Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Is Christian art an expression of white supremacism?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Overnight, we noted a certain Mr Sean King, aka “Talcum X” who has perhaps 1.1 million Twitter followers:

I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down.

They are a form of white supremacy.

Always have been.

In the Bible, when the family of Jesus wanted to hide, and blend in, guess where they went?

EGYPT!

Not Denmark.

Tear them down . . . .

Yes.

All murals and stained glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother, and their white friends should also come down.

They are a gross form white supremacy.

Created as tools of oppression.
Racist propaganda.

They should all come down.

Of course, immediately, Egypt c. 7 – 4 BC was cosmopolitan, especially its capital of that time, Alexandria (which had a large Jewish quarter . . . Jews may have been 10% of the Roman Empire).

Similarly, here is a Roman statue of Cleopatra, mid C1 BC . . . about the time of her visit to Rome, last Queen of Egypt (by then a Roman client state):

Cleopatra VII, last ruler of Egypt, a Ptolemaic Greek who may have had some Egyptian lineage also. (HT: Wikipedia)

No, Egypt was quite cosmopolitan. And indeed, a point made by objectors in Mr King’s Twitter thread was to post this, showing the racial diversity of Ancient Egypt. Though, of course, hair colour is subject to discolouration and the blue eyes claim is in some cases dubious. Mind you, I have cousins with very African features and sapphire blue eyes, given St Elizabeth, Jamaica’s notorious tri-continental racial mashup so blue eyes in some cases would not be implausible:

Similarly, another commenter posted various holy family portrayals, including:

Also:

Here is a very Medieval scene from the C14 Morgan Bible MS:

In that light, let us now ponder the only sculpture Michelangelo signed, his awesome Pieta, with a forever young Mary holding the body of her son across her lap as she mourns:

Pieta, Michelangelo (HT: Wiki Media and Stanislav Traykov )

Then, there is Poland’s famous (and once defaced by Hussite raiders) Black Madonna, originally a Byzantine Icon:

The Black Madonna Icon, venerated by Popes (HT: Wikipedia)

The point is obvious, people often portrayed Jesus, the Holy Family and other Biblical figures in light of their own culture.

And duly, in our scientific, digitally besotted age, we have tried a digital reconstruction of Jesus as a typical C1 Palestinian Jew:

Jesus as a typical C1 Palestinian Jew (HT: Pop Mech)

I suspect, it will not only be BA77 who will prefer this digital painting based on a shroud image:

And, here is a digital fade:

And of course, here is one of the Rose Windows of Notre Dame:

The South Rose Window, Notre Dame

Why bother?

Because, our art and monuments reflect who we are and what we aspire to be. Just so, the besmirching, branding, defacing, deliberate destruction and replacement of great art and key historic monuments is a symbolic raping of a culture and the souls of its people, meant to scar the soul.

That’s why Mao sicced his Red Guards on Chinese treasures, even desecrating graves and bodies given honourable burial. It is why today’s culture form marxist heirs of said Red Guards target cultural achievements and monuments, smear them with one sided or outright slanderous graffiti and use that as an excuse to burn, deface, tear down.

For example, is this even near a responsible summary of the man who — warts and all — led Britain’s lonely stand for what he termed “Christian Civilisation” against Hitler’s triumphant Panzers, Stukas and Messerschmitts in that awful summer now eighty years distant, 1940?

This is rage-driven Civilisation replacement that they intend.

But those on the streets likely don’t understand the need for cultural buttresses to sustain a sound Constitutional Democracy, in their burning zeal to be rid of what they see as an evil civilisation with effectively no redeeming virtues.

