General Discussion

clu

(494 posts)

2. he's a regular guy

Reply to struggle4progress (Original post)

Thu Sep 7, 2017, 10:41 PM

Sep 2017

who filed a motion on behalf of a federal judge. i'm sure it's full of legalese. TBH - and i'm biased since i'm not black - I would rather see the statue remain at the park. To me, there is a difference between a confederate statue in the real south vs Texas. It's a part of history that can be used effectively to start a discussion about the extent that black society could really change post-civil rights bill.

edit: I am mestizo and I'm in North Texas
edit 2: post-civil rights bill not post-civil war bill

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

TX Man Behind Lee Statue Restraining Order Signed Complaint Without Reading It [View all] struggle4progress Sep 2017 OP

I am not surprised by this ProudLib72 Sep 2017 #1

he's a regular guy clu Sep 2017 #2

It's a part of history so it belongs in a History Museum, not in a public park pnwmom Sep 2017 #3

(1) He did not file the motion "on behalf of a federal judge" -- he was asked by a neo-confederate struggle4progress Sep 2017 #4

all fair points clu Sep 2017 #5

Texas was full of cotton and sugarcane plantations struggle4progress Sep 2017 #6

nice post clu Sep 2017 #8

one minor clarification clu Sep 2017 #9

The February 1861 Texas "Declaration of Causes" indicates slavery was a powerful institution there struggle4progress Sep 2017 #10

surgical strike clu Sep 2017 #11

Not the "real" south? blogslut Sep 2017 #7