Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Virginian Church Announces It Will Remove Plaque Honoring George Washington

Virginian Church Announces It Will Remove Plaque Honoring George Washington

“The plaques in our sanctuary make some in our presence feel unsafe or unwelcome”

First, they came for the Confederate flag, but I didn’t fly a Confederate flag, so I did not speak out.  Then they came for Confederate statues, but I didn’t feel strongly about Confederate statues, so I did not speak out.  Then they came for statues of George Washington and Andrew Jackson, and I have a chance to speak out . . . so I am.

While I purposely evoke Martin Niemöller’s famous quote about Germans turning a blind eye to Hitler’s incremental buildup to genocide, I mean not to diminish the Holocaust but to show how we can so easily inch into dangerous territory ourselves.

What we are seeing now has unfortunate parallels to the insidious escalation and gradual expansion of beliefs and mores that drove Germany into the abyss.  At this time in our nation’s history, the radical left has identified as obscene and offensive George Washington.  They’ve deemed him and his great legacy worthy only of being eradicated not just from the face of the earth but from historical and socio-cultural memory.

The call for the banning of the Confederate flag went out, and everyone, including Republican governors, agreed.  The Confederate flag is only and solely racist, they exclaimed.  Everyone agrees . . . and those who do not are shamed, falsely-identified as racist white nationalists/supremacists.  The Confederate flag’s meaning is vested only in those who find it offensive, for only the most enlightened can discern meaning and ensure that only their interpretation is permitted.

The overwhelming, crushing elitism and disdainful disregard for any views other than their own led these purveyors of all that is moral and good to imagine that their view somehow matters more than anyone else’s.  They are on the side of the right and the just, so everyone else must be not only wrong but actively advocating injustice.

In August, Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel was petitioned to remove a statue of George Washington.  George Washington.  Not everyone was surprised, however, as President Trump saw it coming.

The Washington Times reported at the time:

President Trump’s question to reporters on Tuesday about the possibility of tearing down historical monuments has been answered by a Chicago pastor: “It’s time.”

Bishop James E. Dukes of Chicago’s Liberation Christian Center made headlines in the Windy City on Wednesday for calling on Mayor Rahm Emanuel to rename Washington Park and remove a statue of the first U.S. president over his ties to slavery. Mr. Dukes told his Facebook flock that “it’s time” after Mr. Trump sparred with reporters over efforts to expunge Civil War-era monuments from existence.

“This week it’s Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder is it George Washington next week and is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?” Mr. Trump asked reporters on Tuesday as he spoke on last weekend’s violence in Charlottesville, Virginia.

The right just can’t seem to figure out that giving an inch to the radical left will always mean giving a mile.  Or ten.  As Republican governors caved to the demands that Confederate statues be removed, many of us could see that the demands to remove RAACIST historical monuments, statues, and artifacts would soon sweep outward from the Confederacy to all “dead white male” historical figures tied to the founding of our country and, ultimately, to the Constitution of these United States.

The Virginian church that George Washington attended for decades has decided to remove a plaque honoring him.  They are also removing a plaque honoring Robert E. Lee, another attendee of the historic church.

Fox News reports:

Leaders at the church that George Washington attended decided that a plaque honoring the first president of the United States must be removed.

Christ Church in Alexandria, Virginia will take down a memorial marking the pew where Washington sat with his family, saying it is not acceptable to all worshipers.

“The plaques in our sanctuary make some in our presence feel unsafe or unwelcome,” leaders said, a reference to the fact that Washington was a slaveholder.

“Some visitors and guests who worship with us choose not to return because they receive an unintended message from the prominent presence of the plaques.”

“Many in our congregation feel a strong need for the church to stand clearly on the side of ‘all are welcome- no exceptions,'” they concluded.

A memorial to Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee will also come down.

A government of, by, and for the people has no need to fear or erase its history.  Indeed, history tells us that the only ones who fear and wish to erase history are totalitarians who intend to “reset” history to begin with their rule.  We’ve seen this with the French revolution, with communists across the globe, and we’ve seen this with ISIS.

