The Instigator
Ngrovcam
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
NathanDuclos
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Sons of Confederate Veterans Racist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
NathanDuclos
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,604 times Debate No: 56384
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

Ngrovcam

Con

I am a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Maryland, and proud to be it. I realize that our organization has a few bad apples- meaning racists, and bigots etc.- but doesn't every organization? My view is that with our charge, made by the original veterans in the United Confederate Veterans, it is stated-

To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans, we will commit the vindication of the Cause for which we fought. To your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldier's good name, the guardianship of his history, the emulation of his virtues, the perpetuation of those principles which he loved and which you love also, and those ideals which made him glorious and which you also cherish. Remember, it is your duty to see that the true history of the South is presented to future generations.

It would seem that many folks consider us racist because of what our ancestors supposedly stood for- slavery. But it is known that a vast minority of southern families owned slaves...in fact according to the University of Virginia- the"total throughout the slave states was almost exactly 26%." personally, my great x3 grandfather who fought in the 34th North Carolina Infantry Regiment DID NOT own slaves, nor anyone in our family according to the records as of 1860. My point is, we (The SCV) are preserving history and are admiring and emulating those who stood for what they believed in.
And so, I ask the question- "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?" further I leave you with a quote by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Junior-

If you haven't found something worth dying for, you aren't fit to be living. - Dr. Martin Luther King, junior.

Many did indeed die for the south, and I as a son SCV am committed to preserving both their legacy and memory. History happens...if you cant accept that the Civil War was a part of our history, then you need to learn.
NathanDuclos

Pro

Dear Con

I believe this is a wonderful topic and putting yourself and your organization for criticism. Thank you for this debate; I look forward to crossing verbal swords and rapier wit, on this, my first debate.org debate. Please excuse any obvious blunders but feel free to take advantage of them, as I would do the same.

the question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?" It"s YES.

A1 - You state "I realize that our organization has a few bad apples- meaning racists, and bigots etc. - but doesn't every organization?" I disagree on your first statement and shows how you do not understand racism, the practice of it, how it occurs or even how in society it expands.

A1.1 " First your opening statement is false and presumes that all organization are Racist in some part, but less racism is better than more racism. I believe no Racist is the only thing to strive for and tolerate. I belong to a social larp group, I assisted people in crisis centers; I volunteer my services for legal assistance and not once in any context have I heard racist statement, jokes or slurs. I worked on a suicide hot line (helping individuals not commit suicide, the title was so unclear), and never did I hear anyone "your black? Call the next guy. You"re a Muslim, burn in hell terrorist.".

I refute your opening statement and if you believe everyone is a racist, excuses some racist behavior, your moral compass is broken and demonstrably false. To tolerate the intolerable in your organization and to claim virtue by others is self-deceit at the highest level.

B2. "To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans, we will commit the vindication of the Cause for which we fought..." Vindication? History has been their trial, and they were guilty of crime by there actions and there words and there deeds. Your hero's you emulate and admire are racists.

B2.1. On the eve of the war, Confederate vice president Alexander Stephens gave his "cornerstone speech", from which I"ll quote:

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. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth"

Again, you Admire RACISTS.

B2.2a - You did not fight in the civil war, no did anyone in your organization, the organization is open to anyone who want to join, your advocates of a cause. Your org identifies and glorifies individuals whose sole means of riches and worth was due to the subjection and exportation of slavery. Your denial is akin to admiring Smoking Posters and collecting them and denying smoking has anything to do with millions of people getting Cancer. Well I did not print the posters, but look at there amazing art work, see how they inspired a generation of people to look cool with cancer sticks. How do you admire them when there sole defining trait is Slavery based on Racism?

B2.3a " The SOCV is trying to vindicate the Southern Cause? What injustice has been thrust upon the south that is unwarranted?

C3. Your quote, SOCV website on the splash page "To your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldier's good name,"

C3.1 Nathan Bedford Forrest (I think of forest Gump fame) was a member of the southern confederacy, who good name SOVC wish to preserve. He raped, murdered, broke a white flag treaty, one of the founder of the KKK and was well known for his preferred method of execution, lynching. Under the FLAG OF TRUCE he butchered over 500 blacks for the crime of being Black and race traitors. Here is one of the Hero's you admire, and those like him.

C3.2 When a town though of renaming a park that bore his name, the SOCV opposed the KKK from protesting the change, not because they did not want the park renamed and found it offense. By your spokesman, because of the negative attention it would bring to this hero of the south. http://www.huffingtonpost.com... your org is defending a racist butchers whose claim to fame is whole sale slaughter. So again your spokesperson is defending a racist and claiming it as White power. Sorry, White Pride. Sorry Southern Heritage. I forget that that term went out, cause it drew to much negative attention because it was Racist. Show me where men of good conscious stood up and said no or even said sitting down for an interview "We should not hail as a hero, he who slaughter to see African American skin run red?"

D1. Remember, it is your duty to see that the true history of the South is presented to future generations.

D4.1 personally when I hear true before a statement of history of politics I tend to think someone is a quack and trying to defend the un-defendable or sell me something that isn't true. "You need to know the true terrorist of 911" or "the true history of the holocaust". History is history, this is implying that there"s another history. The TRUE HISTORY, the south was run, supported and built by racist, and supported by slaves, without intervention it still would be. Done. These are you hero"s, these are the men you admire, these men of conviction are moral convicts. Your lay your admiration at the foot of Racist for building a great society of RACIST. And you call it Southern Heritage.
.

F.1 It would seem that many folks consider us racist because of what our ancestors supposedly stood for- slavery.

