Posted on 04/24/2005 6:08:20 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Southern heritage buffs vow to use the Virginia gubernatorial election as a platform for designating April as Confederate History and Heritage Month.
The four candidates have differing views on the Confederacy, an issue that has been debated for years in the commonwealth.
"We're not just a few people making a lot of noise," said Brag Bowling, a spokesman for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the oldest hereditary organization for male descendents of Confederate soldiers. "This is not a racial thing; it is good for Virginia. We're going to keep pushing this until we get it."
Each candidate recently shared his thoughts on what Mr. Bowling called a "litmus test for all politicians." Lt. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine would not support a Confederate History and Heritage Month. Former state Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore would support something that recognizes everyone who lived during the Civil War.
Sen. H. Russell Potts Jr. and Warrenton Mayor George B. Fitch would support a Confederate History and Heritage Month. Many past Virginia governors honored the Civil War or the Confederacy.
In 1990, former Gov. L. Douglas Wilder, the nation's first black governor, a Democrat and a grandson of slaves, issued a proclamation praising both sides of the war and remembering "those who sacrificed in this great struggle."
Former Govs. George Allen and James S. Gilmore III, both Republicans, issued Confederate History Month proclamations. In 2000, Mr. Gilmore replaced that proclamation with one commemorating both sides of the Civil War -- a move that enraged the Sons of Confederate Veterans.
Gov. Mark Warner, a Democrat, has refused to issue a gubernatorial decree on either side of the Civil War.
Mr. Kaine, another Democrat, would decline to issue a Confederate History and Heritage Month proclamation if he is elected governor, said his campaign spokeswoman, Delacey Skinner.
(Excerpt) Read more at insider.washingtontimes.com ...
If you don't like our opinions "wackymac" you don't have to play ball. You and the rest of the diehard Unionist can fade into the sunset for all I care. If you ever came to Texas, I could introduce you to at least 500 people that love their Southern homeland,(and MANY more as well) and want to honor their Confederate Heritage. I daresay that in Florida, there are quite a few that feel the same way as well. I am not going to let you spread your Pro-Lincoln False History without a challenge, and I daresay there are others here that feel the same way. I personally extended an olive branch to you, but you seem to enjoy being a pain in the butt, so, do as you will. Don't even think for a minute that Southerners didn't support their Confederate Government. Especially Texans. They did. Pontificate all you like, but everytime you turn around and try to spread your lies, I am going to be right there to refute them.
That is pure hogwash. In Texas, we have ALWAYS been 2nd Amendment defenders, and no transplants made us that way.
The only place that assumption is true is in your dark, little mind.
The South didn't give a d*mn about what the North thought, only when it interfered in business that wasn't theirs. And the US Gov DIDN'T ENFORCE IT.
Some of the key battles, anyway.
I disagree.
Civilian or not doesn't really matter. The fact is a Confederate Government existed until Kirby Smith surrendered it.
I think you owe me, and others on this board an apology, Espinola. You know that as far as I know, there are no racists in this group of posters. It is wrong for you to imply that, and even worse to imply that we are KKK hiding behind a computer. I have always tried to be civil with you, and think you have done me an injustice.
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
inasmuch as he is the one who made RACIST comments about AmerIndians in post #645, i'd think he'd be smart enough to keep his mouth closed about ANYONE else possibly being a a bigot!
free dixie,sw
inasmuch as he is the one who made RACIST comments about AmerIndians in post #645, i'd think he'd be smart enough to keep his mouth closed about ANYONE else possibly being a a bigot!
free dixie,sw
The children of an indentured servant could not be sold. Also, indentured servants could testify in court, bring suits, own property, and appeal to courts for protection from abusive masters. Slaves had none of these rights. Plus, of course, there's the whole "limited term" thing.
Thanks for your input, but it was in reference to the Bible's stance (and Biblical morality) on the issue, not the legal definition.
As was to Heyworth:
This is in relation to the Bible's attitude, not the legal definition. Please keep up if you're going to lecture.
"Or do you think that drunkness is not a sin?"
You ignored my statement regarding "moderation"
Drunkenness is a sin. But is DRINKING?
Well this is all new to me. Pray tell what did the Bible have to say on indentured servitude?
I am glad you believe it was murder, but they were not traitors to Texas, they were loyal to the United States.
Since one cannot take mind altering drugs in moderation the result of taking those drugs is the same in principle as getting drunk.
The issue of moderation in drinking has nothing to do with taking mind altering drugs.
If you want to start another discussion on drinking, we can do that, but taking a drugs such as LSD or cocaine is always a sin.
If the civilian Confederate gov't had disappeared, the Confederacy had disappeared with it.
A Constitutional gov't is one that is led by civilians, not the military.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.