More Snowflakes Vs Offensive Symbol Controversy

Revoltingest · May 25, 2020

Vinayaka said:
Yes I ignore as I have known for quite some time that there's something in the water in Revoltistan. We had many DDs from the U S of A here. Similar to POWs. Strangers from a far off land, not good for much.

Well, you dodged one bullet.
I was headed in your direction until Nixon cancelled the draft.

lostwanderingsoul · May 25, 2020

epronovost said:
Welcome to the real world where easy clear solutions don't exist. The world is nothing but mud, learn to live with it.

The easy clear solution is to say that religious or historical symbols are allowed in any public place. If a few people are offended by seeing those symbols, that is better than denying others the right to display them. And, I am afraid that includes having religious symbols on public buildings. It does not mean the government is forcing a certain religion on anyone or is paying tax money to support religion.

epronovost · May 25, 2020

lostwanderingsoul said:
The easy clear solution is to say that religious or historical symbols are allowed in any public place. If a few people are offended by seeing those symbols, that is better than denying others the right to display them.

I think this has been proven to be largely wrong by the American example which has suffered from a lag in civic liberties compared to other first world democracies due to the tolerance of intimidation, hatred and bigotry in policical and public spaces.

Revoltingest · May 25, 2020

lostwanderingsoul said:
The easy clear solution is to say that religious or historical symbols are allowed in any public place. If a few people are offended by seeing those symbols, that is better than denying others the right to display them. And, I am afraid that includes having religious symbols on public buildings. It does not mean the government is forcing a certain religion on anyone or is paying tax money to support religion.

Although in courtrooms, having a government sanctioned religion
sends an ominous message to parties to a suit & to defendants
when they're different.
Also, it's bad when judges automatically want an oath sworn to
their "God", & we non-believers effectively announce our possibly
looked down upon status when requesting a secular oath.

Twilight Hue · May 25, 2020

lostwanderingsoul said:
The easy clear solution is to say that religious or historical symbols are allowed in any public place. If a few people are offended by seeing those symbols, that is better than denying others the right to display them. And, I am afraid that includes having religious symbols on public buildings. It does not mean the government is forcing a certain religion on anyone or is paying tax money to support religion.

The only problem is if one side starts vandalizing the other, and before you know it, government/public buildings will look like Baghdad after the war.

Milton Platt · May 25, 2020

Revoltingest said:
Clickbaity title it is.
I'm with the historical preservationists (as usual).

In the news....
Swastikas Are Carved Into Three Military Gravestones. A Veteran Wants Them Removed.
And for no paywall....
Nazi swastikas at veterans cemeteries prompt outrage, but VA calls them protected history
Excerpted.....
Veterans Affairs officials are rejecting calls to remove gravestones bearing Nazi swastikas at a pair of federal veterans cemeteries, saying they have a duty to preserve the historic markers.

But officials from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation called the continued presence of the offensive symbols alongside the resting place of American veterans “shocking and inexcusable” and are demanding a public apology from VA leaders.

“Secretary Robert Wilkie must immediately replace the gravestones of all German military personnel interred in VA national cemeteries so that abosultely no Nazi-era symbols … will ever again be allowed to appear on such gravestones,” said Mikey Weinstein, chair of MRFF.

At issue are three grave sites at two VA cemeteries: Fort Sam Houston National Cemetery in Texas and Fort Douglas Post Cemetery in Utah. Both were used to inter dozens of unclaimed remains of enemy troops following World War II.

While most of the foreign troops’ grave markers list only names and dates of death, the three in question are also engraved with with a swastika in the center of an iron cross and in inscription in German which reads “He died far from his home for the Führer, people and fatherland.”

Veteran Affairs officials in a statement said the headstones date back to the 1940s. Army officials oversaw both cemeteries at the time and approved the inscriptions and inclusion of the swastika.

Well, you just love to open up those cans of worms. I don't think it is a good thing to erase history, lest we forget the painful parts.

Shadow Wolf · May 25, 2020

lostwanderingsoul said:
Should we remove any symbol that might offend someone? Christians may be offended by Jewish star of David and Jews may be offended by Christian creooses. Atheists of course may be offended by any religious sign. So where do we draw the line? Many people want religion and government separated so there should be no religious symbols in a government run cemetary. How do we avoid anything that might offend even one person?

We were at declared war against hiw many of them? How many of them nearly erradicted the Jews from Europe not even a century ago? Or do you really not see the difference in this subject? Or would you think a hood and fiery cross perfectly suitable for a US military graveyard with no difference between that and a Star of David or Crescent Moon?

Vinayaka · May 25, 2020

Revoltingest said:
Well, you dodged one bullet.
I was headed in your direction until Nixon cancelled the draft.

Well Nixon saved us then. It did make my high school years more interesting. Some of those guys were teachers, and well, snowball fights in class weren't always out of the question. One guy started every day telling us he was from Walla Walla Washington. He seemed to like the sound of his own voice.

Think what you could have become!

taykair · May 25, 2020

The weaker the mind, the more powerful the symbol. Whether that symbol is cherished or reviled makes no difference.

lostwanderingsoul · May 25, 2020

Nowhere Man said:
The only problem is if one side starts vandalizing the other, and before you know it, government/public buildings will look like Baghdad after the war.

That only shows the stupidity of vandals who want to force their ideas on others.

lostwanderingsoul · May 25, 2020

Shadow Wolf said:
We were at declared war against hiw many of them? How many of them nearly erradicted the Jews from Europe not even a century ago? Or do you really not see the difference in this subject? Or would you think a hood and fiery cross perfectly suitable for a US military graveyard with no difference between that and a Star of David or Crescent Moon?

I think we should not force our opinions on others. A hood and fiery cross may be symbols of things most of us find offensive but if someone wants that on a tombstone, why should we deny that right?

Father Heathen · May 25, 2020

In context, here they're used as identifiers for dead guys rather than as a celebratory display.
Remember, our fighter planes would have them placed along their sides as a tally of those they've shot down.

BSM1 · May 25, 2020

epronovost said:
Many black US soldiers were rightfully offended that those German prisonners, when working in community, had more rights than them in segregationist States.

Fodder for another thread, but thanks for playing.

Father Heathen · May 25, 2020

lostwanderingsoul said:
The easy clear solution is to say that religious or historical symbols are allowed in any public place. If a few people are offended by seeing those symbols, that is better than denying others the right to display them. And, I am afraid that includes having religious symbols on public buildings. It does not mean the government is forcing a certain religion on anyone or is paying tax money to support religion.

Then they better allow all of them or none of them. Otherwise it shows preferential treatment which violates the establishment clause of the 1st amendment.

Father Heathen · May 25, 2020

epronovost said:
I think this has been proven to be largely wrong by the American example which has suffered from a lag in civic liberties compared to other first world democracies due to the tolerance of intimidation, hatred and bigotry in policical and public spaces.

If anything, the fact that the U.S. upholds freedom of speech and expression elevates it well above countries that do not.

Shadow Wolf · May 25, 2020

lostwanderingsoul said:
I think we should not force our opinions on others. A hood and fiery cross may be symbols of things most of us find offensive but if someone wants that on a tombstone, why should we deny that right?

In a veteran's graveyard, symbols of those who sent some of those with to the grave should not be honored in such a way. Their Fuehrer is the reason Americans are buried their with them. He is the reason unknown millions of people where brutalized, savagely tortured, and butchered like animals. They deserve no disrespect, but their Fuehrer deserves no mention. They died in a tragic war, we know who's side they fought on. The evil that started it a d caused such death and destruction deserves no such recognition.

Revoltingest · May 26, 2020

Shadow Wolf said:
In a veteran's graveyard, symbols of those who sent some of those with to the grave should not be honored in such a way. Their Fuehrer is the reason Americans are buried their with them. He is the reason unknown millions of people where brutalized, savagely tortured, and butchered like animals. They deserve no disrespect, but their Fuehrer deserves no mention. They died in a tragic war, we know who's side they fought on. The evil that started it a d caused such death and destruction deserves no such recognition.

Have any of the veterans buried due to Hitler complained?

tytlyf · May 26, 2020

metis said:
We all too conveniently forget that Hitler and Mussolini had a significant number of supporters here in the States and elsewhere-- but then try and find one after when we got in the war and later.

Lot's of American flags at the rally.

lostwanderingsoul · May 26, 2020

Father Heathen said:
Then they better allow all of them or none of them. Otherwise it shows preferential treatment which violates the establishment clause of the 1st amendment.

"Establishment" means that the government pick one religion and says that is the official religion of the country. Allowing or not allowing certain symbols has nothing to do with establishment.

lostwanderingsoul · May 26, 2020

Shadow Wolf said:
In a veteran's graveyard, symbols of those who sent some of those with to the grave should not be honored in such a way. Their Fuehrer is the reason Americans are buried their with them. He is the reason unknown millions of people where brutalized, savagely tortured, and butchered like animals. They deserve no disrespect, but their Fuehrer deserves no mention. They died in a tragic war, we know who's side they fought on. The evil that started it a d caused such death and destruction deserves no such recognition.

In the middle ages the Catholic church slaughtered thousands in the crusades. So we should not allow any Catholic symbol such as crosses.

More Snowflakes Vs Offensive Symbol Controversy

Pragmatic Libertarian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Pragmatic Libertarian

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

Well-Known Member

Certified People sTabber

devotee

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

What? Me worry?

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Certified People sTabber

Pragmatic Libertarian

Not Religious

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member