F.1 We are not judging you on your ancestors, we are judging you and your organization on the fact you choose to make a hero out of Racists. We don"t think your organization is racist because your ancestors held slave or 1 in 4 did, we call your organization Racist because you idolize the 4 in 4 and there defining trait as something to be admired. You can"t separate the south from Racist, because it touched everything they did. 1 in 4 I don"t care if it"s 1 in 20. It"s wrong, its evil its sick and to reduce it to a non-argument when it was the only argument that they cared about with the north is again, RACIST.

G1 My point is, we (The SCV) are preserving history and are admiring and emulating those who stood for what they believed in.

G2. I don"t care. Seriously, your argument it absolutely idiotic and stupid. The fact I have to go here and reference a bigger racist then the racists is just mind blowing. NAZI Believed that committing Genocide was Right and just and Gods work and they fought and died for it. The religious superstitious Salem Witch Trials where they burned women, Islamic who blew up the twin towers, Terrorist, Green Peace, they all believe in what they are doing. The Spanish Inquisition (ha didn't think id pull out the Spanish inquisition, since there main weapon is surprise), the Spanish believed torturing people to the point where they claimed belief in a biblical god, then killed them before they recounted was absolutely something they believed in. A rapist or pedophile believes in what he's doing or he wouldn't do it. Any sick twist person or morally bankrupt group can believe in anything, including justified walking into a school classroom and shooting children be it in America or Saudi Arabia or even china. I don't care what you believe in if what you believe in is freaking stupid. No one does, unless its to oppose it. Its nice for you to admire and emulate those who stood for what they believed in, when they believed in something of value. But Again, ,you admire and emulate RACISTS. Do yo see the dividing line? I dont care about your ancestors, there dead. I dont care your ancestors held slaves, there dead to. I find you finding your ancestors who held slaves in high regard demonstrably and morally bankrupt?

H1. If you haven't found something worth dying for, you aren't fit to be living. - Dr. Martin Luther King, junior.

H2. Seriously you can"t be this naive. I would rather live for a better cause then dye for a stupid belief. I would rather die for something of value, be it love, trust, equality and then worship those who believe in bigotry, racism and slavery. Where is your self criticism or values?

I1. Many did indeed die for the south, and I as a son SCV am committed to preserving both their legacy and memory. History happens...if you can"t accept that the Civil War was a part of our history, and then you need to learn.

I1.1 To be ignorant in the age of information is a choice, that is your choice. However preserving "their legacy" you discount, down play, and ignore the entire aspect that built there culture; slavery built on racism. If you can"t accept the civil war was the result of bigots and racists, then you failed to open your eyes and look to why the north went to war. Your hero worship at the feet of individuals whose sin have landed, if you believe in such things, in hell for the hell the put other through. This is what your Org stand to hold on high, that which is the lowest of human kind. To then ask, why the question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?" It"s YES. You shouldn't have to ask, its apparent, and if you too blind to see it, it"s because you choose not to.

Please feel free to discuss how admiring and emulating racists is an of its self not racist in nature. Thank you for your patience. . .
Debate Round No. 1
Ngrovcam

Con

I believe you are missing my point, we are talking past each other.....maybe we should start over.

Please tell me what your perception of the Confederate Nation is, and why racism was so accepted and related to by the public at the time.
NathanDuclos

Pro

Dear NGrovcam.

I"m sorry NGrovcam, besides not knowing what Racism means, I assumed you knew how to have an argument. In an argument you pose a question, or assert a position, and then you defend it or prove it. For instance, First you say "there is a god" or "Do I look fat in these jeans is a unfair and trick question". Then you go about proving your position. You prove it by logic, facts, things that support your argument. Hopefully this will help in the future.

As to Your Question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?"

You say no. Again I say yes. And I offered proof. You now ask for a do over. . . This is not a good tactic.

You say "I believe you are missing my point, we are talking past each other....."

I believe your oblivious and charge you with choosing to remain ignorant in an age of information. I'm talking to you, and the people who read the page. You belong to an organization that choose to make heroes out of racists, ego racist organization.

You admire men whose who sole cause was SLAVERY. I say that no man is free while any man is held in bondage, be it in chains that bind you to the earth, or the rose white colored glasses, you NGrovcam choose to wear.

You seek to vindicate those who argued blacks were racially inferior in there politics, law and religion. Before the civil war, after the civil war and your org was founded upon that believe and re-write history to suite their own biased ends. I believe that revisionist history is a form of white washing and racism. One of us is right, and one of us is wrong. See civil war for parallels.

Your org which claims a-political nature, fought politically for keep a statue of a genocidal maniac whose claim to fame was being a founding member of the KKK and known for a list of war crimes. I believe if your org was not racist as you claimed there should be someone somewhere who would have stood up and said `this is wrong.` Instead as per your original charge, your preserving his good name as per your orgs quote and spokesperson stated.

You Question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?"

You say no. Again I say yes. And I offered more proof, and have you refuted anything.

No, you offered a plea for a do over, and shifting the burden and changing the debate. How very Sons of Confederate of you. . . (see what I did there, it"s a funny ha ha on your previous statement of do over and how the SoCV want the same for history)

Again "Please tell me what your perception of the Confederate Nation is"

First of all, my perception is not important, and neither is yours. Your personal optics is why you think its normal to join an org that holds racist as heroes. We have the original documents, signed, dated and published repeatedly. Lets refer to your `southern heritage` leadership at the time.

Mississippi "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery " the greatest material interest of the world " a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization." -
Alabama - ". . . the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin to the offices of president and vice-president of the United States of America by a sectional party [the Republicans], avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions [slavery] and to the peace and security of the people of the State of Alabama . . ."
Lincolns own party ""We deny the authority of Congress, of a territorial legislation, of any individual or association of individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States."