So, let us remind of the good governance challenge and what triggering anarchic chaos is liable to trigger, a tumble into the vortex of tyranny:

U/d b for clarity, nb Nil

Likewise, let us refresh ourselves on one of the crown jewels of our civilisational inheritance, our natural law heritage:

We can readily identify at least seven inescapable first duties of reason. Inescapable, as they are so antecedent to reasoning that even the objector implicitly appeals to them; i.e. they are self-evident. Duties, to truth, to right reason, to prudence, to sound conscience, to neighbour, so also to fairness and justice etc. Such built in law is not invented by parliaments or courts, nor can these principles and duties be abolished by such. (Cf. Cicero in De Legibus, c. 50 BC.) Indeed, it is on this framework that we can set out to soundly understand and duly balance rights, freedoms and duties; which is justice. The legitimate main task of government, then, is to uphold and defend the civil peace of justice through sound community order reflecting the built in, intelligible law of our nature. Where, as my right implies your duty a true right is a binding moral claim to be respected in life, liberty, honestly aquired property, innocent reputation etc. To so justly claim a right, one must therefore demonstrably be in the right. Thus, too, we may compose sound civil law informed by that built-in law of our responsibly, rationally free morally governed nature; from such, we may identify what is unsound or false thus to be reformed or replaced even though enacted under the colour and solemn ceremonies of law.

For, as Cicero reminded us, c 50 BC, in De Legibus: “Law. . .  is the highest reason, implanted in nature, which prescribes those things which ought to be done, and forbids the contrary” and again, of how “the voice of conscience is a law, that moral prudence is a law, whose operation is to urge us to good actions, and restrain us from evil ones.

That core heritage was endorsed by the Apostle Paul, even as he gives a form of the Golden Rule and explains in brief how conscience instructs and how love sums up law:

Rom 2: 14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them . . . .

Rom 13:Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. [ESV]

Themes like these would be built up and integrated into core thought, e.g. by The Angelic Doctor, St Thomas Aquinas:

So, when rage-driven radicals brand Christian art as intentionally oppressive racism tantamount to Nazism (which was neo-pagan heresy, strictly) and demand its despoliation, they destabilise more than they imagine.

It is time to correct such imbalance and blinding ill-advised rage lest we wreck what we cannot easily recover, our civilisation. Never mind, warts and all. END

