Moderator: Community Team
Snorri1234 wrote:OFCOURSE WE SHOULDN'T BAN IT!
Are you an idiot? Do you even read my posts? Did I ever claim the flag should be banned? Just as I don't think we can ban people from burning flags, I don't think we can stop people from waving their flags. You can do whatever you want, just as long as I can think you're a dick or idiot for waving it around. That's the great thing about this free world, everybody can have an opinion!
Also, your poll is all kinds of retarded. Why did you include "No" two times while being the complete opposite of eachother?
Napoleon Ier wrote:Snorri1234 wrote:OFCOURSE WE SHOULDN'T BAN IT!
Are you an idiot? Do you even read my posts? Did I ever claim the flag should be banned? Just as I don't think we can ban people from burning flags, I don't think we can stop people from waving their flags. You can do whatever you want, just as long as I can think you're a dick or idiot for waving it around. That's the great thing about this free world, everybody can have an opinion!
Also, your poll is all kinds of retarded. Why did you include "No" two times while being the complete opposite of eachother?
The "No" group falls into two broad categories, those who want it banned, and those who strongly dissapprove but don't want it banned. The Yes group falls only into those who believe it's fine to fly it.
jecko7 wrote:Napoleon Ier wrote:Snorri1234 wrote:OFCOURSE WE SHOULDN'T BAN IT!
Are you an idiot? Do you even read my posts? Did I ever claim the flag should be banned? Just as I don't think we can ban people from burning flags, I don't think we can stop people from waving their flags. You can do whatever you want, just as long as I can think you're a dick or idiot for waving it around. That's the great thing about this free world, everybody can have an opinion!
Also, your poll is all kinds of retarded. Why did you include "No" two times while being the complete opposite of eachother?
The "No" group falls into two broad categories, those who want it banned, and those who strongly dissapprove but don't want it banned. The Yes group falls only into those who believe it's fine to fly it.
And those who believe in the heroism of Robert E. Lee and the liberating power of the Confederacy from the horrid oppression of overbearing authority. Seriously, make the poll more biased. I dare you.
jecko7 wrote:Do you agree with the flying of the Confederate flag?
Yes
No
No legalistic issues here, just straight-up agree or disagree. I believe in your right to fly the flag, I also believe that if you choose to make use of that right you are un-patriotic and ignorant of American history and/or a moron. Because the question here is not if it is legal to fly the flag, but whether or not that is good or bad, e.g. does it make you a hypocrite to get in an uproar about Obama not putting his hand over his heart while at the same time supporting the Confederacy?
jecko7 wrote:heavycola wrote:who gives a toss?
People from the United States![]()
I dunno what part of Britain you're from, but I'm venturing a guess that this would be kind of like flying the IRA flag in London (if they have one).
jecko7 wrote:Sure, that works.
heavycola wrote:jecko7 wrote:heavycola wrote:who gives a toss?
People from the United States![]()
I dunno what part of Britain you're from, but I'm venturing a guess that this would be kind of like flying the IRA flag in London (if they have one).
I meant, who gives a toss about nappy rash's attempts at trolling?
Decieving, thieving sophist? I'm sorry, just because Heavycola's views frighten you and go far beyond your ability to see the future and your ability to not be stuck in the past, doesn't mean you get to call him names, you homosexual infant.Napoleon Ier wrote:Trolling? I'm sorry, just because the issue of the CS battle flag is too far beyond your political correctness toleration quotient doesn't mean you get to call threads about it trolling, you deceiving, thieving sophist.
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
Napoleon Ier wrote:heavycola wrote:jecko7 wrote:heavycola wrote:who gives a toss?
People from the United States![]()
I dunno what part of Britain you're from, but I'm venturing a guess that this would be kind of like flying the IRA flag in London (if they have one).
I meant, who gives a toss about nappy rash's attempts at trolling?
Trolling? I'm sorry, just because the issue of the CS battle flag is too far beyond your political correctness toleration quotient doesn't mean you get to call threads about it trolling, you deceiving, thieving sophist.
jecko7 wrote:Napoleon Ier wrote:heavycola wrote:jecko7 wrote:heavycola wrote:who gives a toss?
People from the United States![]()
I dunno what part of Britain you're from, but I'm venturing a guess that this would be kind of like flying the IRA flag in London (if they have one).
