CSNbbs

I hope this is all a distraction while the really "good" Bills escape through Special Session. Otherwise its just a Rinky Dink, two bit BS, stupid crap that ranks up there with the sonograms and the TSA pat down assault Bills.

Confederate Flag License Plate Sparks Debate
Texas Might Allow Confederate Flag On License Plates

FORT WORTH (CBSDFW.COM) – Would you buy a license plate with a Confederate flag on it? State officials are looking at possibly launching a new Texas state license plate honoring veterans of the War Between the States.

Mr. Hilary Shelton, with the NAACP in Washington, D.C., said that the Civil War may not be something we want to celebrate.

“When many look at that history, we think about it in terms of secession, that is we were seceding from the Union in the southern parts of the country,” explained Shelton. “Many would view that, quite frankly, as treason, because they meant to actually destroy the existing governmental structure. But when we dig deeper, the issue becomes even more offensive to many African Americans and those that sought freedom for those of darker skin in our country.”

“When you understand the Confederate history, and what it stood for,” said Dallas resident Mark Jones, “it’s directly slapping African Americans in the face.”

In terms of the Civil War, Shelton said that the Confederate flag was actually very un-American. “It was the flag that was flown during a war to actually tear the nation apart,” Shelton explained.

“I don’t think that this will unify us,” said Carrollton resident Carolina Arreola. “Our patriotism is to the Unites States flag.”

But the Texas Sons of Confederate Veterans have renewed their push for a Texas license plate that includes the rebel flag in its design.

Thomas Muhammed founded an organization to recover reparations for slavery. Still, he would not oppose the license plates. “I don’t see how a flag hurts someone, as long as the people displaying these license plates are not killing people physically who are of African descent.” Muhammed said.

Currently, nine states already allow the license plates. A statement in a recent newsletter from the Texas Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans said, “…the Florida Division, the eleventh state, has just filed a lawsuit against the DOT there after their request was denied. I am confident their case will prevail, because legal precedents are in place. I am hopeful that the Texas DOT also realizes this as they consider our application.”

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/06/23/licen...-at-txdot/

When states started offering organizational plates, you had to know something like this was coming. If it wasn't the Sons of Confederate Veterans (for which the objection seems to be their flag within their logo, rather than the group itself), if would have been some other group that was objectionable in itself or had an objectionable logo. Maybe the dreaded Illinois Nazis.

In some ways, it is an interesting converse to some of the debates years ago over arts funding. In those cases, the government gives money to individuals, some of whom use it to create displays that offend people. The question then arises: can government use that offense as a reason to stop funding the displays? (Predictably, the recipients of the money think not.)

Here, the government (for revenue or other reasons) provides advertising to organizations. Some of those organizations, or their ads, offend people or embarrass the government. Is that a valid reason to stop selling ads to those organizations?

The simple solution, of course, is for government to just stick to governing. Unfortunately, that horse left the barn long, long ago.

In this particular case, perhaps the organization could agree not to use its logo. Or perhaps it could change its logo. (I suspect if their logo incorporated the CSA stars and bars instead of the battle flag, the controversy never would have come up.) But now that is has made the national press, a digging in of the heels seems likely.

As a personal side, I like how Mr. Shelton in the quoted article pointed out that the first and clearest meaning of the Confederate flag is a symbol of treason against the United States. That is certainly a perfectly sufficient reason for Americans from all regions to dislike it. But of course, that doesn't answer the legal question.

(06-25-2011 03:08 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]The simple solution, of course, is for government to just stick to governing. Unfortunately, that horse left the barn long, long ago.

That's putting it mildly.

Quote:I suspect if their logo incorporated the CSA stars and bars instead of the battle flag, the controversy never would have come up.

What makes you think that? I remember nearly 20 years ago when the UDC tried to renew it's trademark emblem, it (the UDC and the trademark) were denounced as ... (can you guess?)

I mention this because the UDC emblem included the "stars and bars" and excluded the battle-flag, for the specific purpose of not offending the South-haters. To no avail.