Comments
Next they will plow under and develop Gettysburg's battle fields.ET
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
06:23 PM
6
06
23
PM
PDT
All Am I the only one that finds it curious that no one has defaced any Mosques or calling for their destruction? I mean did Jesus own slaves like the founder of Islam? Seems to me this is a much bigger deal than certain depictions of Jesus Also anyone find it curious that certain leftist icons like FDR, or KKK Byrd, or the Russell building are left alone.? Sometimes all one has to do is observe it pretty much tells you all that you need to know. Vividvividbleau
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
05:39 PM
5
05
39
PM
PDT
KF, Yes, I believe (some) charges were dropped on the NM shooter. RP, Thanks, that's a good example.daveS
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
04:53 PM
4
04
53
PM
PDT
Folks, I am aware of a statue incident case in NM, where a woman blocked a would be counter-protester, apparently pushing/blocking several times. He pushed back, she fell, was swarmed. He retreated, was hit with a skateboard, used pepper spray. He further retreated (making tactical error of turning his back), on some claims 90+ m. He was pursued, was tackled and swarmed by 3 men, being again hit with a skateboard (which is in effect a metal loaded club). The crowd was baying about killing him. He pulled a gun and shot one of the three, who seemed to have a knife in a still frame and was within the 20+ ft danger space for a knife armed person. He went to a knee as they fled. Supporters came rushing up and interposed between him and the crowd which now accused him of murder. It seems to me that he may have a case of defensive shooting targetting the most pressing threat after retreating twice and being in reasonable fear of life. In another case an apparently black woman, stopped and swarmed drove off through a crowd, hitting one protester. She reported seeing a gun, motivating racing off. That sounds like she may argue defensive use of a vehicle as a weapon . . . which raises the point that people cannot be wholly disarmed, e.g. a 2 x 4 or a leaf spring turned into a kukri etc. In case A pepper spray and a handgun were used, in B, a sedan car as a ram-weapon. KFkairosfocus
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
04:42 PM
4
04
42
PM
PDT
And Jim Jones had a righteous cause, too. :roll:ET
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
04:42 PM
4
04
42
PM
PDT
@Ed @Dave it’s possible for you to be violent, and the government to call you a terrorist, and yet your cause be righteous. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)Retired Physicist
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
04:36 PM
4
04
36
PM
PDT
LoL! @Acartia Eddie- "They" want to repeal the 2nd amendment. "They" say we shouldn't have guns. Or aren't you aware of the left's stance on guns in the USA?ET
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
04:29 PM
4
04
29
PM
PDT
Andrew
With guns they shouldn’t have?
The 2nd amendment may disagree with you.Ed George
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
04:22 PM
4
04
22
PM
PDT
JAD, I didn't say they don't believe there is such a code, and obviously some do. But as KF said, this is a war of sorts, and some are returning fire.daveS
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
12:50 PM
12
12
50
PM
PDT
"They are shooting back." DaveS, With guns they shouldn't have? Andrewasauber
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
12:48 PM
12
12
48
PM
PDT
DS,
These people are not trying to convince us that we have a duty to treat them with respect according to some transcendent code of morality.
Then it’s hypocritical for them to demand justice. The very idea of justice assumes that there is some kind of society wide standard.john_a_designer
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
12:43 PM
12
12
43
PM
PDT
JAD,
From a naturalistic evolutionary perspective (like Darwinian evolution) what makes humans any better than puppies or dogs? And from a cosmological perspective we’re just insignificant specks which have appeared momentarily in the Cosmos. From that perspective it is pure arrogance to think we are in any way special.
These people* are not trying to convince us that we have a duty to treat them with respect according to some transcendent code of morality. They are shooting back. *Some of them, anyway. It's a diverse group.daveS
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
12:20 PM
12
12
20
PM
PDT
