Do you really believe that our heritage was dedicated to the enslavement of a race of people?  This is the ignorance about southern culture to which I refer.  You Yanks are not only arrogante and rude, your stupid..
[right][snapback]625784[/snapback][/right]

What northern states still permitted slavery in 1865?  The states individually abolished slavery before it was abolished by the 13th Amendment, and the Emancipation Proclomation did not actually free any slaves, since it only applied to slaves in states that were rebelling.
[right][snapback]625865[/snapback][/right]

I said no such thing.  I referenced the Confederate flag and what it represents to mainstream America.  Ignorance may contribute to this in society.  Ignorance does not equal stupidity.  Insulting people and calling them stupid will never help them see your point of view.  Good job.

My stupid?  Is arrogante a new French trend?

EDIT:
[right][snapback]625963[/snapback][/right]

Squeegie, the war ended in 1865.  It started in 1861.  Here is a link regarding slavery in the North.  http://www.afrolumens.org/slavery/faq.html
[right][snapback]625905[/snapback][/right]

While some northern states prohibited slavery from the start, most had a history of tolerating or encouraging slaveholding.  The revolution had a strong impact on how slavery was perceived, and most northern states began to debate abolition during or soon after the war.  However, in states that passed gradual abolition legislation, slavery lingered in the form of term slavery for decades.  For many states, the only official end to slavery came in 1865 with the ratification of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution.  Chronologically, slavery ended in:

Vermont, 1777 (slavery prohibited by the state constitution)
Pennsylvania, 1780 (Gradual Abolition legislation)
Massachusetts, 1783 (Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling)
New Hampshire, 1783 or 1789 (accounts vary--no judicial records verify abolition)
Rhode Island, 1784 (Gradual Abolition legislation)
Connecticut, 1784 and 1797 (Gradual Abolition legislation)
New York, 1799 and 1817 (Gradual Abolition legislation)
Ohio, 1802 (slavery prohibited by the state constitution)
New Jersey, 1804 (Gradual Abolition legislation)
Indiana, 1816 (slavery prohibited by the state constitution)
Illinois, 1818 (slavery prohibited by the state constitution)

Frankly, I dont care if you see my point of view.  I have long ago stopped trying to get others to understand why we southerners take pride in our heritage.  As you can see by the arrogance of so many posters here, it would be fruitless to even attempt to do so.  They see southern culture as rooted in hate and racism etc.  That is why I never answered Squeegies question to me.  I am not even going to go there.
[right][snapback]626029[/snapback][/right]

Is it ok to offend the british by brandishing the US flag? Isnt that a symbol of rebellion to them?
[right][snapback]626116[/snapback][/right]

there's plenty to take pride in without brandishing a symbol of rebellion and slavery.
[right][snapback]626103[/snapback][/right]

Squeegie, the war ended in 1865.  It started in 1861.  Here is a link regarding slavery in the North.  http://www.afrolumens.org/slavery/faq.html
[right][snapback]625905[/snapback][/right]

don't be stupid.  see, the south lost the civil war they fought in defense of slavery.  which means their symbol lost too, and never gets to mean anything more than rebellion and slavery.  if the swastika was the symbol of germany for hundreds of years, it would have lasting positive associations like the american flag does.  but instead it has come to be a short-lived symbol of an atrocious period.  like the confederate flag.

the stars and bars was the symbol of the south for, what, 5 years?  5 years of getting their ass kicked defending a corrupt and completely immoral system.  what person in their right f*ckin' mind would adopt THAT symbol of defeat and depravity as a symbol of cultural pride??
[right][snapback]626162[/snapback][/right]

Again, I dont, nor have I ever brandished that symbol.
[right][snapback]626199[/snapback][/right]

the south lost the civil war they fought in defense of slavery.
[right][snapback]626162[/snapback][/right]

well, i'm glad.  but of course, brandishing that symbols IS what this thread is about, and what people are taking issue with.
[right][snapback]626232[/snapback][/right]

Well, it started off there but took alot of tangents as is par for the course.
[right][snapback]626275[/snapback][/right]

don't be stupid.  see, the south lost the civil war they fought in defense of slavery.  which means their symbol lost too, and never gets to mean anything more than rebellion and slavery.  if the swastika was the symbol of germany for hundreds of years, it would have lasting positive associations like the american flag does.  but instead it has come to be a short-lived symbol of an atrocious period.  like the confederate flag.

the stars and bars was the symbol of the south for, what, 5 years?  5 years of getting their ass kicked defending a corrupt and completely immoral system.  what person in their right f*ckin' mind would adopt THAT symbol of defeat and depravity as a symbol of cultural pride??
[right][snapback]626162[/snapback][/right]

Just to point out your ignorance about another symbol tard boy http://www.manwoman.net/swastika/swastika.html

ding fries are done
[right][snapback]626299[/snapback][/right]

the stars and bars was the symbol of the south for, what, 5 years?  5 years of getting their ass kicked defending a corrupt and completely immoral system.  what person in their right f*ckin' mind would adopt THAT symbol of defeat and depravity as a symbol of cultural pride??
[right][snapback]626162[/snapback][/right]

Just to point out your ignorance about another symbol tard boy http://www.manwoman.net/swastika/swastika.html

ding fries are done
[right][snapback]626299[/snapback][/right]

What are you talking about?  Your link proves that the swastika was used by many cultures throughout the centuries (not Germany specifically), but does nothing to dispell the truth that Az pointed out - that it is its association with Hitler, the Nazi party, and their atrocities that is the lasting association.
[right][snapback]626309[/snapback][/right]

Frankly, I dont care if you see my point of view.  I have long ago stopped trying to get others to understand why we southerners take pride in our heritage.  As you can see by the arrogance of so many posters here, it would be fruitless to even attempt to do so.  They see southern culture as rooted in hate and racism etc.  That is why I never answered Squeegies question to me.  I am not even going to go there.
[right][snapback]626029[/snapback][/right]

oh, so the swastika hasn't come to represent nazism and all its associated evils?  gee, where did i ever get that idea?
[right][snapback]626370[/snapback][/right]

I think she should have worn a NASCAR dress or something if she wanted to celebrate her Southern heritage.

And who would have been offended by that?
[right][snapback]626388[/snapback][/right]

The winner always gets to write history, and in this case the winner tried to hide the greed of the North under the cloak of helping slave, when at the onset of the war slavery was legal in many of the Northern States that were fighting the South.
[right][snapback]625823[/snapback][/right]

It has come to represent naziism through idiots and their ignorance in the same manner which the confederate battle flag has come to represent slavery and oppression, through ignorance.
[right][snapback]626398[/snapback][/right]

the stars and bars was the symbol of the south for, what, 5 years?  5 years of getting their ass kicked defending a corrupt and completely immoral system.  what person in their right f*ckin' mind would adopt THAT symbol of defeat and depravity as a symbol of cultural pride??
[right][snapback]626162[/snapback][/right]

perch, the civil war wasn't fought because the northern economy depended on the south
[right][snapback]626418[/snapback][/right]

perch, the civil war wasn't fought because the northern economy depended on the south, it was fought because the southern economy depended on slavery for ultra-cheap manual labor.  yes, the civil war was fought over "states' rights" -- specifically, the right of states to allow slavery. 

perhaps you can name one other states' right that was such a burning issue at the time as to necessitate civil war?  also, if the civil war wasn't about slavery, it seems to be quite a startling coincidence that ALL of the slave states were the ones that joined in rebellion, and all of the free states remained in the union, and that this was all precipitated by the election of an abolitionist president.
[right][snapback]626418[/snapback][/right]

Then why fight the war?  Why not just let them go on about there merry way?
[right][snapback]626439[/snapback][/right]

Then why fight the war?  Why not just let them go on about there merry way?
[right][snapback]626439[/snapback][/right]

What he said - the only States' right at issue was the right to own slaves.
[right][snapback]626445[/snapback][/right]

I think she should have worn a NASCAR dress or something if she wanted to celebrate her Southern heritage.

And who would have been offended by that?
[right][snapback]626388[/snapback][/right]

Then why fight the war?  Why not just let them go on about there merry way?
[right][snapback]626439[/snapback][/right]

perch, the civil war wasn't fought because the northern economy depended on the south, it was fought because the southern economy depended on slavery for ultra-cheap manual labor.  yes, the civil war was fought over "states' rights" -- specifically, the right of states to allow slavery. 

perhaps you can name one other states' right that was such a burning issue at the time as to necessitate civil war?  also, if the civil war wasn't about slavery, it seems to be quite a startling coincidence that ALL of the slave states were the ones that joined in rebellion, and all of the free states remained in the union, and that this was all precipitated by the election of an abolitionist president.
[right][snapback]626418[/snapback][/right]

What he said - the only States' right at issue was the right to own slaves.
[right][snapback]626445[/snapback][/right]

There were many reasons for a Civil War to happen in America, and political issues and disagreements began soon after the American Revolution ended in 1782. Between the years 1800 and 1860, arguments between the North and South grew more intense. One of the main quarrels was about taxes paid on goods brought into this country from foreign countries. This tax was called a tariff. Southerners felt these tariffs were unfair and aimed toward them because they imported a wider variety of goods than most Northern people. Taxes were also placed on many Southern goods that were shipped to foreign countries, an expense that was not always applied to Northern goods of equal value. An awkward economic structure allowed states and private transportation companies to do this, which also affected Southern banks that found themselves paying higher interest rates on loans made with banks in the North. The situation grew worse after several "panics", including one in 1857 that affected more Northern banks than Southern. Southern financiers found themselves burdened with high payments just to save Northern banks that had suffered financial losses through poor investment.

In the years before the Civil War the political power in the Federal government, centered in Washington, D.C., was changing. Northern and mid-western states were becoming more and more powerful as the populations increased. Southern states lost political power because the population did not increase as rapidly. As one portion of the nation grew larger than another, people began to talk of the nation as sections. This was called sectionalism. Just as the original thirteen colonies fought for their independence almost 100 years earlier, the Southern states felt a growing need for freedom from the central Federal authority in Washington. Southerners believed that state laws carried more weight than Federal laws, and they should abide by the state regulations first. This issue was called State's Rights and became a very warm topic in congress.

Ask and you shall receive.
http://www.nps.gov/gett/gettkidz/cause.htm

Az this is for you.  Since     doesn't work for you Squeegie, I'll just have to settle for      and 
[right][snapback]626481[/snapback][/right]

so what's the states' right you're referencing here?  the right not to pay taxes?

any thoughts on why it just so happened that ALL of the slave states rebelled and all of the free states fought for the union?  just coincidence?  and why was lincoln such a particular threat to them?

also, if they were so concerned about states' rights, why did they create a FEDERAL right to own slaves in their own articles of confederacy which would override any desired state law to the contrary?
[right][snapback]626498[/snapback][/right]

I stimm am amazed at the number of mongolids and thier mongoloid children who believed that the average yankee thought they were going to war to stop slavery. That is simply amazing.
[right][snapback]626480[/snapback][/right]

Unfair taxation is why the Colonies declared independence.  I guess it is only a good reason if you win.
[right][snapback]626524[/snapback][/right]

I stimm am amazed at the number of mongolids and thier mongoloid children who believed that the average yankee thought they were going to war to stop slavery. That is simply amazing.
[right][snapback]626480[/snapback][/right]

Ask and you shall receive.
http://www.nps.gov/gett/gettkidz/cause.htm
[right][snapback]626481[/snapback][/right]

Another quarrel between the North and South and perhaps the most emotional one, was over the issue of slavery. America was an agricultural nation and crops such as cotton were in demand around the world. Cotton was a plant that grew well in the southern climate, but it was a difficult plant to gather and process. Labor in the form of slaves were used on large plantations to plant and harvest cotton as well as sugar, rice, and other cash crops. The invention of the Cotton Gin by Eli Whitney made cotton more profitable for southern growers. Before this invention, it took one person all day to process two pounds of cotton by hand, a slow and inefficient method. Whitney's Cotton Gin machine could process that much within a half hour. Whitney's invention revolutionized the cotton industry and Southern planters saw their profits soar as more and more of them relied on cotton as their main cash crop. Slaves were a central part of that industry.

Slavery had been a part of life in America since the early colonial period and became more acceptable in the South than the North. Southern planters relied on slaves to run larger farms or plantations and make them profitable. Many slaves were also used to provide labor for the various household chores that needed to be done. This did not sit well with many northerners who felt that slavery was uncivilized and should be abolished. They were called abolitionists and thought that owning slaves was wrong for any reason. They loudly disagreed with the South's laws and beliefs concerning slavery. Yet slavery had been a part of the Southern way of life for well over 200 years and was protected not only by state laws, but Federal law as well. The Constitution of the United States guaranteed the right to own property and protected everyone against the seizure of property. A slave was viewed as property in the South and was important to the economics of the Southern cotton industry. The people of the Southern states did not appreciate Northern people, especially the abolitionists, telling them that slave ownership was a great wrong. This created a great amount of debate, mistrust, and misunderstanding.

As the nation grew in size, so did the opportunities for expansion westward. Many felt that slavery should be allowed in the new territories such as Kansas and Missouri, while others were set against it. This led to "bleeding Kansas", a bitter war that pitted neighbor against neighbor. In 1859, a radical abolitionist from Kansas named John Brown raided the Federal armory at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in the hopes of supplying weapons to an army of slaves that would revolt against their southern masters. A number of people were taken hostage and several killed, among them the mayor of Harpers Ferry. Brown was cornered with several of his followers in a fire engine house, first by Virginia militia and then by Federal troops sent to arrest him and his raiders. These troops, commanded by Colonel Robert E. Lee, stormed the building and captured Brown and several of his men. Brown was tried for his crimes, found guilty, and hung in Charlestown. Though John Brown's raid had failed, it fueled the passions of northern abolitionists who made him a martyr. It was reported that bells tolled in sympathy to John Brown in northern cities on the day he was executed. This inflamed passions in the South where southern leaders used the incident as another reminder how little the South's interests were represented in Federal law, labeled as sympathetic to runaways and anti-slavery organizations.

any thoughts on why it just so happened that ALL of the slave states rebelled and all of the free states fought for the union?  just coincidence?  and why was lincoln such a particular threat to them?

also, if they were so concerned about states' rights, why did they create a FEDERAL right to own slaves in their own articles of confederacy which would override any desired state law to the contrary?
[right][snapback]626498[/snapback][/right]

Unfair taxation is why the Colonies declared independence.  I guess it is only a good reason if you win.
[right][snapback]626524[/snapback][/right]

please answer these questions.
[right][snapback]626554[/snapback][/right]

Wouldn't 'unfair taxation' only apply if taxes were being applied differently to some states than they were to others?  You know...like in the way Britain taxed the colonies more heavily than it did brits on the island?
[right][snapback]626537[/snapback][/right]

please answer these questions.
[right][snapback]626554[/snapback][/right]