Really Theodore Rosevelt?

[WildRose]

It applies to most things in life.

The gov’t is not here to protect you from offense. Freedom in fact means you’re going to be offended a lot because people and institutions get to express views you don’t like.

[Samm]

@SottoVoce

It’s a statue. Statues don’t preserve history. They preserve a viewpoint of history at the time they were created. Viewpoints change and people can decide to take them down.

Those who are offended by a statue being taken down should realize you can also be offended by one being kept in place.

So apparently the safe thing to do is remove all statues and prohibit the creation of any new ones. Problem solved. Happy?

[SottoVoce]

@WildRose

It applies to most things in life.

The gov’t is not here to protect you from offense. Freedom in fact means you’re going to be offended a lot because people and institutions get to express views you don’t like.

So if a community doesn’t like a statue or piece of art, there is no recourse, just look the other way. Even if the majority of the community is offended or doesn’t like the statue or art, it must remain in place. Shoot, even if the statue owner or municipality wants a statue gone, they’re stuck with it. If one person likes it, that’s all that matters. Everyone else just needs to look the other way.

I guess there should be a law saying statues can never be taken down once they’re up. The American Museum of National History and the city if New York have no right to remove statues on their property or in their city.

Interesting.

[Samm]

@Nemesis

Oh please, society is not collapsing. Its changing and changing for the better.

Better for who?

[SottoVoce]

@Samm

@SottoVoce

It’s a statue. Statues don’t preserve history. They preserve a viewpoint of history at the time they were created. Viewpoints change and people can decide to take them down.

Those who are offended by a statue being taken down should realize you can also be offended by one being kept in place.

So apparently the safe thing to do is remove all statues and prohibit the creation of any new ones. Problem solved. Happy?

Happy about what? People can put up statues. People can take down statues. People can be offended because statues are up. People can be offended because statues are taken down. The only problem is that the people offended by statues being taken down see themselves as more justified than those people who are offended by a statue being up.

If people say there is no right to not be offended they shouldn’t be upset when they’re offended that a statue comes down.

[Samm]

@Nemesis

@coolidge

There is no better trying to erase the past. Its censorship. You know who else in history believes In censorship?

Its not censorship. Remove the statue put it in a museum and nothing is been eradicated. No one is rewriting history.

Please explain to us what the difference is between a statue placed inside a museum as opposed to placing the same statue outside at the museum entrance. What are the rules for your offense?

[Samm]

@WuWei

@SottoVoce

It’s a statue. Statues don’t preserve history. They preserve a viewpoint of history at the time they were created. Viewpoints change and people can decide to take them down.

Those who are offended by a statue being taken down should realize you can also be offended by one being kept in place.

Fair point.

Which gets us no closer to eliminating offense. No matter what we do or don’t do offends someone.

[Samm]

@SottoVoce

@WildRose

Then don’t look at it, just walk on by or don’t go to see it to start with.

We have rights in this country but you don’t have a right to be protected from being offended.

If they want to put up a new statute and you have a problem with it feel free to voice your opposition. If an existing statue bothers you feel free to close your eyes.

Just don’t look at it? If someone is offended by an object, the answer is to not look at it?

Does this apply to everything or just statues?

Everything. None of us has a right to not be offended. Remember the Court Ruling regarding “Piss Christ”?

[Samm]

@SottoVoce

@conan

Who decide…libs?

Sure. Or conservatives. If enough of one group or another or the entire population don’t like it and the owner of the statue agrees, it’s taken down. Why is this some difficult process to understand?

So the presentation of history should vacillate depending on the whim of public opinion? Three or four iterations should be sufficient to sanitize everything that ever happened, don’t ya think?

[Samm]

@SottoVoce

@Samm

@SottoVoce

It’s a statue. Statues don’t preserve history. They preserve a viewpoint of history at the time they were created. Viewpoints change and people can decide to take them down.

Those who are offended by a statue being taken down should realize you can also be offended by one being kept in place.

So apparently the safe thing to do is remove all statues and prohibit the creation of any new ones. Problem solved. Happy?

Happy about what? People can put up statues. People can take down statues. People can be offended because statues are up. People can be offended because statues are taken down. The only problem is that the people offended by statues being taken down see themselves as more justified than those people who are offended by a statue being up.

If people say there is no right to not be offended they shouldn’t be upset when they’re offended that a statue comes down.

The key word there is “offense.” If your goal in removing statues is to eliminate the offense that it causes some people, then the only safe thing to do is prohibit any statues from being erected in the first place. It’s being proactive and thereby eliminating the angst that statues apparently cause some people. We must be proactive if we are ever to eliminate offensiveness.