I am thinking about starting a new organization committed to seeking justice for our fellow animals. Humans are after all, as I am sure you know from HS biology, animals-- We’re mammals. I am going to call my organization Do Not Harm Puppies. I decided to focus on puppies because puppies pull on everyone’s heartstrings. But tragically everyday hundreds of cute adorable puppies across America are being harmed, abandoned or neglected by their owners. This has to stop! One puppy being harmed is too many. We will use every means possible to put an end to this abuse. That includes boycotts, marches and demonstrations even if some of these things result in looting, vandalism and arson. We’re passionate! We are angry! We will not stop until the abuse of puppies stops. Again, one puppy being harmed is too many. If you don’t support our cause you are not only uncaring and heartless but you are a speciesist and a bigot. Our bottom line is this, "if this country doesn't give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it.” Of course I am being facetious. But the logic I am using is the same logic that Black Lives Matter uses to justify the violence it has spawned. The last quote is from a leader of BLM. Do you think I am trivializing it all by using puppies? How so? From a naturalistic evolutionary perspective (like Darwinian evolution) what makes humans any better than puppies or dogs? And from a cosmological perspective we’re just insignificant specks which have appeared momentarily in the Cosmos. From that perspective it is pure arrogance to think we are in any way special. Well okay let’s make the protest instead about ending late term abortion. Suppose a prolife demonstration resulted in the same kind of violence we have seen associated with BLM. How do you think the MSM would be covering it? If you are honest you know that they would be vehemently condemning it. The double standard is very obvious. It has been for some time. PS I really do like puppies and don’t think they should be harmed.john_a_designer
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
11:44 AM
11
11
44
AM
PDT
The insistence on specific appellational identities so often detailed by the popular media, social justice groups, governmental statistical policies perpetuate so-called racism ... people of color, African-American, Chicano or Latino, Asian-American, White, ad nauseum. So is there an unresolvable racism between the European-American and African-American? Between the German-American and the Mexican-American? Between the British-American and the Asian-American? Are the racial demarcations stretched beyond rational limits to that between the Christian-American and the NeoAtheist-American? Between the Alternative-Life-Style-American and the Alt-Right-American? Between the Libertarian-American and the Muslim-American? Who are the racists among us? And does this matter, truly matter, in the unending scheme of all things human? Are we, grouped in tribes and self-identified geographic origins, responsible and accountable for our present actions, even our persistent powerlessness and existential confusion? Are we responsible and accountable at bottom as individuated humans? When will each and everyone stop hiding behind a tribalism, the masks each and everyone wears to justify opposition against the other masks worn? The tribes, the mobs, the appellation identities will most likely persist as long as there is a struggle for power and preeminence, no matter how unreasonably confused, no matter how ungrounded the perceptions of individuated identities. Is all of this inevitable? This is certainly not new in human experiencing, the long history of human civilizations rising, persisting, and falling. Or in the words of the ancient preacher, "All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down into the earth? So I saw that there is nothing better than that a man should rejoice in his work, for that is his lot. Who can bring him to see what will be after him?" Yet some of us believe, whether falsely or naively might not matter, there is a "better" way available for our kind, that is for the human. We can begin to examine ourselves, so to speak, and seek understanding and pursue wisdom. We can listen to the many various voices of our histories and restrain ourselves from acting out the dark violent remembrances of our tribes, mobs, and appellational identities. The ideologies which encourage the destruction or violent replacement of history, our human arts, our human religious beliefs, our historical memories are self-refuting ideologies which can not stand the tests of time and existential individualism. These are similar to a biological cancer which has neither design nor purpose for human integrity except to extinguish its host. Cancer and viruses do not discriminate by race. Ignorance has no isolated pigmentation. Seeking understanding and pursuing wisdom is available to each and everyone of us.redwave
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
07:31 AM
7
07
31
AM
PDT
JaD, that a clearly marxism-influenced pope would canonise Serra, even in the teeth of decades of controversies, is a message in itself. KFkairosfocus
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
02:19 AM
2
02
19
AM
PDT
PS: For reference, said parable:
It is not too hard to figure out that our civilisation is in deep trouble and is most likely headed for shipwreck. (And of course, that sort of concern is dismissed as “apocalyptic,” or neurotic pessimism that refuses to pause and smell the roses.) Plato’s Socrates spoke to this sort of situation, long since, in the ship of state parable in The Republic, Bk VI:
