First, I did not vote for the folks for whom you claim to do your unquestioned bidding. Second, the discussion topic here, as I understand it, is whether or not a person ought (a moral question) to tear down and destroy a piece of material (flag) owned by somebody else. Third, the fallacy of diversion says when you have no answer to the topic at hand, divert the discussion to something with which you have more comfort. Introducing some sort of god to save humanity will also is off point. Fourth, my justification for anything is not on topic, I raised the question of how does one justify the initiation of the use of force and the destruction of somebody else’s property? To which I have seen no answer in this thread. I see self-justification for initiating force against those who are peaceful. Fifth, what I am doing to oust “them” from office also is off topic.

Elder and Paul put it this way:

The Problem: Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically cultivated.

A Definition: Critical thinking is the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it.

The Result: A well cultivated critical thinker: raises vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely; gathers and assesses relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively; comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards; thinks open mindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems.

Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It requires rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcoming our native egocentrism and sociocentrism.

Paul, Richard; Elder, Linda (2014-10-20). Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts & Tools (Thinker's Guide Library) (Kindle Locations 29-41). Foundation for Critical Thinking. Kindle Edition.

Correct analysis by Blarman.

"With malice toward none. . ."

I guess the minutemen at Lexington and Concord were an "enemy army" too.

I did not cast such a vote.

The slave in question is not initiating force but responding to it. Embrace absolutes.

The First Amendment only applies to action taken by the government. You can choose to buy or sell or to refuse to buy or sell any flag you wish. The retailers in question have the same right.

Slavery was a driver, but not the primary one. It wasn't a focus until after the war had already begun.

That's all fine, but slavery _was_ one of the drivers for the war. The economics of the South relied heavily on slave-based labor for their agricultural exports - the subjects of the tariffs. Do I think the tariffs were fair? No. But the exports themselves were the direct products of slave labor. Without those products (made more efficient and demanding even more slave labor as a result of Eli Whitney's cotton gin), there is nothing to place tariffs on.

Do I think that Robert E Lee fought to protect slavery? No. His own comments on the matter when he was approached by Abraham Lincoln told the story: that he was a Virginian first and an American second - a predominant feeling of that era that was demonstrated by the various state militias that were mustered to fight. "Stonewall" Jackson felt the same, declining to fight for the Union even though he was the preeminent authority on artillery bombardment in the States at the time as an instructor at West Point.

It takes two to tango. It takes two to war. All I can do is look at the causes for which each side is/was fighting. With many it is clear cut - WW II is a great example. With the Civil War, there is right and wrong on both sides. Regardless of that, however, the fact remains that history will always tie the Confederacy to slavery and the "stars and bars" is a symbol of that - just as history will always tie the red and black swastika to the Germans and the Holocaust. You can defend it if you wish, but don't expect much support.

Perhaps this (From NPR)

The "Stars and Bars" flag, currently the subject of controversy, was actually the battle flag of Gen. Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia.

After the war ended, the symbol became a source of Southern pride and heritage, as well as a remembrance of Confederate soldiers who died in battle.

I don't know why they want to fly it, not my issue on here.

My disagreement is over slavery as the primary driver for the Civil War.

That's fine. As XenokRoy and I agreed, there is a taint on the Confederate Flag from its association with the Confederacy. That taint isn't going to disappear and is always going to be associated with the defense of slavery regardless of anything else that was going on. So regardless of what those still hoisting it _want_ it to say, it still screams racism and slavery. If you want to hoist that above your state Capitol or above your home, you also take on that taint, again regardless of your intent. It doesn't seem like a good idea to me, but you are welcome to do what you want.

I'm from the west. My ancestors have been in the west since before the Civil War, so I've got no family history from either side to bias my feelings on the matter. I just look at it from a symbology standpoint. What I can't understand is why 150 years later anyone would still fly that flag. That's like the Macedonians trying to resurrect and fly their flag in the faces of the rest of Greece.

When the means of production are privately held but are controlled by the state, it's fascism. Censorship is one way that the state controls production.

Yes, America is a dying country. We don't need to worry about external enemies. We are committing suicide all by our selves!

it's censorship;; Yes? -- j
.

we could, by selling museum pieces depicting the
Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia in a
curio fashion!!! -- j

p.s. the mascot at my high school is the rebel.
no flag, but the guy looks a lot like a red-jacketed
colonel Sanders.
.

You are absolutely correct in stating that any constitution, or any document, is only as good as the people behind it. The Constitution of the Soviet Union was remarkably similar to the US Constitution. Does anything else needs to be said? Except, perhaps, for the fact that some chapters in that darn document, especially those called the Bill or Rights, are a real thorn to the statists and the socialists, so besides ignoring them, they would really prefer to get rid of them altogether. It's cleaner that way...