[Janet_Miller]

I understand more liberal posters becoming irritated when posters made assertions without any links to support them. PlasmaBall was nice enough to teach me yo copy & paste using my phone so I no longer had that problem.

Please provide links to support your assertions. Now can anyone find racism in this link?

Theodore Roosevelt

Indigenous Americans were in fact part of the Rough Riders.https://www.ajc.com/news/theodore-roosevelt-statue-will-removed-from-museum-natural-history/dwaNhyJfgfym2GZlDSUsTI/amp.html

Or is it now considered racist by fanatics like Bill deBlasio for indigenous or black Americans to be under the command of a white man?!

We’ve given far too much power to our more destructive Americans, IMO.

[Janet_Miller]

Was Theodore Roosevelt Racist? Controversial NY Statue to Be Removed

Psst… The age of Bill deBlasio and average age of those on staff at the museum >18–actually quite >.

[SottoVoce]

@Samm

@SottoVoce

@conan

Who decide…libs?

Sure. Or conservatives. If enough of one group or another or the entire population don’t like it and the owner of the statue agrees, it’s taken down. Why is this some difficult process to understand?

So the presentation of history should vacillate depending on the whim of public opinion? Three or four iterations should be sufficient to sanitize everything that ever happened, don’t ya think?

Yeah. That’s how it works. There are objective parts to history and there are subjective/opinion parts. Taking down statues is not changing or sanitizing history. It’s removing a statue. There are no statues of Caesar or Hitler or Ghandi or Stalin where I live. Their histories and legacies are intact. Not everyone wants to look at a statue for whatever reason. There is no guarantee to not being offended that someone wants to take down a statue.

Everyone can and will be offended at some point or another. People that are offended about statues being taking down are not some special class of the offended who supersede those offended by the statues staying up. They’re welcome to be offended just like everyone else. They can deal with it like everyone else.

[SottoVoce]

@Samm

@SottoVoce

@Samm

@SottoVoce

It’s a statue. Statues don’t preserve history. They preserve a viewpoint of history at the time they were created. Viewpoints change and people can decide to take them down.

Those who are offended by a statue being taken down should realize you can also be offended by one being kept in place.

So apparently the safe thing to do is remove all statues and prohibit the creation of any new ones. Problem solved. Happy?

Happy about what? People can put up statues. People can take down statues. People can be offended because statues are up. People can be offended because statues are taken down. The only problem is that the people offended by statues being taken down see themselves as more justified than those people who are offended by a statue being up.

If people say there is no right to not be offended they shouldn’t be upset when they’re offended that a statue comes down.

The key word there is “offense.” If your goal in removing statues is to eliminate the offense that it causes some people, then the only safe thing to do is prohibit any statues from being erected in the first place. It’s being proactive and thereby eliminating the angst that statues apparently cause some people. We must be proactive if we are ever to eliminate offensiveness.

I’m not trying to somehow “eliminate offensiveness.” That’s called life. Two sides are offended by the opposite actions. One is offended by statues. The other is offended by removing statues. One side will be offended no matter the outcome. You can’t have it both ways so the end result is someone remains offended. They need to deal with it. If people are offended because a statue remains, they need to deal with it. If people are offended because a statue is taken down, they need to deal wit it.

[ResPrivita]

You got a Native American, and an African American walking BEHIND him, as he strides, a la Fabio, on a steed!
Am I the only one picking up the vibe here, hello!
The two fella’s on the ground have no shirts on, and muscles like Steve Reeves!
Teddy is covered head to toe in skin tight leather, and looks to be in pretty good shape for sure himself. And that look on his face shows he’s both comfortable with the arrangement, and in full control of the matter at hand.
He’s clearly on top of things.

Now having said all that, and taken 3 cold showers, maybe it best it does get moved… to a bath house, where it belongs.

Why these two men behind him, lower than him, walking behind him?
It is kinda’ insulting, he is the big boss for sure, no doubt about that.

[Samm]

So you’re good with offending people as long as it the right people. Gotcha.

[Janet_Miller]

The linked article proves what I’ve suspected all along: white liberals push “rights” members of the minority groups they say they want to help don’t even want.

One of the BLM peaceful protests not too far from me was composed 100% smiling white faces. There wasn’t a single black, or even brown face in that crowd.

[Janet_Miller]

Do we have a link to those ■■■■ paying jobs?

How do you explain young people who are marrying or at least moving out of their parents’ home renting with one or more roommates?

[conan]

I don’t see one ■■■■■■■ difference bet wen destruction of those statues and book burning…they’re one and the same.

Until society wakes up and realize this we’re heading right back into early part of 20th century.

[Axxowiz]

Are there no end to this ■■■■■ They are talking about pulling Mary Poppins on the independent. Mary Poppins