>>[Soc.] I perceive, I said, that you are vastly amused at having plunged me into such a hopeless discussion; but now hear the parable, and then you will be still more amused at the meagreness of my imagination: for the manner in which the best men are treated in their own States is so grievous that no single thing on earth is comparable to it; and therefore, if I am to plead their cause, I must have recourse to fiction, and put together a figure made up of many things, like the fabulous unions of goats and stags which are found in pictures. Imagine then a fleet or a ship in which there is a captain [–> often interpreted, ship’s owner] who is taller and stronger than any of the crew, but he is a little deaf and has a similar infirmity in sight, and his knowledge of navigation is not much better. [= The people own the community and in the mass are overwhelmingly strong, but are ill equipped on the whole to guide, guard and lead it] The sailors are quarrelling with one another about the steering – every one is of opinion that he has a right to steer [= selfish ambition to rule and dominate], though he has never learned the art of navigation and cannot tell who taught him or when he learned, and will further assert that it cannot be taught, and they are ready to cut in pieces any one who says the contrary. They throng about the captain, begging and praying him to commit the helm to them [–> kubernetes, steersman, from which both cybernetics and government come in English]; and if at any time they do not prevail, but others are preferred to them, they kill the others or throw them overboard [ = ruthless contest for domination of the community], and having first chained up the noble captain’s senses with drink or some narcotic drug [ = manipulation and befuddlement, cf. the parable of the cave], they mutiny and take possession of the ship and make free with the stores; thus, eating and drinking, they proceed on their voyage in such a manner as might be expected of them [–> Cf here Luke’s subtle case study in Ac 27]. Him who is their partisan and cleverly aids them in their plot for getting the ship out of the captain’s hands into their own whether by force or persuasion [–> Nihilistic will to power on the premise of might and manipulation making ‘right’ ‘truth’ ‘justice’ ‘rights’ etc], they compliment with the name of sailor, pilot, able seaman, and abuse the other sort of man, whom they call a good-for-nothing; but that the true pilot must pay attention to the year and seasons and sky and stars and winds, and whatever else belongs to his art, if he intends to be really qualified for the command of a ship, and that he must and will be the steerer, whether other people like or not-the possibility of this union of authority with the steerer’s art has never seriously entered into their thoughts or been made part of their calling. Now in vessels which are in a state of mutiny and by sailors who are mutineers, how will the true pilot be regarded? Will he not be called by them a prater, a star-gazer, a good-for-nothing? [Ad.] Of course, said Adeimantus. [Soc.] Then you will hardly need, I said, to hear the interpretation of the figure, which describes the true philosopher in his relation to the State [ --> here we see Plato's philosoppher-king emerging]; for you understand already. [Ad.] Certainly. [Soc.] Then suppose you now take this parable to the gentleman who is surprised at finding that philosophers have no honour in their cities; explain it to him and try to convince him that their having honour would be far more extraordinary. [Ad.] I will. [Soc.] Say to him, that, in deeming the best votaries of philosophy to be useless to the rest of the world, he is right; but also tell him to attribute their uselessness to the fault of those who will not use them, and not to themselves. The pilot should not humbly beg the sailors to be commanded by him –that is not the order of nature; neither are ‘the wise to go to the doors of the rich’ –the ingenious author of this saying told a lie –but the truth is, that, when a man is ill, whether he be rich or poor, to the physician he must go, and he who wants to be governed, to him who is able to govern. [--> the issue of competence and character as qualifications to rule] The ruler who is good for anything ought not to beg his subjects to be ruled by him [ --> down this road lies the modern solution: a sound, well informed people will seek sound leaders, who will not need to manipulate or bribe or worse, and such a ruler will in turn be checked by the soundness of the people, cf. US DoI, 1776]; although the present governors of mankind are of a different stamp; they may be justly compared to the mutinous sailors, and the true helmsmen to those who are called by them good-for-nothings and star-gazers. [Ad.] Precisely so, he said. [Soc] For these reasons, and among men like these, philosophy, the noblest pursuit of all, is not likely to be much esteemed by those of the opposite faction [--> the sophists, the Demagogues, Alcibiades and co, etc]; not that the greatest and most lasting injury is done to her by her opponents, but by her own professing followers, the same of whom you suppose the accuser to say, that the greater number of them are arrant rogues, and the best are useless; in which opinion I agreed [--> even among the students of the sound state (here, political philosophy and likely history etc.), many are of unsound motivation and intent, so mere education is not enough, character transformation is critical]. [Ad.] Yes. [Soc.] And the reason why the good are useless has now been explained? [Ad.] True. [Soc.] Then shall we proceed to show that the corruption of the majority is also unavoidable [--> implies a need for a corruption-restraining minority providing proverbial salt and light, cf. Ac 27, as well as justifying a governing structure turning on separation of powers, checks and balances], and that this is not to be laid to the charge of philosophy any more than the other? [Ad.] By all means. [Soc.] And let us ask and answer in turn, first going back to the description of the gentle and noble nature.