There is not a single document saying anything but it was slavery, except by revisionist who cannot avoid the fact that the racist slavery organization was waging a PR war to justify owning individuals and those documents are preserved to this day.

Confronting Civil War Revisionism: Why The South Went To War
(in the word of the racist slavers who started it)
http://www.confederateamericanpride.com...

Using confederation documents to teach about secession, slavery and the origins of the civil war
http://maghis.oxfordjournals.org...#

Civil War Talk " Why the war was about slaver & Racism
http://civilwartalk.com...

Teaching Tolerance - Why the war was about slavery and Racism part ii
http://www.tolerance.org...

Lincoln & Racism " Why the war was about slavery and racism and how Lincoln was right and Racist Slaver owners were wrong.
http://thehistoricpresent.wordpress.com...

in the comments section you post it was a minority not the majority and your ancestors were not all bad, there were a efw bad apples. I refute your claim, everyone knows what its about because the leaders of your confederation wrote it, spoke it and preached about it. You just choose to ignore it. Slavery was the only song the confederate choir chose to sing about . Please stop deluding yourself about what the civil war was really about to justify your sick delusion that of playing dress as mass murders is anything but racist in nature.

You Question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?"

You say no. Again I say yes. Even our own membership says I`m right. Even your own members within the organization claimed it was racist and it was being overrun by Radical extremists, rather than just the run of the mill racist who long for the good old days. The links are from media sources and our own membership, showing racism at the top levels.

White power and SCV Unite
http://www.splcenter.org...

Save the SCV " How the racist are taking over the SCV, by a SCV member.
http://www.savethescv.org...

From the same web page - The SCV"s mission of Confederate heritage guardianship is being transformed into modern political extremism that often has little to do with defending the proud record of the Confederate soldier. Many SCV leaders are participants in this transformation.

From the same website - - As the Sons of Confederate Veterans begins to dissolve in its own extremism, former members (and future former members) are starting to look for local, regional, and national Confederate history/heritage groups to join.

Your own website http://www.scv.org... keeps its Items for sale, including its books list to members only. However individuals have released it, and you can actually google passages, One of the better selling authors as of 2008, Roper"s insists that "the Bible justifies slavery and those who disagree are not really Christian" and that political correctness of black equality (referring that blacks are not inferior ergo white are superior) is criminal and that not to enslave them ignores biblical truth. This was sold, in the SCV Merchandise Catalogs of 2008-2009, 2009-2010, and 2011-2012. Currently your SCV favored author is writing about Jewish conspiracy and how he Nazi didn`t really commit geoncide on the true Jews.

You Question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?"

You say no. Again I say yes.
SOCV members say its racist. SoCF is a racist organization.

Historical documents says your org is racist, its roots are racist, and its view is racist. SoCF is a racist organization.

Hell you even have racist members and a civil war on how extream you could be. Again SoCF is a racist organization.

You insist you celebrate the majority of confederate, who were not racist, not the minority who were, despite all actual documentation shows your delusional view is wrong and delusional. Epically deslutional, like weapons of mass destruction delusional. SoCF is so a racist organization.

Your org defends racist and there historical importance for `white power`, `white pride`, to `southern heritage`. Even "southern heritage" came about to make "white pride" more palatable. nothign is more apparent then your lack of actually doing research on which your debating and participating. It like a fanatic screaming about the 10 commandments and he can`t even name them, well beside dont kill and dont covet they neighbors wife. why its always those two I dont understand.

Your language may have changed, and your may hide your items for sale, but Im not buying it. No matter how many times, your dress up and play soldier holding heros of racist, re-enacting the `good old godly days where we the people meant white men and only white men` and say racism has nothing to do with it, its apparent that, like the civil war, it has everything to do with it.

You Question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?" you have to ask?

This time, can you actually mount a defense? I mean really your kind of getting slaughtered. I feel like Nathan Forest Gump and you waved the white flag. (haha see what I did there, it was funny, cause one of the good names your defending, a racist slave owning founder of the kkk accepted surrender under a white flag and killed everyone who surrender). Round 3?
Debate Round No. 2
Ngrovcam

Con

Very we'll sir, I was attempting to avoid any misplaced unpleasantries...if you want an argument here it is!

me thank you for making this so easy, and for demonstrating so well your lack of knowledge of history. I will answer you points in order, in red text, to make it easier to follow.

Dear Con

I believe this is a wonderful topic and putting yourself and your organization for criticism. Thank you for this debate; I look forward to crossing verbal swords and rapier wit, on this, my first debate.org debate. Please excuse any obvious blunders but feel free to take advantage of them, as I would do the same.

the(sic) question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?" It"s(sic) YES.

A1 - You state "I realize that our organization has a few bad apples- meaning racists, and bigots etc. - but doesn't every organization?" I disagree on(sic) your first statement and shows(sic) how you do not understand racism, the practice of it, how it occurs or even how in society it(sic) expands.
I did not say "meaning racists", Your words, not mine. Do you claim the right to put words in my mouth, I sir will not stoop to such tactics. I do not believe you can find an organization of more than ten that does not have a few bad apples.

A1.1 " First your opening statement is false and presumes that all organization are(sic) Racist in some part, but less racism is better than more racism. Don"t you see less racism as better thank more? See A1, as you have stooped again. I believe no Racist is the only thing to strive for and tolerate. I can"t argue with you on that. I belong to a social larp group, I assisted people in crisis centers; I volunteer my services for legal assistance and not once in any context have I heard (sic) racist statement, jokes or slurs. I worked on a suicide hot line (helping individuals not commit suicide, the title was so unclear), and never did I hear anyone "your black? Call the next guy. (sic) You"re a Muslim, burn in hell terrorist.". I won"t stoop to putting words in your mouth, so I will give you the opportunity to clarify your statement: (not the part where you announce all the wonderful things you have done) You seem to intimate, when you write "your black? Call the next guy. You"re a Muslim, burn in hell terrorist.". That you have heard an SCV member say these things? Is that really what you are saying? Please clarify?