And now we are seeing it with the left and Democrats right here in America.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

What this calls for is thousands of patriotic Americans writing to these unpatriotic people, saying that they can’t feel safe or welcome in a so-called church that can so cavalierly eject the father of the country. “All are welcome- no exceptions”; except, apparently, the most honorable American of all. If the Washingtons were to show up at your church today, to sit in their pew, would you make them welcome, or would you throw them out as you do their plaque?

George Washington fought, at considerable personal risk, to establish a representative republic which has been a better society than any other ever constructed. That does not mean a perfect society, but one which has struggled, and continues to struggle, to make lives better for all its citizens. Were the Founders perfect? By no means, not even in the terms of their day, and not in modern terms. If we must all be perfect in every respect, there are none who will ever be worthy.

A Christian church ought to understand these ideas. This tells us something about the nature of the modern Christ Church, Alexandria. There are actual Christian churches in the area.

If the Constitution was written by white slave owners, why shouldn’t it be removed as well. Do you see where this is going now?

    This is precisely the goal.

      Can you just imagine if hillary clinton were elected president on the heels of eight years of the stench of obama?

      This blog probably would be censored, and we would be slaves to the most corrupt democracy in world history – second only to the US government under obama.

      Why stop there? If this ‘Church’ wants to cater to these Cultural Marxist and play the Game of Infinite Regression, then they should also remove any images of the Cross since we can argue it was the Emblem of the Conquistadors and the Crusade.

      Or perhaps that it is the intent after all? The way Mao’s Cultural Revolution attempted to erase all vestiges of China’s pre-Communist history.

    puhiawa in reply to Guein. | October 29, 2017 at 6:06 pm

    A court will declare the constitution unconstitutional. any day now.

      Walker Evans in reply to puhiawa. | October 29, 2017 at 7:12 pm

      When that day arrives, I will be actively exercising my rights under the Second Amendment to that Constitution, whether it still exists on paper or not! To me, that document is sacred and anyone – anyone at all – who attempts to void it will be instantly become an enemy worthy of death. The oath I adhered to over a twenty-two year military career does not have an expiration date and I am still bound by it … “to defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic … No waffling, no reservations, nothing less than my Life and my Sacred Honor.

      And there are a lot of us who are still bound by that oath, whether still in uniform or not!

    Massinsanity in reply to Guein. | October 29, 2017 at 9:12 pm

    Ben Shapiro recently spoke at the University of Utah and there were massive protests against him. One of the leaders of the protestor was asked by ABC News if he was concerned about denying someone their 1st rights. His response was that he doesn’t care because “the Constitution is not a relevant document right now.”

    4:15 in the following video

    http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/outspoken-conservative-ben-shapiro-political-correctness-breeds-insanity-50603406

The saddest thing is that if they were to sell off this property and let it be turned into an Iglesia de Cristo, it would be a far more Christian institution than it is today.

Ironically, while Washington faithfully attended this Church of England church, his own views were inconsistent with trinitarian Christianity. Like all of his set except Patrick Henry, he was a unitarian by conviction, though only Adams was willing to openly acknowledge that belief and attend a church that preached unitarian doctrine.

    Kepha H in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2017 at 5:56 pm

    Do we have anything by Washington himself that attests to Unitarian beliefs? I’ve been trying to find such, but without success.

      Not really. We do know from his private secretary’s wife that Washington would regularly make the 10-mile horse ride (each way) to this church in Alexandria and that it was an Anglican (i.e. Christian) church.

      There is a great deal of historical evidence that Washington was himself a Christian, but for some reason, likely an attempt to undermine our nation’s Judeo-Christian founding, the left decided that the Founders were all atheists, deists, or unitarians. With Washington, however, we do know that he was deeply religious and firmly believed in God.

        To the best of my knowledge there were no atheists among them, and the only deist was Paine, who was very much not a member of Washington’s set, and was widely despised for his beliefs. Deism was not respectable in that time and place, but unitarianism was.