[ -- > note the character issue] Truth, as you will remember, was his leader, whom he followed always and in all things [ --> The spirit of truth as a marker]; failing in this, he was an impostor, and had no part or lot in true philosophy [--> the spirit of truth is a marker, for good or ill] . . . >>
(There is more than an echo of this in Acts 27, a real world case study. [Luke, a physician, was an educated Greek with a taste for subtle references.] This blog post, on soundness in policy, will also help)
Washington, Franklin, Henry, Jefferson et al were the ones who hammered out the first practical, sustainable answer to this dilemma of steering the ship of state. I note that our word Government derives from Kubernetes, the steersman or sailing master. That is how pivotal this parable is in the history of our civilisation.kairosfocus
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
02:17 AM
2
02
17
AM
PDT
EG, your attempt to turn the tax protesters of Boston into a Red Guard mob, and the US founders into a mob is a fallacy of attempted moral equivalency. That you try to make such an equivalency speaks volumes against you. I suggest, you need to read and ponder Plato's parable of the ship of state. KFkairosfocus
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
02:13 AM
2
02
13
AM
PDT
EG, it does not need to be said, it is the context for discussion. No one objects to the result of a responsible vote, though we may seriously doubt its wisdom. In the case of American Founders and the "second martyr-founder, Lincoln," we need to understand that a hero is not a god, s/he will -- like the rest of us -- have feet of mixed iron and clay. There is no hypocrisy in celebrating heroic contribution, while recognising and duly noting the failings of say a Martin Luther King (plagiarism in academic work [perhaps unintentional], evident adultery etc) or a David, or a Churchill or a Jefferson. Likewise, we must be willing to recognise defeated but decent men. In more recent times, a Rommel is an obvious case, a man Churchill openly praised in the UK Parliament as a great captain. In the case of Robert Edwin Lee, note that he was offered command of the Union Army by Lincoln. He went through personal crisis and decided to go with his state (we must reckon that the Federal level was not as dominant then, by a long shot, hence the name, united States located in America). After his defeat, he sought to promote reconciliation, instructing and advising other leading men and promising men not to emigrate but to stay and rebuild. Indeed, taking up leadership of a College only a few months after his surrender itself speaks volumes on his unsung leadership in reconciliation and rebuilding. Branding him with slavery (which, apparently he did not like) and dismissing him is grossly unfair and robs us of key lessons. Jefferson outright tried to break slavery with the American founding, never mind how he was hopelessly trapped by debt and laws that implied that were he to manumit his slaves would simply be seized by debt holders as payment. As to the Ms Hemmings narrative, even if true he would have formed a common law union which was all the law would have permitted. But, manifestly, the force of evidence -- in a politicised context -- was grossly exaggerated and in key aspects had to be taken back. Of course, that did not receive wall to wall coverage. Here, I speak as direct descendant of such unions. The result is, creation of a dominant but ill founded narrative of tainting accusation. More to the point, the theme of branding by accusation and riotous mob action by Red Guards is manifest and must be resolved. KFkairosfocus
June 25, 2020
June
06
Jun
25
25
2020
02:07 AM
2
02
07
AM
PDT
Acartia Eddie is ignorant of US History. It wasn't a mob that dumped tea into Boston Harbor. It was a well organized, precision attack. It definitely wasn't a mob that drafted the Declaration of Independence. Do you have no shame? What is wrong with you?ET
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
08:21 PM
8
08
21
PM
PDT
KF@54, who said anything about allowing mobs to pull down statues and monuments. But mobs do serve a purpose. They force us to examine our preconceptions. Mobs do not arise out of a vacuum. Without some sort of inequity or trigger, they simply don’t exist. I read in a history book once about a mob in Boston that dumped a load of tea in the harbour. And then there was that mob of disgruntled land owners that drafted a manifesto that they named the Declaration of Independence. Yesterday’s mobs are today’s freedom fighters or founding fathers.Ed George
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
07:08 PM
7
07
08
PM
PDT