"I refute your opening statement and if you believe everyone is a racist, (sic) excuses some racist behavior, and if you believe everyone is a racist," Here, you did not specifically say, that I "believe that everyone is a racist," You once again seem to be putting words in my mouth. Please clarify? I of course do not think anything excuses any racist behavior, not even the understandable desire to elect the first black president, yet 95% blacks backed Obama. Never in my lifetime has any white president received so much as even 75% (and I expect the percentage is much lower than 75) of the white vote. I am not a mathematician, but doesn"t this mathematically prove racism on the part of a large majority of blacks? Do you find such behavior excusable? Then, you attack me personally when you say, "your moral compass is broken and is demonstrably false." Or can you really demonstrate that my moral compass is broken? To tolerate the intolerable in your organization Are not your words claiming that I tolerate the intolerable? Isn"t it impossible to tolerate that which is intolerable by definition?

B2. "To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans, we will commit the vindication of the Cause for which we fought..." Vindication? History has been their trial, Actually, many in the leadership of the Federal Government did want to try the leading secessionists, but their (the Federal Government) own attorneys advised them not to bring any of them to trial, because you (the Federal Government) would lose, because in their view, secession was legal. Consequently, not a single one of the millions who supported the Confederacy were ever tried for treason. I would readily argue this was vindication at the time, so really there is not need to wait for vindication. Let me add Mr. Lincoln"s views on the subject: "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world." Addressing your statement " and they were guilty of crime by there actions and there words and there (sic)deeds. Consequently, not a single one of the millions who supported the Confederacy were ever tried for treason. I apologize for repeating myself, but it is the same answer. Your hero's you(sic) emulate and admire are racists. I don"t know for sure, but I think you probably admire Lincoln? But, Lincoln was demonstrably a racist, by his own statements: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything."

-Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858 I can condemn him for many things, but I really can"t blame him for this particular view because virtually ( I do mean virtually, not all) all Americans, North and South, (i.e. the Northern slave states, the Northern states who denied blacks the right to live among them.) were racists by today"s standard.

B2.1. On the eve of the war, Confederate vice president Alexander Stephens gave his "cornerstone speech", from which I quote:

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. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth" You do not say why or to what point you quoted Alex Stephens, but I think you meant to imply that he was saying that slavery was the reason for the War? I don"t think it is reasonable to take the words of one man and condemn a whole nation. (the Confederacy) If that was indeed your intent, let me dispel it by the words of the head Yankee politician and its adoption by unanimous consent of the entire Federal Congress, which consisted of not a single man who held a Southern view:

"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give Congress the power to abolish or interfere within any state with the domestic institutions thereof, including that a person's held to labor or service by laws of said State."

-Abraham Lincoln-March of 1861

"The War is waged by the government of the United States not in the spirit of conquest or subjugation, nor for the purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or institutions of the states, (the peculiar institution) but to defend and protect the Union."

-This resolution was passed unanimously by Congress on July 23, 1861.

Do the people of the South really entertain fear that a Republican administration would directly or indirectly interfere with their slaves, or with them about their slaves? If they do, I wish to assure you that once, as a friend, and still I hope not as an enemy, that there is no cause for such fears. The South would be in no more danger in this respect than it was in the days of Washington."

-Abraham Lincoln to Alexander Stephens-Vice President of the Confederacy. Springfield, Ills., Dec. 22, 1860. Public and Private Letters of Alexander Stephens, p. 150.

Again, you Admire RACISTS. If you admire Lincoln, so do you.

Please let me present you with a few more of Lincoln"s quotes:
"You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us" while ours suffer from your presence.

B2.2a - You did not fight in the civil war, no did anyone in your organization, the organization is open to anyone who want to join, your advocates of a cause. Your org identifies and glorifies individuals whose sole means of riches and worth was due to the subjection and exportation of slavery. I believe you could find dozen or so who "individuals whose sole means of riches and worth was due to the subjection and exportation of slavery., but certainly not so much as fifty, out of 10 million people whom the SCV "identifies and glorifies"" "whose sole means of riches and worth was due to the subjection and exportation of slavery" Your denial is akin to admiring Smoking Posters and collecting them and denying smoking has anything to do with millions of people getting Cancer. Well I did not print the posters, but look at there (sic) amazing art work, see how they inspired a generation of people to look cool with cancer sticks. How do you admire them when there sole defining trait is Slavery based on Racism? To say that the Southern Nations "sole defining trait" was slavery based on racism, would be akin to my saying that the Federal Union"s, "sole defining trait was slavery based on racism" since it were they who were the primary importers of slaves for the entire period of slave importation.

B2.3a " The SOCV is trying to vindicate the Southern Cause? What injustice has been thrust upon the south that is unwarranted? Let me count the ways: tariffs, which stole from the South and gave to the North, the numerous violations of the Constitution of the United States, a war of invasion, murder, rapine, arson, theft and a hundred other over what was a legal right, and was according to Mr. Lincoln, totaly justified when he said "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right" and "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it." In these, as much as I hate to admit to agreeing with a man as base as Mr. Lincoln, I would be hypocritical if I did not agree with Mr. Lincoln.