        The evidence for Washington’s beliefs is indirect. There can be no question of his having been anything like a Deist. He made it very clear, on dozens of occasions, that he deeply believed in a Providence that takes a keen interest in us, guides our affairs in the minutest detail, rewards virtue and punishes vice, and both expects and responds to prayer. However he seems to have taken great pains to avoid any acknowledgement of Jesus’ divinity. The simplest explanation of that, combined with the popularity of unitarian beliefs in his social circle, is that he shared those beliefs.

        There’s also Jefferson’s perception that Washington “has divines constantly about him because he thinks it right to keep up appearances but is an unbeliever”. There’s no question that Jefferson himself was neither a trinitarian nor a Deist. He explicitly rejected any idea that Jesus was more than a teacher, but like Washington he frequently displayed his belief in Providence. He knew Washington well enough to be a reliable source on his beliefs, and it appears that he was convinced those beliefs accorded with his own.

      Colonel Travis in reply to Kepha H. | October 29, 2017 at 6:51 pm

      Read “Sacred Fire” by Peter Lillback, it’s an exhaustive, documented, authoritative account of Washington’s Christian views. No other book that I know of comes close to examining this subject any better.

        Hardly. It’s a self-published exercise in sheer speculation and wishful thinking, without a shred of evidence. Lillback desperately wants Washington to have been a Christian like himself, so he has convinced himself of it; his book is popular only because Glenn Beck promoted it, which is surprising considering that Beck himself is very much not a orthodox Christian either.

          Colonel Travis in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2017 at 8:50 pm

          Laughing. Can I let you in on a little secret? Wikipedia doesn’t even agree with you.

          That review is terrible and superficial – it is actually everything he accuses Lillback of doing except that he does not do. Also, the book was not self-published. He works for seminary that owns the publishing house. Either you have no clue that it is common for academics to use their own publishing house for their books, or you think this is somehow, inexplicably, discrediting. I write for a living. Trust me, there is a big difference between “self-published” and taking advantage of your own in-house press. If you can’t even get that little detail correct, you have a truth problem. Not a good way to start a review by someone who is allegedly into facts.

          I’m guessing you have not actually read the book. I go where the evidence leads, I do not care one way or another. You have to meander out of your way to think Washington was Unitarian or a deist. What’s in the book refutes your link not just a little bit but pounds it to dust. But forget this book was even written – a devoted Unitarian does not help found a freaking Episcopal church. Hello, is this thing on? You clearly have no understanding of that religion in Virginia at the time, or what Washington thought about it, how he interacted with it, etc.

          I’d say try harder next time but I think this is about your speed.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2017 at 10:18 pm

          Lillback probably wrote his own Wikipedia entry. And yes, it is self-published. He doesn’t “work for” the seminary and its press, he’s the president. It’s his own press, and he used it because no respectable publisher would have touched it.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2017 at 10:20 pm

          He did not found any church. And yes, most unitarians at that time attended Anglican churches.

          Colonel Travis in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2017 at 11:47 pm

          Milhouse you argue like a child. You haven’t read the book, you’re too lazy to read the book, you’re too closed minded to read the book.

          1.) Please prove Lillback was rejected by other publishers. I want to see the evidence. Scratch that. Why does it matter? Let’s pretend he was rejected by 120 publishers. What would that mean? That would mean he had been rejected one time less than the number of rejections Robert Pirsig got for his book that has been in print for more than 40 years. Feel free to look up the title of that book if you’re into looking up things. I’m a published writer and have been my entire professional life. I’m not going to tell you who I am but I’ve been rejected many, many times. Once you are published and have demonstrated success, holding previous rejections against an author is not just a dumb argument, it amplifies how stupid the rejecters were in missing out.

          2.) GW was one of the founding members of Christ Church in Alexandria. Sorry, that is a fact. How many Unitarians bought pews in the church they didn’t really believe in? How many members of the congregation, period, did that? How many Unitarians paid for communion decorations and for the wine at communion like GW did? Merely going to a church vs. participating in the growth and well-being of a church with your own money are two different things. I could give more examples but it would be a waste on you.

