Poll of the Day > it's now illegal, in alabama, to remove confederate monuments

(+) Yeah! (+)

huh

https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-now-illegal-alabama-remove-174400476.html?.tsrc=fauxdal

A new bill signed into law Wednesday by Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) protects Confederate monuments in the state even as other states have started to do away with them.

The Alabama Memorial Preservation Act of 2017 disallows removing or renaming any memorial streets or buildings on public property that have been in place for 40 or more years. Those monuments include an obelisk dedicated to Confederate soldiers in Birmingham’s Linn Park, named after Confederate captain Charles Linn; an obelisk for a fallen Confederate in Anniston; and the Alabama Confederate Monument, which sits on the grounds of the state Capitol in downtown Montgomery.

A Confederate memorial, with an added Confederate flag made out of flowers, is shown in Jasper, Alabama, in 2010. (Buyenlarge via Getty Images)
A Confederate memorial, with an added Confederate flag made out of flowers, is shown in Jasper, Alabama, in 2010. (Buyenlarge via Getty Images)
More
State Sen. Gerald Allen (R-Tuscaloosa), who first proposed the bill, praised the governor for signing it into law.

“I appreciate Gov. Ivey standing up for the thoughtful preservation of Alabama’s history,” Allen said in a press release. “Contrary to what its detractors say, the Memorial Preservation Act is intended to preserve all of Alabama’s history %u2015 the good and the bad %u2015 so our children and grandchildren can learn from the past to create a better future.”

The Southern Law Poverty Law Center disagrees.

“These racist symbols have no place on government property, where they counter our nation’s core principle to ensure liberty and justice for all,” said Rhonda Brownstein, legal director for the SPLC. “Other states and municipalities are removing these monuments from public property and placing them in museums, where people can learn the full history of slavery, the Civil War and the Confederacy. That’s where they belong.”


Watch news, TV and more Yahoo View, available on iOS and Android.

The law marks a turn for Alabama. In 2015, under Gov. Robert Bentley, the state removed a Confederate battle flag from its Capitol grounds following the deadly shooting of nine black church members by a white supremacist in South Carolina.

More recently, New Orleans has taken major steps to remove all monuments celebrating the Confederacy, even as death threats for the mayor have poured in.

In an impassioned speech last week, New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu (D) made the case against keeping Confederate monuments.

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential?

The answer, Landrieu concluded, is no.

keep on rollin' tide, alabama, you stupid fucks.
---

That's it I'm taking away all monuments until you guys play along nicely

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential?

I could.
---

I can see how confederate- anything would piss some people off, but it just seems silly when museums take them down. It's history. It already happened. The thought of erasing/covering up history to make people feel better is a pretty scary thought.
---

RedPixel posted...

I can see how confederate- anything would piss some people off, but it just seems silly when museums take them down. It's history. It already happened. The thought of erasing/covering up history to make people feel better is a pretty scary thought.

This, if people find the prominent display of these monuments upsetting, I think relocation should be the preferred course of action. Stuff 'em in some museum. Destroying history helps no one.
---

Veedrock- posted...

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential?

I could.

No, you couldn't, tough guy.
---

EvilMegas posted...

Veedrock- posted...

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential?

I could.

No, you couldn't, tough guy.

Has nothing to do with being tough buddy. All you have to do is not frame Lee's story into some racist narrative and you're set.

Did you know Lee wasn't in favor of slavery and he supported the Union before war broke out?
---

The Civil War had no "good" or "bad" sides, since the South wanted States rights, while the North wanted to keep the country whole.

Sure, the South was guilty of slavery, but so was the North in the border states (which the Emancipation Proclamation did not apply to), and the Northern states also had legalized slavery before the 1800's, so they were not exactly "clean" as well. Not to mention that something that was never discussed about, and the public knows nothing about, is that free blacks had slaves of their own as well.

It was something that should have been avoided to begin with, and no sides were perfect.

Removing statues of historic value is essentially re-writing history, and antithetical to American principles.

