Do you think the confederate flag is a racist symbol?

Of course I didn't live in the 1860's during the CIVAL WAR, so I wouldn't associate the racist connotation with the Stars And Bars. It has significant meaning to a lot of Southerners, and to some of them it is probably a signet of slavery that they will never let go of. But then, some Blacks will never let go of believing that since their Great-Great-Great Grandfather was a slave, America owes them a free ride through life. Then there are also some Blacks who condemn other Blacks and tell them to get off welfare and get a job. Likewise, some Southerners can't give up the hope that "the South is gonna rise again." It all boils down to 2 things 1. Being smart enough to leave the past behind (except in historic value), and 2. Being able to control feelings that would start a chain reaction of regrettable actions. Just a question, but where was the outrage from civil rights groups when the Dukes of Hazzard were running around in the General Lee for 5 years with the Stars and Bars on top of the car? Where is the protest against the car touring around tne car shows even to this day? Where was the protest from Hollywood about the movie a few years back with Jessica Simpson as Daisy? There is never a controversy until someone wants to stir up the stink from the bottom of the barrel "just one more time". Just when we think that racisim and prejudice are almost dead, SOMEONE has to give it CPR and bring it back to life. This continuing Soap Opera will never be canceled as long as there's an audience that will tune in to it.

Seceding from the Union was all about the South no longer having to pay tribute to the North to the tune a of millions of dollars per year due to an unfair tariff system where the monies were spent mostly in the North.

The South paid 87% of the tariffs which averaged 47%, and they wanted to establish a soverign nation with low tariffs, but due to the fact that if the South was allowed to secede and establish a free trade zone, it would undermine Northern business and trade.

The South did not need the North because it could purchase the goods they needed from Europe, but the North needed the South for raw materal and a market for Northern goods.

It is those that claim freeing the slaves was the reason for the war that are rewriting history.

If slavery was the reason for the war: why did the Union not free the slaves held in the Union states before, or during the war, and admit West Virginia, to the Union, as a slave state after Southern statres had already began to secede; why did general Grant state that if the war was to free the slaves he would change sides; why did Lincoln state that he had no power or intention of interfering with slavery, pledge to enforce the fugitivfe slave act, and support a new irrevocable constitutional amendment to protect slavery forever; why did the Union not mention the issue of slavery until about a year and a half after the war had started; and why did Lincoln not free all the slaves in lieu of only freeing those in the Confederate states?

I have never claimed that slavery was anything but wrong, and never said that it was OK, just pointed out that both the North and the South were slave owners, that the first decision to make slavery last a lifetime and include the children of slaves, was made in New England, and that the war was not fought over slavery, but over unjust taxation.

I am sure there were cases where slaves were not properly fed, childern were sold from their parents, and instances of slave rape occurred, but then, as today, most people keep their livestock, and that was what slaves were considered at that time, in good condition in order to achieve maximum production, so it would have made no sense to mistreat or starve a several thousand dollar investment to the point that they could not preform to their maximun potential.

Although you may not believe it, there were many slaves that felt they were part of the family they belonged to, and fought to protect the members of that family.

The issue of slavery was not raised by the Union untill about a year and a half after the start, when it looked like England may come in to offer military assistance to the South and the Union needed some moral justification for their actions.

I would still like you to address the questions I ask, but it is apparent that you have no interest in learning the truth about the reason for the war.

The reason that Southerns lost their money was because the Union army had destroyed their homes, livestock, infrastructure, not to mention that the South was broke after the war, and carpetbagger governments set up in the South took their property through unjust property taxes.

I am sorry that you will not even consider that although slavery was a terrible institution, it was not the reason for the war, and that you will not understand that slavery was not in danger because of the statements made by Lincoln of his willingness to enforce the furgitave slave act, that he had no power or intention of interfering with slavery, his willingness to sponsor a constitutional amendment to pritect slavery forever, and even General Grants statement that if he thought the war was to free the slaves, he would change sides, and that he, along with other slave owners in the Union, kept slaves until the the 13th amendment was passed.