          3.) You guessed the wrong wikipedia entry I was thinking of. But we all know that the most important thing in life is to pretend you know what other people are talking about even when you do not, right?

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | October 30, 2017 at 5:06 pm

          “Founding member” just means that when they started it he joined. It doesn’t imply any role in the founding. How many unitarians were members of Anglican (there was no such thing as “Episcopalian”) churches? Pretty much all of them. Openly unitarian churches barely existed, but the CofE included all sorts of tendencies and heresies.

          Washington very much approved of churches and religion — all kinds of churches and religions, including Jews, Mahometans, Hindoos, and all kinds of infidels. He didn’t care what the churches taught about the god/s, so long as they promoted virtue and condemned vice. And so he set an example of church-going about once a month, but when one minister called him out for never taking communion he took his prayers elsewhere. The content of his own prayers, and to Whom they were addressed, were not public, but everything we do know about him leads to the conclusion that they were directed to a single Creator, not to Jesus.

    Colonel Travis in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2017 at 6:48 pm

    Washington wasn’t Unitarian. A book called Sacred Fire blows that argument up. GW spent his entire life in the Anglican/Episcopal church, he continually sought out those pastors, he was immersed in the Virginia Anglican tradition in just about everything he did – why on earth would he do that otherwise? He wrote and spoke repeatedly in ways that a Unitarian would never communicate.

    I’ve got 19 biographies on GW, and the only reason I bring that up is to say that way too many lazy historians have not helped us understand this man.

By the way, if you pay attention to the SJW fulminations against the founders, they do not accuse them of having owned slaves, but of having enslaved people. The distinction is important.

In plain English, to enslave someone means to kidnap a free person and turn them into a slave. That’s, of course, not what any of our founders did. All of their slaves had already been slaves long before they came into their possession.

In fact that’s not what any Americans did; they sailed to the slave markets of West Africa and bought the merchandise that was lawfully on sale there. Every slave who was brought to what became the USA had already been enslaved under the local laws before any American trader ever saw them.

But in the world-view that these people are trying to push on us there is no such thing as a slave, and it’s impossible to own one. Rather, there are free people, who are being enslaved every moment that they are subjected to the condition of slavery. So they insist that Washington actively enslaved people.

    They’ve already moved well past enslavement, they’re on now to claims that white people are guilty of some unspecified “genocide.” Yeah, the slave thing matters, but now we’re genocidal maniacs who seek to destroy all persons of color (and those whites who may be trans, gay, etc. They get a “pass” . . . for now.).

    We’re seeing a build-up not unsimilar to that which culminated in the French Revolution. Such things happen by degreees, not overnight, and what we are seeing is alarming.

      Tom Servo in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 29, 2017 at 5:50 pm

      A recent survey among college students showed that most believe that America was the only country that ever had slavery, that it hadn’t ever happened anywhere else.

        Kepha H in reply to Tom Servo. | October 29, 2017 at 5:59 pm

        This is nothing new. When I was growing up, it was commonly believed that America and Australia were the only countries that had displaced indigenous populations, and that the USA was the country that invented Civil Wars. It was the flip side of an era in which history was “American history” and in which kids were encouraged to think that their country was first in everything. Apparently, such blindness has not yet died.

Colonel Travis | October 29, 2017 at 5:37 pm

Washington was the only slave-owning Founder to free his slaves. This never could have happened without Christianity’s influence on him. Wonder if the church ever tried to explain this to its frightened flock.

So if a plaque is bad, why does the church plaster on its website how much Washington used to attend? Why highlight this at all? I’m sure that will be toned down and/or eventually scrubbed. Why is the name “Washington, D.C.” not as offensive? Why is the state of Washington not as offensive? Why is anything promoting Washington not as offensive? There is no logical reason to remove a plaque about the uncomfortable-making, slave holder Washington, while leaving everything-else-Washington standing.

Where do we drawn the line at acknowledging our “proper” history? Anyone after the 13th Amendment can be recognized? There’s that Jim Crow thing, so how about a 1968 cutoff? But you still had too many OK with all the stuff that had been acknowledged up to mid-2017. Seems to me mid-2017 is the best place to start all over and tear down all monuments, memorials, plaques, etc. that make us uncomfortable.