Honestly, this will just make rennovations amd construction projects more annoying.
---

Veedrock- posted...

EvilMegas posted...

Veedrock- posted...

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential?

I could.

No, you couldn't, tough guy.

Has nothing to do with being tough buddy. All you have to do is not frame Lee's story into some racist narrative and you're set.

Did you know Lee wasn't in favor of slavery and he supported the Union before war broke out?

Did he fight for the North?
---

EvilMegas posted...

Did he fight for the North?

do you believe everyone on the side of the Union was virtuous and everyone on the side of the Confederacy was morally corrupt? the civil war was not nearly that straightforward
---

EvilMegas posted...

Veedrock- posted...

EvilMegas posted...

Veedrock- posted...

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential?

I could.

No, you couldn't, tough guy.

Has nothing to do with being tough buddy. All you have to do is not frame Lee's story into some racist narrative and you're set.

Did you know Lee wasn't in favor of slavery and he supported the Union before war broke out?

Did he fight for the North?

Dude fought for the south because of his family. He couldnt fight against them and he didnt want them to fight without a commander. He did what he did to preserve life. War was gonna happen anyways and he did his best to keep the confederate men alive during it. He didnt fight for racism or slavery. He fought to give his family and friends a fightin chance.
---

You can respect history without keeping monuments to people fighting for a state's rights to own slaves.
---

how do you remove a monument?

you know...as a regular citizen?
---

Good
---

deoxxys posted...

how do you remove a monument?

you know...as a regular citizen?

The same say a citizen illegally put up a monument to destroy a visual symbolism that represents a growing economy, inadvertently sending a message of either feminism leading to an economic depression, or a little girl wishing to commit suicide out due to "bravery".

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/04/wi/ap/12/2iar5ok-e1492103827637-640x480.jpg

Doctor Foxx posted...

You can respect history without keeping monuments to people fighting for a state's rights to own slaves.

It was a lot more then that. states rights were a big reason, economics and texas was big on protection. Every state had different reasons.

But in all honesty, hearing that they are putting on the monuments in museums is fine by me. I thought they were destroying them honestly. So i am okay with this now.
---

helIy posted...

keep on rollin' tide, alabama, you stupid fucks.

They don't sound half as backwards as that New Orleans Mayor, tbh.

Also lol @ the news quoting the fucking SPLC, a joke organization funded by dark money to advance far left principles which, among other things, put Ben Carson on its terrorist watch list.
---

helIy posted...

keep on rollin' tide, alabama, you stupid fucks.

Found the angry white guy.
---

RedPixel posted...

I can see how confederate- anything would piss some people off, but it just seems silly when museums take them down. It's history. It already happened. The thought of erasing/covering up history to make people feel better is a pretty scary thought.

How long before we start taking down monuments to Founding Fathers or other Revolutionary War notables because they spent years shitting on Native Americans?

For that matter, can we pretend that Andrew Jackson and Woodrow Wilson were never US Presidents, because they were both huge racists and passed oppressive legislation that almost certainly resulted in minority deaths?


---

I wonder if all the survivors of Stalin & Pol Pot want any monuments of those guys left standing.


But regardless, history is like science. as in its not 100% accurate.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

For that matter, can we pretend that Andrew Jackson and Woodrow Wilson were never US Presidents, because they were both huge racists and passed oppressive legislation that almost certainly resulted in minority deaths?

They're taking Jackson off the $20. So kinda.
---

yutterh posted...

EvilMegas posted...

Veedrock- posted...

EvilMegas posted...

Veedrock- posted...

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it? Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential?

I could.

No, you couldn't, tough guy.

Has nothing to do with being tough buddy. All you have to do is not frame Lee's story into some racist narrative and you're set.

Did you know Lee wasn't in favor of slavery and he supported the Union before war broke out?

Did he fight for the North?

