Editorial Condemns Monument to Confederate Soldiers

The Decatur (Alabama) Daily ^ | 16 November 2005 | Editorial

[Rebeleye]

The idea to honor only Confederate soldiers is a bad idea...

[Rebeleye]

Diehard rebels will disagree, but there was no mission more noble than preserving the Union and doing away with slavery.

Sure, we still chaff from having lost the Civil War, and bristle at the word "Yankee," even if in jest.

But what kind of nation, or nations, would we be if the Union had not prevailed?

Standing separately, the Union would not have become a world power. Neither would the Confederacy. Both nations would be subservient to Europe and Asia. Neither may have been the dominant nation of North America.

Standing alone, both nations would be vulnerable to foreign attacks.

Thus, if Lawrence County wants to erect a Civil War monument on the courthouse square, it should do so to the people who preserved the Union and reunited its people into the greatest power ever known on earth.

But the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Moulton this week sold the County Commission on a monument to Confederate veterans. The compromise of honoring soldiers from both sides lost out as a bad idea. It was as if sculpted together, the Blues and the Grays might take up arms again.

How refreshing it would be if we could put down our swords of resentment that divide our people, and agree on a thoughtful monument that honors the soldiers from both sides.

Our side gave 'em a good fight, but in the end, the other side saved us from becoming a second- rate power and from something far worse — slavery.

The idea to honor only Confederate soldiers is a bad idea because it leaves the impression we continue to embrace what we know was morally wrong.

[xrp]

Haha, "preserving the Union" cost us the republic.

[clee1]

Un huh.

This Nation has not been the same since. The FedGov has become too powerful, and to deaf to the pleas of the citizenry. Special interest groups and a corrupt political class now rule this country

Slavery, abhorent as it it/was, was already dying a natural death before the War anyway.

[Valin]

FYI
Nov. 16
1864 Union Gen William T Sherman begins march to the sea during Civil War
1864 Confederates retreat at Lovejoy, Georgia

[Little Bill]

Was the war about slavery or was it about preservation of the Union, get your act together.

[M. Espinola]

The article is correct: "The idea to honor only Confederate soldiers is a bad idea because it leaves the impression we continue to embrace what we know was morally wrong."

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

"Diehard rebels will disagree, but there was no mission more noble than preserving the Union and doing away with slavery."

Honoring the fallen men whom wore the gray has naught to do with slavery. Both Northern and Southern fighting men were Americans, both were brave and self sacrificing to a fault.

A little known bit of history, Lincoln shed tears when he went to dedicate Gettysburg. He did so during a tour of the battle field, he walked down to where Picket's men had sustained such horrific causalities in making their charge. Looking up to where the union troops had held, in tears, he spoke of the Confederates, I thank GOD, that such brave men are my American brothers.

[Luke21]

Thank you. My people were confederate, and they've bled and died for this nation ever since that war. Our dead of that painful generation are still Americans. No region of this country is more wise and patriotic than the south.

Think not? Try winning the presidency without the rebs, people. The union states are nearly all red, not white and blue.

[thoughtomator]

Confederate soldiers were not simply fighting for slavery. There were virtues to the Confederate cause as well. Unfortunately only the winners write history, and in this case the winners were not very generous in describing their opponents' motives. What the Confederacy stood for - other than slavery - deserves recognition.

I'm a Yankee through and through and I still say that.

[Rabble]

"Confederate soldiers were not simply fighting for slavery. There were virtues to the Confederate cause as well. Unfortunately only the winners write history, and in this case the winners were not very generous in describing their opponents' motives. What the Confederacy stood for - other than slavery - deserves recognition."

WELL SAID! Your thoughtful comments are accurate and need to be stated more often. There are many that just want to focus on the slavery aspect of the war.

[libertyman]

The War for Southern Independence was about NEITHER....Lincoln's government was strangling the southern states w/ its tarriffs, for one thing.

The southern states had just as much of a God-given right to secede & form their own government that the colonies did in 1776 against the British King. The Union is NOT greater than the sum of its parts---our nation was built from the bottom up (beginning w/ SELF-government), not from the top down.

[libertyman]

The bad impression itself is totally wrong: if folks think we honor slavery by doing so, that's THEIR problem...but we know better.

The War wasn't fought over slavery--state's rights & free trade were the main reasons why the south wanted to secede from the Union.

[libertyman]

The bad impression itself is totally wrong: if folks think we honor slavery by doing so, that's THEIR problem...but we know better.

The War wasn't fought over slavery--state's rights & free trade were the main reasons why the south wanted to secede from the Union.