C3. Your quote, SOCV website on the splash page "To your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldier's good name," We, the SCV were given the "defense of the Confederate soldier's good name" on April 25, 1906, by Lt. General Stephen Dill Lee when he directed "To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans, we will commit the vindication of the Cause for which we fought. To your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldier's good name, the guardianship of his history, the emulation of his virtues, the perpetuation of those principles which he loved and which you love also, and those ideals which made him glorious and which you also cherish. Remember, it is your duty to see that the true history of the South is presented to future generations."

C3.1 Nathan Bedford Forrest (I think of forest Gump fame) I really can"t give answer to this since I think it was an attempt at humor? If not, please clarify? was a member of the southern confederacy, who good name SOVC wish to preserve. He raped, Where did you get that silly idea? murdered, See previous, broke a white flag treaty, I know its redundant, but see previous, it is really the only way to answer such silly and totally unfounded ideas. one of the founder (sic) of the KKK You are correct (thankfully) in this instance. "However, this group was disbanded (by his order) a few years after because the founder, Nathaniel Bedford Forrest, disagreed with the violent measures being used by members." according to the left wing Institute for the Study of Violent Groups. and was well known for his preferred method of execution, I can only call the foregoing an outright slander, if you know the truth of history, or incredible ignorance (please don"t be offended, the word ignorance is defined as the lack of knowledge)The only people he ever executed were the 30 men he killed in hand to hand combat, (to call this execution is quite a stretch, but you cannot stretch far enough to include the scoundrels he shot at a distance during pitched battle) was ever lynching. This is just another silly, unfounded idea. Under the FLAG OF TRUCE he butchered over 500 blacks for the crime of being Black and race traitors. Even the North vindicated him of such a silly idea. Here is one of the Hero's you admire, and those like him. Yes, he was a very noble, generous, brave, virtuous man. I admire him very much, don"t you admire these traits? Perhaps not, but since I don"t know a thing about you, I won"t pretend to know your personal morals, unless of course you do know something of history and are intentionally stating falsehoods, rather than just silly ideas.

C3.2 When a town though (sic) of renaming a park that bore his name, the SOCV opposed the KKK from protesting the change, not because they did not want the park renamed and found it offense. By your spokesman, because of the negative attention it would bring to this hero of the south. found (sic) it offense. (sic) By your spokesman, because of the negative attention it would bring to this hero of the south. I really don"t know how to answer this charge since it seems you are contradicting yourself. http://www.huffingtonpost.com......( you should not get your news from a tabloid. It is the reason you have so many silly ideas) your org is defending a racist butchers (sic) whose claim to fame is whole sale (sic) slaughter. There you go again, another silly idea. I think you need a nap. So again your spokesperson is defending a racist and claiming it as White power Sorry, White Pride. Sorry Southern Heritage. My spokesman never claimed it was white power, White Pride, Southern Heritage, I think you are referring the KKK, you know, the organization that you, yourself wrote that the SCV opposed. (and no need to apogize, even if you are wrong, I would never wait a 150 years to forgive you, heck, I forgive all those Northern Slavers who brought negroes to this country for a couple hundred years. I must admit, I do harbor some animosity for those who raped, robbed, burned and pillaged my ancestors 150 years ago.) I forget that that term went out, "that" term has not gone out? Unless you mean those terms "white power, White Pride" you know the ones you mistakenly (or was it intentionally) attributed to the SCV, rather than its true source, the KKK, which headquarters are by the way, located in the North and have no affiliation with Southern Heritage groups. cause it drew to much negative attention because it was Racist. I am sorry, I cannot understand the previous sentence, so am unable to reply. Show me where men of good conscious stood up and said no or even said sitting down (" stood up" and said "sitting down"? Please see previous answer) for an interview "We should not hail as a hero, he who slaughter (sic) to see African American skin run red?" (are you drinking, or off of your medication? You are becoming less coherent as you go along this bunny trail)

D1. Remember, it is your duty to see that the true history of the South is presented to future generations. You must have forgotten my previous reply to this accusation: "defense of the Confederate soldier's good name" on April 25, 1906, by Lt. General Stephen Dill Lee when he directed "To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans, we will commit the vindication of the Cause for which we fought. To your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldier's good name, the guardianship of his history, the emulation of his virtues, the perpetuation of those principles which he loved and which you love also, and those ideals which made him glorious and which you also cherish. Remember, it is your duty to see that the true history of the South is presented to future generations."

D4.1 personally when I hear true (sic) before a statement of history of politics I tend to think someone is a quack and trying to defend the un-defendable or sell me something that isn't true. "You need to know the true terrorist of 911" or "the true history of the holocaust". Yes, one should endeavor to know the truth about everything. I see that you do not want to though. Are you not again contradicting yourself? History is history, (that is what I have been saying) this is implying that there"s another history. No, that is opposite of my position, I am trying to say there is only one true history. Methinks you contradict yourself again. You are going to have to lay off of that sauce if we are to continue this correspondence. The TRUE HISTORY, the south was run, supported and built by racist,(sic) and supported by slaves, without intervention it still would be. (sic) Done. These are you (sic) hero"s, these are the men you admire, Not all of the racists North and South, only he Southern ones. these men of conviction are moral convicts. Your lay your admiration at the foot of Racist (sic) for building a great society of RACIST (sic). And you call it Southern Heritage.
.

F.1 It would seem that many folks consider us racist because of what our ancestors supposedly stood for- slavery.