Except this has nothing to do with being uncomfortable and everything to do with the left re-defining America.

I have never been so glad to be a former Episcopalian.

    tarheelkate in reply to Leslie Eastman. | October 29, 2017 at 6:44 pm

    Me too, Leslie.

    I don’t blame you. And I say that as a soon-to-be former Catholic.

    https://www.christianpost.com/news/episcopal-priest-defrocked-after-refusing-to-recant-muslim-faith-37847/

    “An Episcopal priest who claimed to be both Christian and Muslim was defrocked, effective Wednesday.

    Bishop Geralyn Wolf of the Episcopal Diocese of Rhode Island deposed Ann Holmes Redding, citing abandonment of Communion of The Episcopal Church.

    Although Wolf has described Redding as a ‘woman of utmost integrity,’ the bishop said she ‘believes that a priest of the Church cannot be both a Christian and a Muslim,’ according to a statement by the Rhode Island diocese.

    In response to the charge, Redding claimed becoming a Muslim ‘is not an automatic abandonment of Christianity,’ according to the Seattle Times. ‘For many, it is. But it doesn’t have to be.'”

    Yes, actually becoming Muslim is an explicit denial of Christianity. The core tenets of Christianity include faith in the divinity of Christ, His death on the cross for our sins, and his resurrection. Islam specifically denies all three. Redding, who ironically was in charge of “faith development” at her church can not both deny the basic tenets of Christianity and then claim to be a Christian as that requires faith in the core tenets of Christianity that Islam demands be renounced.

    Surah 4:157

    “And [for] their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah .” And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise. And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in Jesus before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection he will be against them a witness. For wrongdoing on the part of the Jews, We made unlawful for them [certain] good foods which had been lawful to them, and for their averting from the way of Allah many [people],”

    This passage is, of course, ridiculous. There were no changes to Jewish dietary laws following the crucifixion of Jesus. One of the most thoroughly documented events in antiquary. There’s a Rabbi in Plano who I’m friendly with and we always get a good laugh at of this portion of the Quran. Furthermore, there was no need to fool people into believing Christ had been crucified by substituting another victim for Christ. Unless Allah enjoys establishing false religions. But I digress.

    Obviously we don’t believe the same things. But at least he knows that if I’m going to call myself a Christian I have to believe in the Deity of Christ, His death on the cross, and His resurrection.

    There is no way to reconcile the demands of Islam with the demands of Christianity. Yet this priest’s Bishop gave her six months to think about it before defrocking her. Which tells you how much the Episcopalian Church believes in the Deity of Christ.

    Most mainline Protestant sects have written Christ out of their religion. It’s now possible to be an atheist and a Presbyterian pastor.

    https://www.christiantoday.com/article/belief.less.christianity.is.thriving.presbyterian.usa.pastor.asserts/50727.htm

    “The claim is made by Oregon-based Presbyterian USA Minister John Shuck in an article titled ‘I’m a Presbyterian Minister Who Doesn’t Believe in God’.

    He claims that ‘[b]elief-less Christianity is thriving” in the article, published in Patheos’ The Friendly Atheist blog.

    ‘We all have been trained to think that Christianity is about believing things,’ Shuck said in the article. ‘Its symbols and artifacts (God, Bible, Jesus, Heaven, etc) must be accepted in a certain way. And when times change and these beliefs are no longer credible, the choices we are left with are either rejection or fundamentalism.’

    Shuck also used the article to say that he takes offence at not being called a Christian. The minister said that while he rejects the Bible as literal truth, and denies the existence of Heaven and Hell, he is stilll a ‘proud minister.'”

    All in all, if I were George Washington I’d want my plaque removed from that church. I’m happy to say that the elitists who are harshly judging men and women for being men and women of their time will be likewise judged. All it is is chronological elitism. “How dare George Washington not be an enlightened 21st century superior form of humanity like me?” Here’s how stupid it’s gotten; students at one university want Lincoln’s statue torn down because “he owned slaves.”