Well, it didn’t take long for the iconoclasts to start targeting religious statues.
(RNS) — As protesters on Friday toppled a statue of Father Junipero Serra in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park, leaders of another California city had already announced plans to remove a statue of the Catholic saint near their city hall. And by Saturday afternoon another Serra statue was toppled at Placita Olvera in downtown Los Angeles. "Pull it! Pull it! This is for our ancestors," a person shouted. In a video of the San Francisco toppling, people can be heard cheering as the statue of the 18th-century Franciscan priest holding a cross fell to the ground. People strike and kick the statue in the video, and it’s clear the statue has also been tagged and splashed with what appears to be red paint.
https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2020/06/22/who-st-junipero-serra-and-why-are-california-protesters-toppling-his In 2015 Serra was canonized as a saint by Pope Francis. Doesn’t that make him as evil as Serra? What are the rioters going to do to the Pope?john_a_designer
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
07:03 PM
7
07
03
PM
PDT
Somerset, 1772, set the tone. After Somerset the South understood what was next.ET
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
06:08 PM
6
06
08
PM
PDT
ET, no, the conditional manumission of slaves was a cannon fodder hunt. Critical mass to abolish slavery in the British Empire did not occur until the 1831 Baptist War uprising in Jamaica and its aftermath in which Dissenter Chapels were razed and the colonial authorities tried to hang missionaries as instigators. By the time William Knibb went to the UK to inform "the Christian people of Britain" what their enslaved "brethren" were suffering in Jamaica, and reports of what was done to Dissenter chapels, there was political crisis in the UK with dissenter areas heavily involved. That is when the Planters and Merchants lost credibility. Knibb stood in his rebuilt chapel in Falmouth Jamaica, with the slaves in packed attendance and counted down the seconds to midnight as "the monster" died with the first second of August Morning 1834. Thereafter he tried to register voters and organise a political party for former slaves and more. KFkairosfocus
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
05:46 PM
5
05
46
PM
PDT
EG, your comparisons are telling, given the focus of the OP. And even figures like a Robert Lee or a Thomas Jefferson simply bear no comparison to such dictators. On point, I spoke to why I spoke to art and monuments, especially why they overlap, so you went off on a toxic tangent. That said, riotous mobs serving as Red Guards (and their backers) should not be allowed to set community policy. Down that road lie reigns of terror and horrific abuses. KFkairosfocus
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
05:32 PM
5
05
32
PM
PDT
People need to remember that the American Revolution was also fought over the issue of slavery. Great Britain was going to abolish slavery in Her colonies. The South wasn't going to allow that to happen. And in the war of 1812 the British troops freed thousands of slaves during their march through the South. This would mean the removal of everything Washington, Jefferson and a host of others. Somehow I doubt any of that will happen.ET
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
02:27 PM
2
02
27
PM
PDT
KF@47, I agree. But the fact that monuments are “ beautiful and durable“ doesn’t mean that they should be kept. I monument to Hitler or Stalin May be beautiful and durable, but I wouldn’t loose any sleep over their loss. Confederate monuments that glorify confederate leaders should be removed, or relocated to a museum where they can be put in context. Monuments to dead confederate soldiers should be retained, as Germany retains monuments to soldiers.Ed George
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
02:12 PM
2
02
12
PM
PDT
If you are a serious Christian in the USA, you are constantly subject to offensive displays, unless you don't use media at all. Andrewasauber
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
01:58 PM
1
01
58
PM
PDT
Well, I was not talking slander. I was talking about being offended by the type of things that have traditionally been defended in western democracies as freedom of expression: art, music, drama, speech, religious beliefs etc. There are a lot of things that I find to be offensive. Does that mean I have the right to have it censored?john_a_designer
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
01:49 PM
1
01
49
PM
PDT
JaD, there is a right to innocent reputation, protected through tort law. However, those crying out how they are offended too often don't even hesitate before indulging slander. KFkairosfocus
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
12:11 PM
12
12
11
PM
PDT
So now there is A RIGHT TO NOT TO BE OFFENDED but only certain people have that right? The problem is how is that equal rights? Or have equal rights now been abolished? Obviously the right to not be offended has more than a few problems.john_a_designer
June 24, 2020
June
06
Jun
24
24
2020
10:15 AM
10
10
15
AM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply