A Monumental Problem In America:

[Aquila]

Here's something to consider:

Statues honor individuals, but much more importantly, they honor the causes for which those individuals stood. A denial of history does not stem from a preservation of tradition, but from memorializing a cause that had, at its core, the defense of a terrible wrong.

"If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong," Lincoln wrote to a friend. On that, we will all agree. But casting a modern-day blind eye toward millions of fellow citizens who have a genuine right to be deeply offended is also inherently wrong.

In the midst of conviction, we must, however, be both realistic and discerning historians. To obliterate the existence of memorials to all great Americans found personally guilty of the tragedy of slavery is both misdirected and counter-productive. In so doing, our intellectual integrity would force us to disqualify the very man who penned, "All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." The author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, along with 11 other American presidents, owned slaves, including Washington during his presidency.

How, then, can a distinction be made among these American "greats"? (Robert E. Lee, a former superintendent of West Point, was a man of great personal character and unquestionable honor.) The distinction should be very clear: It is the cause for which the man (or woman) is remembered and memorialized, rather than the attributes of the man alone. American presidents are memorialized for leading the great nation that, according to Lincoln, was "conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

Not so with the generals of the Confederacy. In stark contrast, these men were memorialized because they were identified with the defense of a much different proposition, the very premise of which was that all men are not created equal. That's the distinction. And that's why we Christians and students of history should understand why memorials to Confederate generals should be moved from places of public honor, such as city parks, to places of intellectual curiosity and history, such as museums.

It's the intellectually honest, but more importantly, the right thing to do.

Paul wrote concerning those offended by others eating meats dedicated to idols,

I Corinthians 8:1-13 (ESV)
Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that “all of us possess knowledge.” This “knowledge” puffs up, but love builds up. 2 If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. 3 But if anyone loves God, he is known by God.
4 Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.” 5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
7 However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. 9 But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol's temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? 11 And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. 12 Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.

Paul's answer was one of love. He would rather give up eating meat altogether than risk offending a Christian brother or causing them to stumble in the faith.

While we are rarely concerned with meats offered to idols in our day and age, we do have brothers, sisters, and fellow Americans taking deep offense at the memorialization of the Confederacy. I believe that the true Christian would gladly support the removal of such statues from public lands and state parks wherein they appear to praise and memorialize a confederate system essentially built on the backs of slaves and dedicated to the perpetuation of slavery itself.

A statue is only a statue. Your offended brother or sister is infinitely more important. And that being so, how can a true Christian not support removal of such monuments knowing that so many of our brethren and fellow Americans are offended by them?

Remove them to where they belong. Places such as history museums. In such places they exist within the context of history and are not memorialized. In such places they are also removed from public properties and places of prominence where they can deeply offend our brothers, sisters, and fellow Americans.

[n david]

As posted in the other thread this was posted to, this isn't a true comparison. One was sin, the other is not.

I don't know a true brother or sister who is offended by a historical statue, university name, street name or park name. The only ones offended by this are the paid astro-turf activists. There may be a few on the fringe who have been moved to becoming offended due to the media fomenting division.

But actual, real human beings who are not being paid by Crowds On Demand .... very, very few are actually offended by this.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Here's something to consider:

Statues honor individuals, but much more importantly, they honor the causes for which those individuals stood. A denial of history does not stem from a preservation of tradition, but from memorializing a cause that had, at its core, the defense of a terrible wrong.

"If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong," Lincoln wrote to a friend. On that, we will all agree. But casting a modern-day blind eye toward millions of fellow citizens who have a genuine right to be deeply offended is also inherently wrong.

In the midst of conviction, we must, however, be both realistic and discerning historians. To obliterate the existence of memorials to all great Americans found personally guilty of the tragedy of slavery is both misdirected and counter-productive. In so doing, our intellectual integrity would force us to disqualify the very man who penned, "All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." The author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, along with 11 other American presidents, owned slaves, including Washington during his presidency.