Quote:As a personal side, I like how Mr. Shelton in the quoted article pointed out that the first and clearest meaning of the Confederate flag is a symbol of treason against the United States

I have observed/listened to (and occasionally participated in) these conversations for more than 25 years, and doing so all over again is a tedious prospect. But I just have to say, I always wished someone would explain what makes "treason" synonymous with "secession". It's like saying that "day" is synonymous with "night".

Virginia went through this 10 years ago, and the fallout is minimal, at best. The legal grounds anyone has for preventing the logo from being used is very thin indeed. As noted when the Virginia ruling came down from the Federal district judge (and eventually affirmed at the Appeals level), government cannot selectively discriminate on something like this. Once the government starts issuing specialty plates like this and sets the ground rules, they generally cannot then deny an organization based on any disagreements over images used.

Now, in Virginia's case, you have to be a member of the SCV to be issued the plate. But that's the only restriction for getting it the plate here. And while lots of hot air was generated for the years while the legislation was eventually passed and then challenged in court (by a Republican governor and attorney general, it should be noted), it's been a non-factor once it started being issued. You see it, you might have a visceral reaction to it, but it's not ever been a source of conflict (as far as I've heard heard).

Then again, that could be in part because almost every instance I've seen of this plate (probably in at least 80% of the cases) also involves another instance of a Stars and Bars sticker somewhere else on the vehicle. (You know where the driver stands.) So shoot me for generalizing, but that's my experience.

(06-25-2011 03:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-25-2011 03:08 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]As a personal side, I like how Mr. Shelton in the quoted article pointed out that the first and clearest meaning of the Confederate flag is a symbol of treason against the United States

I have observed/listened to (and occasionally participated in) these conversations for more than 25 years, and doing so all over again is a tedious prospect. But I just have to say, I always wished someone would explain what makes "treason" synonymous with "secession".

Wow. I have also participated in such conversations for some time, and I have yet to hear anyone articulate a credible reason why it is not. If you can do so, you would be the first.

(06-25-2011 03:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]I mention this because the UDC emblem included the "stars and bars" and excluded the battle-flag, for the specific purpose of not offending the South-haters. To no avail.

For the record, denoting opponents of CSA symbols as "South-haters" is far, far, far, far, far, far, FAR less supportable than denoting secession and war against one's country as treason. Are opponents of Nazi symbols "German-haters"? If a person genuinely believes that criticism of CSA symbols is South-hatred, then that person's affinity for the region is perhaps a bit thin-skinned.

(06-25-2011 04:40 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-25-2011 03:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-25-2011 03:08 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]I suspect if their logo incorporated the CSA stars and bars instead of the battle flag, the controversy never would have come up.

What makes you think that? I remember nearly 20 years ago when the UDC tried to renew it's trademark emblem, it (the UDC and the trademark) were denounced as ... (can you guess?)

I mention this because the UDC emblem included the "stars and bars" and excluded the battle-flag, for the specific purpose of not offending the South-haters. To no avail.

For the record, denoting opponents of CSA symbols as "South-haters" is far, far, far, far, far, far, FAR less supportable than denoting secession and war against one's country as treason. Are opponents of Nazi symbols "German-haters"? If a person genuinely believes that criticism of CSA symbols is South-hatred, then that person's affinity for the region is perhaps a bit thin-skinned.

Well, there's criticism, and there's criticism. There's opposition, and there's opposition. I do not consider every "opponent" of "CSA symbols" to be a "South-hater". But when the opposition reaches the point of objecting -- in rather angry, emotional tones -- to the mere renewal of a trademark or patent, then ... Yeah, at that point, I think the South-hating shoe does fit nicely.

To return to your own original point, there's "symbols" and there's "symbols". The UDC symbol in question carefully omitted the "Rebel" battle-flag emblem in favor of the (ostensibly) less-visceral "Stars and Bars" emblem, and did so for the express purpose of (trying to) avoid provocation. That was the symbol that stirred up so much dust back in 1993, which seems to refute your suspicion that "the controversy would have never come up" if the Stars-and-Bars had been proposed for the Texas license plates.

I just don't see the point of putting the confederate flag on anything.

(06-25-2011 06:57 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-25-2011 04:40 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-25-2011 03:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-25-2011 03:08 PM)georgewebb Wrote: [ -> ]I suspect if their logo incorporated the CSA stars and bars instead of the battle flag, the controversy never would have come up.