Dude fought for the south because of his family. He couldnt fight against them and he didnt want them to fight without a commander. He did what he did to preserve life. War was gonna happen anyways and he did his best to keep the confederate men alive during it. He didnt fight for racism or slavery. He fought to give his family and friends a fightin chance.

I asked a yes or no question.
---

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

one that you already know the answer to and is pointless to answer
---

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Except it was totally relevant.
---

EvilMegas posted...

Except it was totally relevant.

Nope. Mitch Landrieu made a dumb statement since he clearly doesn't know anything about Robert E. Lee.
---

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Actually it is relevant considering those fighting for the south *drum role please* were pro slavery.
---

SamTheWizard posted...

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Actually it is relevant considering those fighting for the south *drum role please* were pro slavery.

So were many in the north.

AverageBoss posted...

SamTheWizard posted...

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Actually it is relevant considering those fighting for the south *drum role please* were pro slavery.

So were many in the north.

Terrible rebutle. That doesn't disprove Lee's racism.
---

blackhrt posted...

I wonder if all the survivors of Stalin & Pol Pot want any monuments of those guys left standing.

By that logic, all statues should be taken down.
---

SamTheWizard posted...

AverageBoss posted...

SamTheWizard posted...

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Actually it is relevant considering those fighting for the south *drum role please* were pro slavery.

So were many in the north.

Terrible rebutle. That doesn't disprove Lee's racism.

Show proof that he was racist and fought for slavery?

http://www.civilwarhome.com/leepierce.htm

This proves otherwise. Once again, he fought for his family and friends. He wanted to give them a fighting chance instead of just being wrecked.
---

yutterh posted...

SamTheWizard posted...

AverageBoss posted...

SamTheWizard posted...

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Actually it is relevant considering those fighting for the south *drum role please* were pro slavery.

So were many in the north.

Terrible rebutle. That doesn't disprove Lee's racism.

Show proof that he was racist and fought for slavery?

http://www.civilwarhome.com/leepierce.htm

This proves otherwise. Once again, he fought for his family and friends. He wanted to give them a fighting chance instead of just being wrecked.

No that just proves you are wrong and don't know it.
---

SamTheWizard: Robert E Lee's writings where he says "slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil" is FAKE NEWS

SamTheWizard posted...

AverageBoss posted...

SamTheWizard posted...

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Actually it is relevant considering those fighting for the south *drum role please* were pro slavery.

So were many in the north.

Terrible rebutle. That doesn't disprove Lee's racism.

I am not try to disprove anything. I am simply stating you can't condemn one side for something, and forgive someone else for the same thing just because they won. The north would have likely let slavery persist for decades if the war had never broken out, or if the south had surrendered early.

Lee came very close to being the head general of the Union forces. The only reason he turned down the job was because Virginia joined the Confederacy, and people had much more loyalty to their state than the US as a whole at the time. But the north still wanted him.

The nation as a whole was pretty shitty back then. But soldiers on both sides died fighting for their homes and families, whether they individually believed in slavery or not.

AverageBoss posted...

I am not try to disprove anything. I am simply stating you can't condemn one side for something, and forgive someone else for the same thing just because they won. The north would have likely let slavery persist for decades if the war had never broken out, or if the south had surrendered early.

Lee came very close to being the head general of the Union forces. The only reason he turned down the job was because Virginia joined the Confederacy, and people had much more loyalty to their state than the US as a whole at the time. But the north still wanted him.

The nation as a whole was pretty shitty back then. But soldiers on both sides died fighting for their homes and families, whether they individually believed in slavery or not.

They will probably deny that the Confederacy had a few armies of free black men as well.

^Agreed. Though if slavery wasn't such a contriversal issue then the civil war could have never occured. Many plantation owners feared the loss of their slaves with the election of lincoln. Which is why he did not live for very long after his election to presidency.
---

SamTheWizard posted...

yutterh posted...

SamTheWizard posted...

AverageBoss posted...

SamTheWizard posted...

SkynyrdRocker posted...

EvilMegas posted...