I meant, who gives a toss about nappy rash's attempts at trolling?
Trolling? I'm sorry, just because the issue of the CS battle flag is too far beyond your political correctness toleration quotient doesn't mean you get to call threads about it trolling, you deceiving, thieving sophist.
I think he's calling it trolling because you're not from the United States, and yet you're telling people to not worry about the Confederate flag, and you're giving all these different hidden meanings for it, yet you're not culturally or societally (not sure if I'm using that correctly) involved with it in any way.
The conclusion many people will draw from this is that you are making this thread to garner attention for yourself or stir up controversy, e.g. trolling.
BTW, I'm dying for a good metaphor, what part of Britain are you from? And what's the deal with the IRA these days?
Dancing Mustard wrote:Napoleon Ier wrote:Trolling? I'm sorry, just because the issue of the CS battle flag is too far beyond your political correctness toleration quotient doesn't mean you get to call threads about it trolling, you deceiving, thieving sophist.
U iz teh gay n teh konservative.
Not sure about the first, but yes, the Confederacy was the South from 1860(maybe 61) to 1865.0ojakeo0 wrote:Did someone make a thread like this once? And the confederatew was the south right?
muy_thaiguy wrote:Not sure about the first, but yes, the Confederacy was the South from 1860(maybe 61) to 1865.0ojakeo0 wrote:Did someone make a thread like this once? And the confederatew was the south right?
And Nappy, the Confederate Flag, even the Confederacy and the Civil War themselves, came off from slavery. Now I'm not saying that either the North or South were in the right (the North, in it's ignorance, relied quite a bit on the slaves in the South), but the times of the Confederacy are over, and have been over for over 140 years. I do believe in States rights, but those do NOT include splitting off from the Union.
Actually, as said in another thread, the Civil War would never had happened if not for slavery. Also, Jackson and Lee both felt more loyalty to their states then to their nation, and thus committed an act of treason by following the rest of the South in seceding. And whether or not the Generals opposed it or not, the South seceded because Lincoln (a moderate Abolitionist (wanted to free slaves)) was elected, and also began the war itself. Like I said, the North and South were both at fault over the war, never said otherwise, but do you know about the Reconstruction Years? If not, I suggest you look it up, it is often called a continuation of the Civil War.Napoleon Ier wrote:muy_thaiguy wrote:Not sure about the first, but yes, the Confederacy was the South from 1860(maybe 61) to 1865.0ojakeo0 wrote:Did someone make a thread like this once? And the confederatew was the south right?
And Nappy, the Confederate Flag, even the Confederacy and the Civil War themselves, came off from slavery. Now I'm not saying that either the North or South were in the right (the North, in it's ignorance, relied quite a bit on the slaves in the South), but the times of the Confederacy are over, and have been over for over 140 years. I do believe in States rights, but those do NOT include splitting off from the Union.
I'm not sure that's entirely fair to say. Slavery may have been an issue, but both Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee opposed slavery, in contrast to Grant and Sherman, who themselves recognised that the War wasn't over slavery. Remember the North imposed horrific economic burdens on the South, which almost caused S. Carolina to secede. I can see th Civil War being a tragic event for he American Nation, which was split schizophrenically between two sides both of which fought in the name of some noble causes. However, I don't see why displaying a flag which represents an entire way of life and of pride in heritage is wrong. I've heard of Southerners who fly both the CS Navy Jack and the current 50-starred US flag.
Napoleon Ier wrote:However, I don't see why displaying a flag which represents an entire way of life and of pride in heritage is wrong. I've heard of Southerners who fly both the CS Navy Jack and the current 50-starred US flag.
Napoleon Ier wrote:heavycola wrote:jecko7 wrote:heavycola wrote:who gives a toss?
People from the United States![]()
I dunno what part of Britain you're from, but I'm venturing a guess that this would be kind of like flying the IRA flag in London (if they have one).
I meant, who gives a toss about nappy rash's attempts at trolling?
Trolling? I'm sorry, just because the issue of the CS battle flag is too far beyond your political correctness toleration quotient doesn't mean you get to call threads about it trolling, you deceiving, thieving sophist.
odious twat wrote:I thought this could be an interesting poll to look at, and spark some intelligent debate. As well as some amusing red-faced convulsions and frothing at the mouth from snorri and co.'s magic circus. So, let's enjoy!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users