How, then, can a distinction be made among these American "greats"? (Robert E. Lee, a former superintendent of West Point, was a man of great personal character and unquestionable honor.) The distinction should be very clear: It is the cause for which the man (or woman) is remembered and memorialized, rather than the attributes of the man alone. American presidents are memorialized for leading the great nation that, according to Lincoln, was "conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

Not so with the generals of the Confederacy. In stark contrast, these men were memorialized because they were identified with the defense of a much different proposition, the very premise of which was that all men are not created equal. That's the distinction. And that's why we Christians and students of history should understand why memorials to Confederate generals should be moved from places of public honor, such as city parks, to places of intellectual curiosity and history, such as museums.

It's the intellectually honest, but more importantly, the right thing to do.

Paul wrote concerning those offended by others eating meats dedicated to idols,

I Corinthians 8:1-13 (ESV)
Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that “all of us possess knowledge.” This “knowledge” puffs up, but love builds up. 2 If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. 3 But if anyone loves God, he is known by God.
4 Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.” 5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
7 However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. 9 But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol's temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? 11 And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. 12 Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.

Paul's answer was one of love. He would rather give up eating meat altogether than risk offending a Christian brother or causing them to stumble in the faith.

While we are rarely concerned with meats offered to idols in our day and age, we do have brothers, sisters, and fellow Americans taking deep offense at the memorialization of the Confederacy. I believe that the true Christian would gladly support the removal of such statues from public lands and state parks wherein they appear to praise and memorialize a confederate system essentially built on the backs of slaves and dedicated to the perpetuation of slavery itself.

A statue is only a statue. Your offended brother or sister is infinitely more important. And that being so, how can a true Christian not support removal of such monuments knowing that so many of our brethren and fellow Americans are offended by them?

Remove them to where they belong. Places such as history museums. In such places they exist within the context of history and are not memorialized. In such places they are also removed from public properties and places of prominence where they can deeply offend our brothers, sisters, and fellow Americans.

Yeah, right.

[aegsm76]

The overall issue is:
WHERE DOES IT STOP?
No one on AFF who has offered support for removing the statues, wants to address this.
The reason is that there is no stopping point.
They want to remove the name/statue/memorial of every white male that they are offended by.
They are now knocking down statues in cemetery plots for ex CSA soldiers.
They vandalized a statue of a Catholic saint.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

The overall issue is:
WHERE DOES IT STOP?
No one on AFF who has offered support for removing the statues, wants to address this.
The reason is that there is no stopping point.
They want to remove the name/statue/memorial of every white male that they are offended by.
They are now knocking down statues in cemetery plots for ex CSA soldiers.
They vandalized a statue of a Catholic saint.

Sadly, the truth is, we "white males" dominated and oppressed millions for several centuries. Did we think they'd just be cool with it?

It will blow over. What fuels their fire is all the skinheads and racists rushing to the rescue of a stupid statue.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

As posted in the other thread this was posted to, this isn't a true comparison. One was sin, the other is not.

I don't know a true brother or sister who is offended by a historical statue, university name, street name or park name. The only ones offended by this are the paid astro-turf activists. There may be a few on the fringe who have been moved to becoming offended due to the media fomenting division.

But actual, real human beings who are not being paid by Crowds On Demand .... very, very few are actually offended by this.

I happen to know quite a few people of color (and even whites) who are absolutely no fan of Confederate Monuments or the Confederate Flag. And they are real people.

You need to get out more. Go downtown and start a conversation about it on the streets with some people of color. I'm sure you'll get a ear full from a number of people who think these things should be removed and put into museums.

[Jermyn Davidson]

It stops with the removal of the icons of American slavery-- at least, that is where it should stop.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I happen to know quite a few people of color (and even whites) who are absolutely no fan of Confederate Monuments or the Confederate Flag. And they are real people.

You need to get out more. Go downtown and start a conversation about it on the streets with some people of color. I'm sure you'll get a ear full from a number of people who think these things should be removed and put into museums.

Hear hear!

On this forum, I have argued for the removal of the Confederate flag from everyday places.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

It stops with the removal of the icons of American slavery-- at least, that is where it should stop.

JD - so Washington and Jefferson should come down, right?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Hear hear!

On this forum, I have argued for the removal of the Confederate flag from everyday places.

Former NAACP President Supports Confederate Flag: “Black folks earned a place of honor and dignity with this flag… This is our flag…”

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/07...s-is-our-flag/