I asked a yes or no question.

and he was explaining why the yes or no question you asked was not relevant

Actually it is relevant considering those fighting for the south *drum role please* were pro slavery.

So were many in the north.

Terrible rebutle. That doesn't disprove Lee's racism.

Show proof that he was racist and fought for slavery?

http://www.civilwarhome.com/leepierce.htm

This proves otherwise. Once again, he fought for his family and friends. He wanted to give them a fighting chance instead of just being wrecked.

No that just proves you are wrong and don't know it.

I don't think you understand what he was saying their. Sure it may sound racist but you have to remember, this was a different time and that is how everyone talked. Even in the north. It just was how the world was. He basically said that slavery is evil but the slaves are better off here then in africa. Which was a shithole during that day and age. He said they would grow through slavery and become better for it. Then he talks how their deleverance will be through christianity. Then he mocks america for wanting to leave england to be free and then enslaves others.
---

SamTheWizard posted...

^Agreed. Though if slavery wasn't such a contriversal issue then the civil war could have never occured. Many plantation owners feared the loss of their slaves with the election of lincoln. Which is why he did not live for very long after his election to presidency.

One of the reasons why slavery expanded as much as it did was due to Eli Whitney. He invented the cotton gin believing that it would relieve slaves from duty. He did not anticipate it having larger profit margins for slave-owners due to efficiency and low skill involved with it.

Im sure those africans that were murdered, raped, beaten, and chained to boats would disagree about america being better. And what lee says "grow through slavery" implies it is good for them. Its like saying people will become better if they are beaten each day and sold off at auctions.
---

Also, slavery here is only abolished on a de-facto level.

It is still legal, albeit as a form of punishment for criminals. But, if we temporarily enslaved criminals and made them work instead of being locked up, SJWs everywhere will be crying "RACIST" and will sue everyone in existence.

SamTheWizard posted...

Im sure those africans that were murdered, raped, beaten, and chained to boats would disagree about america being better.

True and generations grew up in slavery. It was flippin horrible. But they weren't better off in africa either. They were probably beaten, raped and murdered there too. The whole world at the time was pretty horrible. But their future generations were better off. It was comparing their suffering to the bible. Just like when the jews were enslaved and then set free. He figured it should be left up to GOD to decide.
---

SamTheWizard posted...

Im sure those africans that were murdered, raped, beaten, and chained to boats would disagree about america being better.

You are forgetting that Africa, throughout ALL of its history, was guilty of slavery. Even today, there are more slaves in Africa, and the Middle East, than there were in the history of the United States, but unfortunately, most people are ignorant of that.

Only reason why slavery was legal, was because Africans were ALREADY enslaved by others over there, and wanted a cheap profit. They did not discriminate as to WHO was buying slaves, except other slaves.

But we don't. Criminals are supposed to be humanly imprisonned.
---

SamTheWizard posted...

But we don't. Criminals are supposed to be humanly imprisonned.

Nope. They are only sentenced to punishments that are not "cruel or unusual". Forcing them to work for no pay is neither "cruel" nor "unusual". There is nothing stating that it must be "humane", and the original interpretation that the punishment must fit the crime.

SamTheWizard posted...

But we don't. Criminals are supposed to be humanly imprisonned.

Well, supposed to be. For profit prisons do some pretty questionable things though. But that's a different topic.

TheWorstPoster posted...

But, if we temporarily enslaved criminals and made them work instead of being locked up, SJWs everywhere will be crying "RACIST" and will sue everyone in existence.

Pretty sure most criminals would choose this over being locked away for 30+ years.
---

Wouldn't 'not cruel' and 'humane' be synonyms?
---

SamTheWizard posted...

Wouldn't 'not cruel' and 'humane' be synonyms?

Depends on who you talk to. Especially since it would be hard to get a consensus on where acceptable ends and cruel begins.

SamTheWizard posted...

Wouldn't 'not cruel' and 'humane' be synonyms?

Ask Joseph-Ignace Guillotin about that on his famous invention, that was used on people who did not do any crimes except have money.