    I’d be violating their safe space by pointing out they’re idiots. Lincoln, in case it needs to be pointed out, never owned slaves.

      tarheelkate in reply to Arminius. | October 30, 2017 at 8:16 am

      You make a good point, Arminius. Aside from the argument about whether Washington (not a theologian) was fully Trinitarian in his thinking, it’s very clear from his public speaking and letters that he considered a moral people, in the Judeo-Christian sense, to be essential to the maintenance of the new nation. This would put him at odds with the modern Episcopal Church, and perhaps he’d rather have his plaque moved away from the vicinity of a pulpit which nows propounds a different, and dangerous, morality.

    What are you now, if you don’t mind me asking.

How long before they start attacking the Democratic Party, for it’s history promoting slavery, and it’s racist leanings?

    That’s coming, too. White leftists don’t get that they will be turned on and silenced well before these people attempt to tackle right-thinking Americans.

    Again, history is our key: what did every commie or theological dictator ever do first? Destroy their ardent supporters because they are trouble-makers who might one day turn against the new rule. Hitler went after the commies first because they were most likely to pose a real threat to his rule; Nazis and commies have far too much in common for Hitler to have allowed them to live.

    Not only Hitler but Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Castro . . . all of them eliminated their more avid agitators, i.e. those adept at mounting a challenge to the status quo. Once a totalitarian state takes power, the status quo shiftss and agitators who were successful at defeating the previous status quo must die.

    There is no honor among thieves . . . or leftists.

I would imagine that if George Washington were alive today and was told that people were not going back to church because his picture was there, he would say take it away. I know I would.

Churches are not meant for the dead but rather for the living.

    Maybe in your church, but the one I attend has 2 days coming up celebrating the spirits of the dead…All Saint’s Day and All Souls Day. 😉

    Massinsanity in reply to daaron60. | October 29, 2017 at 6:13 pm

    So we can remove the statues of Joseph and Mary, plus any saints who might be tied to the church. Same with the pictures of past popes and bishops.

    Shall we dump all the texts and songs written by dead people too?

    Milhouse in reply to daaron60. | October 29, 2017 at 8:09 pm

    I think he would react to such impudence the same way he did to the minister who rebuked him for never taking communion — by never darkening that church’s doors again.

They are so open minded that their brains are spilling out.

What I cannot understand is how can an plaque make one feel unsafe?

How much left wing victim culture indoctrination does it take for an inanimate piece or wood, metal or stone with words on to make one feel threatened?

I am as Irish-American as one can get with all 4 grandparents born in Ireland but I treasure the opportunity to visit places in London like Westminster Abbey which happens to be the burial place to dozens of English kings and nobles who treated “my people” horribly for centuries. Yet any remote animosity I may have for those dead people is swamped by the sheer historical significance of the place (not to mention the amazing architecture and religious significance).

The fact that the Washington family attended this church should be celebrated without hesitation. I do hope there is a backlash coming against this insanity and soon before it is too late because the left will never stop… they will never, ever be satisfied until every public and private institutions bows before the altar of political correctness.

    A plaque does not make normal people feel unsafe. People who are taught to hate America, our history and culture, however, are “triggered” by just about anything: the flag, the anthem, the Pledge of Allegiance, the image of George Washington, whatever they can decry as evidence of “systemic racism.” It’s ludicrous. And it’s time we stopped kow-towing to this nonsense.

Driving out the members to satisfy “guests” that do not really exist. This is more liberal virtue signaling and presages the death of the church

DieJustAsHappy | October 29, 2017 at 6:15 pm

Let those who are without sin be sure to erect plaques in honor of themselves in place of the ones removed.

caseoftheblues | October 29, 2017 at 6:18 pm

The Koran was written by an actual mass slaver and still allows for and encourages slavery by it’s followers today….how about we apply those same standards here lefties…..

The whole “slave owner” thing is out of context. (What shock.) The whole world was slave owned slavery in the time of Washington. Anyone born in Washington’s time who was wealthy was a slave owner. Washington likely treated his slaves a lot better than obama’s isis and Muslim heroes treats its female “citizens.”