F.1 We are not judging you on your ancestors, we are judging you and your organization on the fact you choose to make a hero out of Racists. Don"t most of you liberals make a hero of the racist Lincoln? And we only make heroes out of the Southern racists, since they were not the hypocrites the Northern racists were. We don"t think your organization is racist because your ancestors held slave or 1 in 4 did, we call your organization Racist because you idolize the 4 in 4 and there (their) defining trait (see above)as something to be admired. You can"t separate the south from Racist, (Nor the North) because it touched everything they did. 1 in 4 I don"t care if it"s 1 in 20. (let me get this straight, you wrongly condemn us for viewing people as a group, but, its ok to lump 19 in with the 1? Liberal logic? Go figure.) It"s wrong, its evil its sick and to reduce it to a non-argument when it was the only argument that they cared about with the north is again, RACIST.

G1 My point is, we (The SCV) are preserving history and are admiring and emulating those who stood for what they believed in. Wow, thankfully after paragraph, after paragraph, you are correct once more.

G2. I don"t care. Seriously, your argument it absolutely idiotic and stupid. You have fallen into the Liberal way again, if you can"t debate the idea, insult it! The fact (sic) I have to go here and reference a bigger racist then (sic) the racists is just mind blowing. NAZI (sic)Believed that committing Genocide was Right (sic) and just and Gods work and they fought and died for it. The religious superstitious Salem Witch Trials where they burned women, (In that Northern bastion) Islamic (sic)who blew up the twin towers, Terrorist, Green Peace, they all believe in what they are doing. The Spanish Inquisition (ha didn't think id (sic) pull out the Spanish inquisition, You are so drunk or under medicated by this point, I would not be surprised if you pulled out little green men. since there (sic) main weapon is surprise), the Spanish believed torturing people to the point where they claimed belief in a biblical god, then killed them before they recounted (sic) was absolutely something they believed in. A rapist or pedophile believes in what he's doing or he wouldn't do it. Are you so naive that you think that mankind only does that which they think right? Any sick twist (sic)person or morally bankrupt group can believe in anything, including justified walking into a school classroom and shooting children be it in America or Saudi Arabia or even china. The Chinese are not allowed to have guns, or they would take up the cry, Sic Semper Tyrannis. I don't care what you believe in if what you believe in is freaking stupid. No one does, unless its (sic)to oppose it. Its (sic)nice for you to admire and emulate those who stood for what they believed in, when they believed in something of value. But Again, ,(sic)you admire and emulate RACISTS. Do yo (sic)see the dividing line? I dont care about your ancestors, there (sic) dead. I dont care your ancestors held slaves, there (sic) dead to. I find you finding your ancestors who held slaves in high regard demonstrably and morally bankrupt? Do you hold your ancestors in low regard? They held slaves also.

H1. If you haven't found something worth dying for, you aren't fit to be living. - Dr. Martin Luther King, junior. I cannot understand the context in which this is relevant.

H2. Seriously you can"t (sic) be this naive. I would rather live for a better cause then dye (sic) for a stupid belief. I would rather die for something of value, be it love, trust, equality and then (sic) worship those who believe in bigotry, racism and slavery. Where is your self criticism or values? Nothing to criticize and values are good? Are you out of silly ideas and just trying to get back to those insults?

I1. Many did indeed die for the south, and I as a son SCV am committed to preserving both their legacy and memory. History happens...if you can"t accept that the Civil War was a part of our history, you need to learn.

I1.1 To be ignorant in the age of information is a choice, that is your choice. You are condemned by your own words. However preserving "their legacy" you discount, down play, and ignore the entire aspect that built there culture; slavery built on racism. If you can"t (sic) accept the civil war (sic)was the result of bigots and racists, Oh, but I do, those bigoted and racist Northerners who wanted to plunder the South. then you failed to open your eyes and look to why the north went to war. Your hero worship at the feet of individuals whose sin have (sic) landed, if you believe in such things, in hell (sic)for the hell the put other through. This is what your Org stand (sic) to hold on high, that which is the lowest of human kind. To then ask, why the question "Is the Sons of Confederate Veterans a racist organization/ hate group?" (No) It"s YES. There you go with those silly ideas again. You shouldn't have to ask, its apparent, and if you (sic) too blind to see it, it"s (sic) because you choose not to.

Please feel free to discuss how admiring and emulating racists is an (sic) of its self not racist in nature. Thank you for your patience.

When you first started, I had hoped we could have a rational, thoughtful discussion, but you will need to study at least a little of history before you will be up for it. I would recommend you doing so, because knowing history is very important. But you must learn in order of importance, and you really need to spend your time working on your spelling and grammar. It has really been fun, but I could get as much out of talking with a doorknob and I would not have to spend so much time correcting its grammar or trying to make sense of contradictory, convoluted and hypocritical statements.

I would have been gentler with you accept you made the rules: "Please excuse any obvious blunders but feel free to take advantage of them, as I would do the same.

So, I will bid you a fond adieu and always remember the good times we had.

Let me leave you with a few fun Lincoln quotes for you to ponder, once you get caught up with your grammar.

Lincoln quotes:

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.

I can make more generals, but horses cost money.

When I get ready to talk to people, I spend two thirds of the time thinking what they want to hear and one third thinking about what I want to say.
NathanDuclos

Pro

Dear PRO

Thank you for the riotous laughter at the obvious lack of understanding and out right denial of Racism on your org part. This would be funny, if it wasn't so sad. If this was an in-person debate at this point, I would expect foot stamping and “what’s rubber” argument. I think anyone reading this will laugh out loud. To white, sorry to wit. . . I appreciate irony in your opening remarks.

In R3 You State “I did not say "meaning racists", Your words, not mine. Do you claim the right to put words in my mouth, I sir will not stoop to such tactics. I do not believe you can find an organization of more than ten that does not have a few bad apples .In R2A1 - I did not say "meaning racists",

Dear Pro, and readers, I point to the top of the page. I’m do not claim the ability to put words into pros mouth, I do claim the ability to recite them accurately and for everyone to see. You’re a serious kind of special aren’t you? You wrote something down for everyone to see at the top of the page, like many of your ancestors wrote of the god given right to own slaves in letters, papers, pulpics and adverts and which anyone can look at. Then you say, no I didn’t, and that’s not what its about, as you spend the entire time aruging that it wasn't even slavery . . .

Seriously. . . .Did you scroll up yet. . . R1 Pro Said “meaning racist”, then R2 ask for a do over, and now R3 said he didn’t say it. If you support PRO, dont worry, there is a true page of the debate else where, where this had nothing to do with racism. however some supports did suggest that there some racial over tones and wanted to save the debate from the obvious racial overtones.


In R3 You state - “you seem to intimate, when you write "your black? Call the next guy. You"re a Muslim, burn in hell terrorist.". That you have heard an SCV member say these things? Is that really what you are saying? Please clarify?”

No I’m refuting your argument that every organization has a few bad apples. Those Racists are everywhere, and your assumption that tolerating racism is acceptable. If you cannot find an org with more then 10 members without racists, maybe its because you surround yourself with racist orgs. Seriously you can be so blind to not see the correlation, lets celebrate racists, and act suprized at who shows up doing a goose step in grey. Also several of your membership write books, which I included in links that are out and out racist. Including a bestselling Jewish conspiracy nut who says the individuals in the holocaust were not really Jews, or an off shot of Jews. It was not hard to find any of this information and in your own membership words. Seriously did you even click the link to

http://www.savethescv.org...


In R3 You state - It would seem that many folks consider us racist because of what our ancestors supposedly stood for- slavery. But it is known that a vast minority of southern families owned slaves...

Again, My responce, I am not calling your org racist because you ancestors owned slaves, that actually racism. I am calling your org racist because you idolise racist for being racist and the racist views. See the difference. I

In R3 To your "To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans, we will commit the vindication of the Cause for which we fought..." Vindication? . . . . Consequently, not a single one of the millions who supported the Confederacy were ever tried for treason.


My response was neither were the vast majority of Nazis. That doesn’t mean that the NAZI were not racist, or there view point was not misplaces and destructive, or they were not guilty of genocide. That why “Hitler Supporters”, “white power” “German pride” “German heritages’ groups tend to get called racist and even “NAZI light” show there true transparency sooner or later. There defining trait wasn’t there weaponry or tactics, or belief it was there genocide of another people and the symbol they bore. See the correlation.

In R3 You state - Again, you Admire RACISTS. If you admire Lincoln, so do you.


My response is ‘Spanish inquisition” Seriously you surprized me here. I got nothing. so do you. Even if he was a racist, it doesn't prove your org is not, unless your back to the "everybodys racist so its ok, but thats not what i implied rant."

In R3 you state "sole defining trait was slavery based on racism" since it were they who were the primary importers of slaves for the entire period of slave importation.


My response, I don’t dress up and admire Slaver traders either. That would be racist. If people did, I would call them racist. If someoen argued Slaver traders didn`t really do that bad a thing. I`d use the same facts i did with you here, to point out the stupidity of there arugments.

In R3 you state - I hate to admit to agreeing with a man as base as Mr. Lincoln, I would be hypocritical if I did not agree with Mr. Lincoln.

My response – I agree with that statement too, for everyone. Your ancestors agreed with it to, unless you were black. You org agrees with your ancestors interpretation as per books, speeches and membership. Did you even look at

http://www.savethescv.org...


In R3 you state - “Even the North vindicated him of such a silly idea. Here is one of the Hero's you admire, and those like him. Yes, he was a very noble, generous, brave, virtuous man. I admire him very much, don"t you admire these traits?”


My responce - Google NATHAN BEDFORD FORREST SLAUGHTER WHITE FLAG, or NATHAN BEDFORD FORREST KKK it will direct you to pages and pages of well documented, sited, referenced and original documents with foot notes attached. Now google definition Racism. No google Definition of Denial.

You gave up trying to prove your point, and now you shift the burden of proof or blame, Your argument is if the SOCV is Racist, not if Lincoln was a racist. And thank you for assuming I’m a liberal. Actually im adopted I have no family history and I didn’t vote for Obama. Thank you for assuming people make arguments based on ancestors and race when they disagree with you. I would say its not racist, just presumptive.


As for my skewed view of history, i have 3 degrees, 9 years of university and college, and my room mate was a history minor on american history called oscar and he was not grouchy. I studied north american history and religion at my first university as a minor. My father is a civil war junky and an economics major, who reads so much on the civil war he had to resort to going to another library for books he hasn`t read and often corrects tour guides when he goes touring. My uncle actually travelled with MLK. When you get our car fixxed you go to a mechanic, no a wanna be mechanic, when you want history you go to the people who have earned there degree through proven study, not wishfull thinking and idol hero worship of he Good Old days, where men were men and blacks were slave. Also quoting MLK doesn`t mean your not a racist, playing dress up in a org that viewed him as property and less them human does.

Ill sum up quickly again.

1) Your own org members have problems with the racists in your midst.
2) Hero worship of an individuals whose sole existence was racism is and of itself a form or racism.
3) Your org misrepresents & ignores the mountain of evidence to forget the primary cause of those you idolize.
4) Your defense of Lincoln and the north were racist too, despite them changing over time, is laughable, but it also doesn’t prove your point of “were not a racist org”. I’ll grant you Lincoln was a racist for free, it still doesn’t say that your ORG isn’t.
5) You symbol of pride is one that represents the worst aspects of American culture and the argument you offer is the same white supremacist defending the symbol.
6) PS, a lot of your org leadership also participate as members of officially recognized hate groups and racist organizations(as sited in my links by your own members) .
7) You have no idea what racism is. Try google.
8) “calling your org racist because your ancestors were racist” is racist, were not doing that, your assuming that. Again, racist behavior bad, hero worship of racist bad. Calling your racist for ancestors behavior, absolutely RACIST, not what I’m doing, but the point your missing. . .
9) You accuse individual who voted for Obama and were black did so for racial means rather than actually policy matters, and because he got in over a white guy. Single women voted dominantly for Obama, as did those with higher edumacation, are you saying women did it for the jungle fevor and higher educated did it because they like the cookie man? What about pro life groups, baby kills also voted on mass for him, does it mean baby killers are racist as well? Ps I didn’t vote for Obama. Does that mean I’m racist as I’m white? Again not a liberal. Do you even understand how transparently idiotic and racial your arguments are?
10) Spanish inquisition

Please feel free to comment. I would love to hear reader responces.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
RFD 1/2:

This debate really was a chore to read.

To BOTH sides: You need to differentiate your own arguments from your copying of your opponent's arguments. Pro did slightly better at that, and Pro's arguments were therefore easier to read. But seriously--you don't have to quote EVERYTHING your opponent said, and it should be easy for me to see what your rebuttal IS--having to reread the round I just read just to find where you threw a line in response is unnecessarily difficult.

This side had good quotes, but I think it still suffered from a lack of sourcing. Pro actually DID use some sources, but I'd note to Pro that he can't rely on the sources to make a case for him. Just giving some links and saying "these support me" isn't really sufficient. Make your case, and use your sources to support the contentions you make in your case. Still, by having far more sources, Pro wins the day on source points.

Both sides had trouble crafting readable sentences, so neither side gets any S&G points from me.

Both sides regressed to insults, so neither side gets any conduct points from me, and I'd strongly recomment both sides get ahold of themselves in future debates.
Posted by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
RFD 2/2:

Fundamentally, when Con agreed that the founder of the KKK was defended by the group to which he belongs, I think he basically lost the debate--his defense of Forrest, that he left the group when it became violent, was irrelevant to its racism. Likewise were his tu quoque claims about other historical figures. Lincoln wasn't the resolution--the SVC were, and both Pro and Con showed that the SVC supports racism. Arguments to Pro.

I will say this to Con: If your group was not racist, *even if they still like the confederacy*, I would have expected you to come up with evidence of your group REPUDIATING racism. If there isn't any, and if racism and slavery were clearly contributing factors to the rebellion of the south (and they were, regardless of any quibbles about the EXTENT of the contribution), then it's pretty clearly implicitly accepted by your group. If you're a part of it, but are not racist yourself, you should strongly consider agitating for such a repudiation of the racist concepts that the Confederacy loudly espoused.

As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Posted by barnesec 2 years ago
barnesec
@ Nicoszon, I would say the Confederacy was certainly a racist organization. Was everyone who fought for the Confederacy racist - probably the overwhelming majority. I would say the overwhelming majority in the North probably were as well. Just because you didn't own slaves doesn't mean you weren't racist, nor does opposing slavery mean you weren't racist. You might find slavery barbaric, but that doesn't mean you supported citizenship for blacks, jury duty, voting, interracial marriage, and so on and so forth. The main issue of the war was slavery which underpinned the whole economy and way of life in the South. Slaves also happened to be the most valuable asset class in the country at the time. There's a reason they were labeled "slave states" and "free states", slavery and its expansion or containment was the defining issue of the time. Were there other issues where they were disagreements? Sure. Would they have led to civil war? Negative. We're trying to impose our contemporary values on times back then. Nowadays "racist" is a toxic term, though it probably applied to the vast majority of people at the time.
Also, Lincoln sold the war as the preservation of the Union. The South seceded and fired the first shots. If he sold it it as the war to end slavery it would have been much less politically popular. Certainly wouldn't say it was a "slug-line", more the opposite. It was downplayed if anything.
Posted by Ngrovcam 2 years ago
Ngrovcam
I agree with Nicoszon....only to answer Kbub's question, I would google Sons of Confederate Veterans. This is about the organization- not the actual Cnfederacy.
Posted by Nicoszon_the_Great 2 years ago
Nicoszon_the_Great
I don't think anyone could call the whole of the Confederacy a racist organisation, however they were separatists and the needs of the Union to be whole required they be destroyed and reabsorbed into the Union. The civil war was fought over land, not slaves, however the slaves were the political slug-line that was used then and now to support the Union's actions.
Posted by kbub 2 years ago
kbub
So, this is a debate on what the Civil War was fought over? That is, if the Confederate States of America were racist, the organization celebrating the cause of the confederacy is racist?
Posted by bettabreeder 2 years ago
bettabreeder
I proudly support the SCVs and there cause They are just celebrating there culture and history. And how can that be offensive
Posted by Ngrovcam 2 years ago
Ngrovcam
Sir, thank you for your well thought out opinion. Although the war was fought for nearly infinite reasons per so many individuals it was not just one reason on either side. Indeed some on the side of the south fought for slavery but again, it is safe to estimate it was a minority. I do not agree that the confederacy as a whole was "evil" but as stated there were perhaps a few bad apples. Regards,

Nick c
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
Fair enough. I went to the site, and it seemed to be a legitimate organization that hosted civil war preservation and exhibits. I don't know enough about them yet though.

The confederates were pretty evil. Usually people who support nazi "heritage" (lots of them), are paramilitary racists though.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
NgrovcamNathanDuclosTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.