What makes you think that? I remember nearly 20 years ago when the UDC tried to renew it's trademark emblem, it (the UDC and the trademark) were denounced as ... (can you guess?)

I mention this because the UDC emblem included the "stars and bars" and excluded the battle-flag, for the specific purpose of not offending the South-haters. To no avail.

For the record, denoting opponents of CSA symbols as "South-haters" is far, far, far, far, far, far, FAR less supportable than denoting secession and war against one's country as treason. Are opponents of Nazi symbols "German-haters"? If a person genuinely believes that criticism of CSA symbols is South-hatred, then that person's affinity for the region is perhaps a bit thin-skinned.

Well, there's criticism, and there's criticism. There's opposition, and there's opposition. I do not consider every "opponent" of "CSA symbols" to be a "South-hater". But when the opposition reaches the point of objecting -- in rather angry, emotional tones -- to the mere renewal of a trademark or patent, then ... Yeah, at that point, I think the South-hating shoe does fit nicely.

To return to your own original point, there's "symbols" and there's "symbols". The UDC symbol in question carefully omitted the "Rebel" battle-flag emblem in favor of the (ostensibly) less-visceral "Stars and Bars" emblem, and did so for the express purpose of (trying to) avoid provocation. That was the symbol that stirred up so much dust back in 1993, which seems to refute your suspicion that "the controversy would have never come up" if the Stars-and-Bars had been proposed for the Texas license plates.

Points taken. The information about the 1993 case does pretty much refute my theory head-on. I was trusting that the public's general ignorance of history would in this case prove useful, but apparently not.

If you drive up 59 through east Texas, about 15 miles north of Nacogdoches is a business with a flagpole in front flying the largest confederate flag I have ever seen. Sometimes the battle flag, sometimes the stars and bars. I am amazed that they can get away with it.

Responding to 69/70/75's comment #8: I think, generally, it is meant to express kinship with, and gratitude to, the sacrifices of forebears.

Other than that, I don't see the point in it, either. Of course, I don't see the point to most human activity, and most especially the kind of activity that involves flags.

Generally, though, I try to assume that the activity is not deliberately calculated to insult me, unless the person involved tells me different. Life just seems to be more peaceful that way.

(06-25-2011 08:19 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]Responding to 69/70/75's comment #8: I think, generally, it is meant to express kinship with, and gratitude to, the sacrifices of forebears.

Other than that, I don't see the point in it, either. Of course, I don't see the point to most human activity, and most especially the kind of activity that involves flags.

Generally, though, I try to assume that the activity is not deliberately calculated to insult me, unless the person involved tells me different. Life just seems to be more peaceful that way.

Considering my great grandfather was the only male out of 5 to survive the war.... And there are some graves of those that didn't that I regularly visit in Georgia, I find that those who display the stars and bars on their trucks don't really understand the true horror and impact of the war

(06-25-2011 08:42 PM)WMD Owl Wrote: [ -> ]I find that those who display the stars and bars on their trucks don't really understand the true horror and impact of the war

I daresay.

Don't you suppose that is generally true for everyone, no matter what flag-sticker is on their car? We live in a society where only a relative handful of people do understand the impact of war.

(06-25-2011 09:03 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-25-2011 08:42 PM)WMD Owl Wrote: [ -> ]I find that those who display the stars and bars on their trucks don't really understand the true horror and impact of the war

I daresay.

Don't you suppose that is generally true for everyone, no matter what flag-sticker is on their car? We live in a society where only a relative handful of people do understand the impact of war.

A few years ago I was at Gettysburg and decided to walk Picketts charge, following basically the path of Armistead's Brigade. It really gave me a creepy feeling walking and just imagining all the Hell falling down on those guys. Walking up to the fence along Emmitsburg Pike and thinking of having to climb over it, and exposing yourself to direct fire... well...

Its probably the same feeling if you walked from the waterline up Omaha Beach.

I think if we could talk to actual soldiers, both Union and CSA, and ask them why they fought, we would be surprised at the answers.

as for my license plate, nothing is replacing the Rice collegiate plate I have.