Africans started the slave trade, not Europeans. America ended slavery before much of the rest of the world did.

The left is looking to destroy out way of life and replace it with a fascist society – which they control and profit personally from. If it takes warping history, so be it. But the warping will be in the minds of their useful idiots, not us.

The U.S. ended slavery long before many other nations did:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom

Wear a yarmulke on the SF State campus and you will really feel unsafe and unwelcome.It’s probably worse than a MAGA hat in Berkeley.

Anyone who feels unsafe or unwelcome because of a plaque with George Washington’s name should NOT be pandered to. They should be referred to a mental health provider. It should be made clear they have a personal problem and they need to seek help.

Never, ever, give in to people like that. You’re not helping them and you’re making a fool of yourself.

OleDirtyBarrister | October 29, 2017 at 7:29 pm

All of those dollar bills have George Washington on them. Clearly, all those professionally offended people should get rid of them. Send them to me, and I will dispose of them properly.

OleDirtyBarrister | October 29, 2017 at 7:36 pm

Europeans and their descendants did not introduce slavery to the new world, it is an historical fact that the idigenous peoples practiced it before the Euros arrived. When the Euros arrived, they and the idigs were sometimes complicit in it, and sold off captives into slavery in the caribbean. Throughout history, people were generally not that kind to one another, and warfare, conquest, execution, and slavery were all very common.

Slavery was common in Africa as well, and muslim slaver tribes played a big part in providing slaves to the new world. The legacy is still present in Africa today. For example, there is an appreciable muslim population on the coast of Mozambique today that stems from the fact that muslim slavers were less likely to take other muslims as slaves. Thus, a lot of people back when converted to avoid capture and sell.

When Black-ish first aired it was a comedy and non-political, It has since veered hard left. The last episode I watched the main character was was trying to make a case on why whites owe reparations to blacks. The show is now pure propaganda.

BTW My ancestry may include both slave owners and slaves, It traces back to ancient Rome.

This is all about POWER. No sane person is made to feel unsafe by the word “george Washington”. In the first place he is DEAD, LONG DEAD. So George can not harm anyone. Second, George and his buddies, such as Tom Jefferson, made it possible for people to protest against a plaque or statute honoring one of them. For tht reason alone, they should be honored. And finally, this whole slavery issue is BS. Almost every people in the world was enslaved at one time or another and virtually every state in the world has allowed slavery. Yet, in this country we are only concerned with notable historical figures who continued the practice. A practice with was born by Negores, usually state or tribal leaders, in Africa capturing neighboring men and women and selling them as slaves to Muslim slave traders who subsequently sold them to Europeans in both Europe and New World. So, there is plenty of BLAME to go around, possibly including the ancestors of some of those held in slavery in the US. Finally, let us not forget that the only reason why there is no longer any slavery in the US is because nearly 400,000 Union soldiers, the vast majority of them white, died to end it.

“The right just can’t seem to figure out that giving an inch to the radical left will always mean giving a mile.”

It’s actually pretty simple, Fuzzy. There are always two, and ONLY two choices, in dealing with tyranny: fight an actual war, and kill them all, or surrender, lick the chains, and be a slave until the tyrant kills you.

Choose.

I just saw a picture of the thing.

It looks to be maybe a few inches long and only says “G. Washington”

This is ridiculous

I recommend that everyone read economist Thomas Sowell’s “Conquests and Cultures: An International History”.

The etymology of the word “slave” would provide insight:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/slave

The Ottoman Empire enslaved many Slavs and others.

The Virginian church that George Washington attended for decades has decided to remove a plaque honoring him. They are also removing a plaque honoring Robert E. Lee, another attendee of the historic church.

I have a better idea. Why don’t we remove the church and leave the two plaques?

Oh, I’m so scared. What if I have to look at the picture of a guy who died over 200 years ago? I feel so unsafe.
–No one ever.

It is like a child who cries so his parents will pay attention.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend