This is John Luke's offense that he has lived and breathed for better than four years now and has earned it with success on the field. He is also a very fine young man. Very proud of him...Go Blues
JLA had an excellent game last week. He appears to be peaking at the right time of year.
No, not the case. I'm disengaging because of you social ignorance. Maybe the war started over slavery on the national level. But you're too ignorant to understand that your average confederate fought for states rights. And the fact stays the same as I stated before. So it's pointless because you're a libtard that's more than likely butt hurt because Trump won. DROP MIC
Have you ever read the secession declarations, the secession convention speeches, or the confederate constitution? Lol, what states' rights not related to the preservation of slavery did the average soldier fight for?
Since you've left the conversation, I'll make my final statement on the matter ... assuming no one else chooses to engage. The only true heritage associated with the flag is that white trash have been using it as a crutch to support their self-esteem for over a century.
Because you are in the same position as your "old school" buddy. The facts don't support you. You called me "uneducated" a little earlier ... and now you're disengaging. I suspect you recognize which one of us is truly uneducated ...and it's not me.
First of all, before you try to twist my post(s) and label me a bigot or racist, which I AM NOT, the right side won. The Southern states were defending state's rights, they were not trying to dominate the world or exterminate a specific race of people.
I guess, using your scale, fighting to keep almost 4 million people enslaved doesn't quite spike your bad cause meter ...
First of all, before you try to twist my post(s) and label me a bigot or racist, which I AM NOT
I hope you are not going to compare Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee to Adolph Hitler.
No, but here's a quote from Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens in his famous "Cornerstone speech" --"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. [Applause.] This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."
The tariffs and states' rights arguments are the first things confederate apologists throw out, but both are flat out wrong.
An attempt to pass the Morrill tariff occurred in the fall of 1860, but the vote was tabled because the supporters of the tariff didn't have the votes to pass it. In fact, the supporters couldn't even get it out of the finance committee until seven southern states had seceded. Regarding states' rights, all you have to do is compare the southern constitution with the U.S. Constitution. In the Confederate Constitution, at least three states rights are explicitly taken away.......the freedom of states to grant voting rights to non-citizens, the freedom of states to trade freely with each other, and the freedom of states to outlaw slavery within their borders. As far as slave-owning rights go, however, the document is ironclad, and far more overreaching than the U.S. Constitution. Four different clauses entrench the legality of slavery in a number of different ways, and together they virtually guarantee that any sort of anti-slave law or policy would be unconstitutional.
This being said, Parsons is right (and it may cause a seal of the Apocalypse to crack by me saying it) vis-a-vis the Confederacy's justifications. "State rights" is a cutesy phrase that our history teachers like to use, but the common denominator of all that is the agrarian economy that flat couldn't exist without slavery. Take away slavery, you take away the antebellum economic foundation.
First of all, before you try to twist my post(s) and label me a bigot or racist, which I AM NOT, the right side won. .... The Southern states were defending state's rights, they were not trying to dominate the world or exterminate a specific race of people. Germany had the means to accomplish their goals, the Confederacy did not. By that, I am talking about their industrial advantages. The Confederacy had no advantages, with the exception of Robert E. Lee, who was defending his home.
I hope you are not going to compare Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee to Adolph Hitler.
I've added a couple of quotes from an earlier discussion of the same subject. You are wrong, the only states' right the confederacy was fighting for was the right to preserve the institution of slavery.
You seem to have a knack for being "right." I am starting to see a pattern here. You have to be a progressive....I am right, all who disagree are wrong!! Your comment comparing the Confederacy to Nazis is ridiculous. Plenty of Confederate dead in local cemeteries that died as Americans. Most confederate soldiers were too poor to own slaves.
I'm sure there were a great many Germans that didn't want to exterminate the Jews also. That doesn't make the cause they were fighting for less evil. Please tell me what's so ridiculous about the comparison?
This all started a few years back when someone told you that you should be offended by the confederate flag, before that no one cared...we all watched the Dukes of Hazzard, we looked at the old monuments in the Southern States, Hurley had it as a mascot, and no one really cared...at all...until you were convinced by the liberal politically correct factions that were left over from the Clinton years that it was a racist symbol...no one cared.
If you see it as a racist symbol, then that's fine...but just because you or anyone else is offended by it doesn't mean you have the right to tell an entire town that it's wrong when they've had the thing in place long before the media manipulated people in to thinking it was something offensive.
I hope they keep giving people the bird.
You're wrong about so many things in your post that I don't know where to start. It's late ..., and I'm sleepy ... so I'll address the bulk of what you said in the morning. I'm just curious ... would you defend the community in the same manner if they were flying a Swastika?
I won't argue with what you're saying, because you're correct. The United States government has perpetuated horrible acts. But take a look at our current Constitution, Tell me which parts you find objectionable. This country, even with its flaws, has an ideal that is moral in purpose, being established with the goal of treating all equally and with fairness.
The Confederacy, like Nazi Germany, had no redeeming characteristics. Your comparison is a false analogy.
Taking a knee is his constitutional right (not American flag right) (don't agree) it's not a false analogy dude. Where is the redeeming principles of what the u.s. Did? Land reservations and casinos? You're an idiot for thinking otherwise. Now take your uneducated ass somewhere else.
While our government has committed many deplorable acts against minorities in the past, our constitution has evolved over time. It has been designed to provide equal rights and equal protection under the law for all of our citizens. That's one hell of a redeeming characteristic. Pointing out Kaepernick's right to take a knee accentuates my point. If you don't like the principles on which our country is established, perhaps you should be the one to leave.
Btw, if you think you're more educated about the subject, perhaps we should compare our academic credentials.
I suppose you'll be taking a knee with Colin Kaepernick? Do you make the same false analogy in support of people that fly the Swastika? Despite what you think, there were no redeeming principles behind the Confederacy's decision to secede. They did it explicitly to preserve slavery.
I kinda like how everyone comes after Hurley about the flag...it might be one of, if not the last places in the country it's still flying high...it's gone from South Carolina, which I never thought they would cave and remove it...but, they did...then there is little old Hurley sitting over there with people trying to force them to make it go away, and they just give 'em the middle finger and move on lol...you have to love that.
God bless them, hope they don't ever change.
.
That particular flag is a monument to confirmation bias. If they don't ever change it will be an indictment of the state of the educational system there.
Also, so much for Graham huddling at the R pregame and barking "come get some" at our players. Much like Tazewell, if you're gonna talk it, you best bring it.
Remembered this post by Ryan from last year.
While it's their prerogative to behave this way before the game, I fail to see the benefit to Graham. I've heard numerous Richlands players mention how fired up they get when Graham starts this stuff. I consider it a gift ... kind of a pre-game pep talk..
As for the flag being a symbol of racism he should take a course in history, the Confederate battle flag is does not represent racism except in his own mind.
Seriously? I just put my lectern in storage last week.
Seen a kid today after the game on the field be introduced to coach Mance. Overheard him say he would be enrolled before the years out. Afterwards I struck up a conversation with the father. They are originally from Richlands. They are moving from Panama City, Flordia. 6'3 270lb freshman. Monster of a kid, plays defensive tackle and offensive guard.
Nice people and going to be high quality.
I'm getting more attached to you each time you post.
.png.01bb665814ffc257795fe158cb2045c7.png.8a531ac878a82772b21014d7a6167582.png){kind=logo}
Richlands vs Graham?
in SWVA Football
Posted