This is why they kneel

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

02-21-2022, 02:17 AM
spliff(TONE)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo

Yes it was.

Tight argument.
02-21-2022, 02:24 AM
dbroncsinmo

Quote:

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

Tight argument.

:laugh: The king of tight arguments has spoken. :laugh:
02-21-2022, 03:22 AM
valade16

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo

Yes it was.

Of course you’d think fighting for slavery was a good deed…
02-21-2022, 04:11 AM
natepro

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeyc77

Most slave owners don't have monuments honoring them.

A lot of people that fought for them to continue doing that, on the other hand...
02-21-2022, 04:12 AM
natepro

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo

Back then it was. The fact that you pretend to not understand that 1860 is not 2022 is astonishing at best.

Well that's not an argument you hear every day.
02-21-2022, 05:28 AM
joeyc77

Quote:

Originally Posted by valade16

Again, you inadvertently show your true colors. Good deeds? The Confederacy was not a good deed.

The Confederacy was not a good deed. That doesn't mean the men who were in it were 100% bad. The Union was a good deed. That doesn't mean the men who were in it were 100% good. Life is complicated that way.
02-21-2022, 05:43 AM
joeyc77

Quote:

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

Lofl I'd love to see you get punked by Barry Bonds.

It wasn't really directed at me. My friend owned a restaurant. Bonds was doing a signing or something next to it. His people asked if my friend could open the restaurant early but keep it closed to the general public. My friend invited myself and a couple others. Bonds basically treated the staff like garbage so much so that my friend had to intervene and remind him they were only there as a favor to him. It was when he was in Pittsburgh.
02-21-2022, 08:30 AM
ewing

Quote:

Originally Posted by valade16

There's heinous and then there's heinous. Does anyone think what they did was as bad as owning slaves, raping slaves, killing slaves, and fighting for slavery?

Also, Chris Benoit isn't really honored at this point, the WWE has done all they can to scrub him from their history and makes it a point to avoid him when talking about past greast.

OJ has the not guilty verdict to fall back on, but even then, he isn't really honored in that the Bills go out of their way to shun him in terms of recognizing their all-time greats.

The closest example may be Mike Tyson, who has had one of the more improbable character comebacks of all-time.

No one honors Mike FOR being a rapist. OJ’s bust at the HOF doesn’t have him holding a knife. Statues of Confederate Generals are not honoring them for there other hobbies.
02-21-2022, 12:03 PM
joeyc77

Quote:

Originally Posted by ewing

No one honors Mike FOR being a rapist. OJ’s bust at the HOF doesn’t have him holding a knife. Statues of Confederate Generals are not honoring them for there other hobbies.

I totally agree. Also, i have no issue if people are offended by statues of Confederate generals. Just like i have no issue if people are offended by OJs bust in the HOF. But it should be handled with a simple conversation explaining the reasons those men are being honored. None of which has to do with their misdeeds.

Also, i saw some people mention chris Benoit as an example. Part of the reason WWE banished benoit from their "history" is because the Monday after he murdered his family, they kinda jumped the gun and had an entire 3 hour show honoring him. It was a PR nightmare as they honored someone who just murdered his family. But as time has passed, they have begun talking about Benoit.
02-21-2022, 01:03 PM
dbroncos78087

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeyc77

The Confederacy was not a good deed. That doesn't mean the men who were in it were 100% bad. The Union was a good deed. That doesn't mean the men who were in it were 100% good. Life is complicated that way.

If someone willingly fought in the Confederacy, then they are forever tainted by its stink. There is no escaping it, there is no amount of good deed that gets around it.
02-21-2022, 01:19 PM
Bird of Prey

Quote:

Originally Posted by valade16

Nobody is saying ignoring them. We are talking about whether to honor them. You can't say we need to understand this was a terrible part of our history when you are defending the honoring of that part of history.

If it was terrible, we shouldn't be honoring it. Teach it, yes. But honor? No.

It depends on the entire history of the person that you are talking about. Look at George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as prime examples. Both owned slaves. Yes, it was wrong. But both of them grew up in that CULTURE where slavery was acceptable to a huge % of the world's governments and people. And look at the great things that both of those guys did with their lives.

If you believe as I do that we are all imperfect and make some bad mistakes, then we should gauge a person by their entirety and not just one bad thing that they did. Especially when talking about what a person did a almsot three centuries ago.
02-21-2022, 01:31 PM
Bird of Prey

Quote:

Originally Posted by valade16

Pretty nuts that Joey is more put off by the actions of BLM and Kaepernick than by Confederate Generals owning slaves and fighting for slavery.

when the Culture of the time that a young child was brought up in and educated in was such that the norms taught were that slavery was accepted, what odds would you give that a given child would grow up thinking differently other than his own experiences taught him? That is what I think that most people at the time were immersed in morally. And that is why I do not judge so harshly some of the people who owned slaves at the time or at least condoned the thing.
02-21-2022, 01:45 PM
metswon69

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeyc77

I totally agree. Also, i have no issue if people are offended by statues of Confederate generals. Just like i have no issue if people are offended by OJs bust in the HOF. But it should be handled with a simple conversation explaining the reasons those men are being honored. None of which has to do with their misdeeds.

Also, i saw some people mention chris Benoit as an example. Part of the reason WWE banished benoit from their "history" is because the Monday after he murdered his family, they kinda jumped the gun and had an entire 3 hour show honoring him. It was a PR nightmare as they honored someone who just murdered his family. But as time has passed, they have begun talking about Benoit.

As someone who still semi regularly watches WWE programming, I can tell you this isn't true. They don't mention Benoit at all and for obvious reasons. The man killed his wife and kid and part of that probably came from the fact that he had advanced CTE. Something the WWE definitely contributed to. They want no part of anything related to their potential involvement in the actions committed that day or give any recognition to the man. The wrestlers who work or worked for the company may mention him when interviewed but never does the WWE reference him.

Yes, these are multi layered human beings. Hitler was too. I'm not saying what slaves owners did was comparable to the genocide Hitler committed but sometimes bad human beings are bad human beings. Does the US need to honor those who committed deplorable actions just because they are historical figures? Take all of that **** down.
02-21-2022, 01:58 PM
joeyc77

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbroncos78087

If someone willingly fought in the Confederacy, then they are forever tainted by its stink. There is no escaping it, there is no amount of good deed that gets around it.

This is a very privileged outlook. You act as if they were given a choice between a blue pill and a red pill and chose the wrong side. Their only was whether to fight and probably die with their family/friends or go awol and probably die for not fighting with family/friends.
02-21-2022, 02:16 PM
joeyc77

Quote:

Originally Posted by metswon69

As someone who still semi regularly watches WWE programming, I can tell you this isn't true. They don't mention Benoit at all and for obvious reasons. The man killed his wife and kid and part of that probably came from the fact that he had advanced CTE. Something the WWE definitely contributed to. They want no part of anything related to their potential involvement in the actions committed that day or give any recognition to the man. The wrestlers who work or worked for the company may mention him when interviewed but never does the WWE reference him.

Yes, these are multi layered human beings. Hitler was too. I'm not saying what slaves owners did was comparable to the genocide Hitler committed but sometimes bad human beings are bad human beings. Does the US need to honor those who committed deplorable actions just because they are historical figures? Take all of that **** down.

I just watched the two part episode of "dark side of the ring" about chris benoit. While i don't think WWE produces the show, there were certainly plenty of WWE personalities commenting about benoit and the murders. I agree potential cte has a lot to do with it. But again, that's part of the pr nightmare. I can understand a company not wanting liability when it comes to the death (murder/suicide) of three people.

Need to? No. But some people want to appreciate those men for their good deeds. And people are allowed to be offended at those men for their bad deeds. We can have a conversation about it, remove if necessary, move on if not necessary.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page