]

Because his notion of evolution has been the single most destructive idea against morality. Morality is based, not on God and His laws, but on who is strongest. In fact, with evolution, God does not even need to exist meaning that His law does not exist, so we can be truly free, no laws to bind us and keep us from having fun and to remind us that there truly is a right and a wrong, good and evil, God and Satan.

Sorry, I'm not sure of your point. You made a intellectual JUMP from the theory of Evolution in NATURE to man's MORALITY. It's not related. I'm just talking about the survival of the most adaptable. Any animals that cannot adapt to new surroundings will die off, with out help from mankind (like we did with the Dodo bird and the Tasmanian Wolf) A Saber Toothed Tiger is not extinct because it's more EVIL than a Bengal Tiger. Now the notion of evolution can be twisted to justify all sorts of weird ideas among people (Extreme Nietzsche-ism for example), but the idea itself isn't based on good or evil.

I'm not sure if this was your point, but It sounds like your viewpoint implies that animals that became extinct were inherently EVIL and animals that survived to this day are inherently GOOD and that, my friend, sounds ridiculous.

[alismith]

Another win for the PC tools:

http://news.yahoo.com/university-tex...162652629.html

(If you can erase it, it didn't happen, right?...)

[ltorlo64]

Sorry, I'm not sure of your point. You made a intellectual JUMP from the theory of Evolution in NATURE to man's MORALITY. It's not related.

They are actually intricately related. Darwin removed God from creation by providing an explanation, no matter how farfetched it was/is, that showed how we all “evolved” from lower life forms (animals). By doing this Darwin removed God from the public discourse relegating any mention of God and creation to being a fable, or worse yet, a fairy tale, that was designed to keep the unintelligent masses from asking too many questions. As God was the giver of the moral law, at least in Western, European, and Middle Eastern thought, removing the God removed His immovable moral standard. When you look at the people that liberals and the left admire, they all have one thing in common, flexible morals, sometimes very flexible. This is why putting Darwin on Mt Rushmore makes perfect sense, especially given the other names recommended.

I'm just talking about the survival of the most adaptable. Any animals that cannot adapt to new surroundings will die off, with out help from mankind (like we did with the Dodo bird and the Tasmanian Wolf) A Saber Toothed Tiger is not extinct because it's more EVIL than a Bengal Tiger. Now the notion of evolution can be twisted to justify all sorts of weird ideas among people (Extreme Nietzsche-ism for example), but the idea itself isn't based on good or evil.

Evolution relies on survival of the fittest, with adaptability being just one quality of the fittest. Strength and intelligence are the more necessary traits as they result in adaptability. While I agree with the idea you are putting forward that animals are not moral beings, since evolution states that we are all just animals with some being more highly evolved than others, how do we get our morals? In cultures that disregard the existence of a god or supreme being morality is left up to the strongest, sort of. The people who are mistreated know they are mistreated and the person making the moral rules know that they are doing the mistreating, but they are in charge and that is all that matters (ie. Survival of the fittest). Again, we see that evolution removes the moral clarity provided by God, as God no longer exists.

I'm not sure if this was your point, but It sounds like your viewpoint implies that animals that became extinct were inherently EVIL and animals that survived to this day are inherently GOOD and that, my friend, sounds ridiculous.

No, my point is that God provides the morals. Animals are not moral creatures, they live based on instinct. Man is a moral being, however. Morals, whether we acknowledge them or not, play a part in how we live and relate to others. Liberals, do their best to do away with morals as this removes any scruples they may have with stealing, enslaving, and lying to gain and consolidate power.

Of course, right wing people (though not true conservatives) can use morals to steal, enslave, and lie to gain and consolidate power but in essence they are doing the something very similar to the liberal. While liberals have flexible morals that do not apply to themselves right wing people have very inflexible morals that apply to everyone but themselves (think Dark Ages Catholic church).

[tank_monkey]

Interesting philosophical theory, but I still think you're applying a specific line of philosophical thought a bit too generally to the overall idea of Darwinism.

I think honest people can dispassionately study WHY certain starfish in the sea die off and why other species survive .... without it de evolving into any sort of argument about God or morality. But then that's just my opinion.

[ltorlo64]

Interesting philosophical theory, but I still think you're applying a specific line of philosophical thought a bit too generally to the overall idea of Darwinism.

I think honest people can dispassionately study WHY certain starfish in the sea die off and why other species survive .... without it de evolving into any sort of argument about God or morality. But then that's just my opinion.

It is not the study of why some organisms live, die, or adapt. It is the idea that they change to new, more complex organisms that results in the thought process I described. Oh yeah, I like the use of the term "de evolving". Well played!

[coppertales]

The University of Texas is removing a statue of Jefferson Davis as we speak. However, Austin is the liberal cess pool of Texas...