Connect with us

News

Post on the Baltimore Sun Thinks Artifacts of Southern Heritage has “No Value”

Published

on

In a recent post on the Baltimore Sun, the topic of confederate monument removals came up again.

It was titled “There’s no value to keeping Confederate statues“.

The article posted the following question:

Statues of military heroes are erected to commemorate their bravery, sacrifice and military acumen, but the ultimate question is: Can one separate the soldier from the cause for which he is fighting?

In a politically correct manner, the writer responded by saying the “obvious answer is “no” if that cause is immoral.”

He then attempted to equate the Southern cause with Nazi Germany and other savage despots in human history.

Yes, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson were heroes for the Southern Cause. They are beloved icons and their military feats are legendary, but so were the bravery and military feats of Attila the Hun, Ivan the Terrible and that great German Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, the “Desert Fox,” who is adored and idolized by military historians the world over.

Trending: Bezos-Linked Thinktank Official Calls for Michael Anton’s Execution for Exposing Anti-Trump Color Revolution

He concluded that “Germany would not consider building a statue in remembrance of General Rommel although he certainly stands in comparison to Messrs. Lee and Jackson. That statue would be a bitter reminder of Nazi atrocities and a crass offense to those whose ancestors suffered under the Third Reich — 6 million Jews in particular.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Indeed, the American Civil War is a complicated subject.

It was part of a festering regional conflict that had its roots in the very foundation of America itself. Given that the slavery question was never settled right off the bat, it would become a point of contention for decades to come.

Although the South was explicit in its desire to keep slavery and leave the Union because of that, many who fought for the South —Lee included— did so to defend their lands and people. There was no planned genocide nor any plan to exterminate a whole segment of a population. Indeed, slavery was a blight on the South and it should be condemned for that. However, certain historians like Thomas DiLorenzo argue that slavery was on its way out in the South before the Civil War even started. He even argues that this brutal conflict could have been handled more peacefully.

The comparison to the Nazis is intellectually lazy but it’s standard operating procedure for the forces of political correctness that would like to destroy all facets of American history under the guise of “racism”, “anti-Fascism”, etc. These monuments demonstrate how much adversity America has faced and how it has still found a way to move forward. Sadly, many mainstream outlets don’t get that and would rather try to sully American history just to advance their case. This recent post on the Baltimore Sun is representative of this toxic trend that is spreading wide across the country.

News

Southern Baptist Convention Reverses Course on Name Change After BLP Reporting

They say they’re not changing their name.

Published

on

The Southern Baptist Convention has sought to dispel reporting from Big League Politics on the organization’s planned name change, arguing that the institution isn’t formally changing its name.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

But a close look at the American Christian church’s plans relating to its name reveal that it’s played with the idea far more seriously than they’re making it seem.

Reports of a name change first emerged in a Washington Post article published on Tuesday. SBC President JD Greear told the Post that “hundreds of churches” affiliated with the denomination had “committed” to using the phrase “Great Commission Baptist” as an alternative to the denomination’s longtime moniker. The change would come as Greear touts his support of the Black Lives Matter, although he’s been careful in pointing out he doesn’t support any formal organization related to the movement. Greear also is renaming the church he personally pastors with the term.

The SBC’s 2021 convention will also organize under the motto of “We Are Great Commission Baptists.” Sounds a lot like a name change, even if the SBC’s leadership is steadfastly maintaining it isn’t.

The name ‘Great Commission Baptist’ is theologically sound in the Christian religion, but it’s somewhat questionable that the organization’s leader appears to be emphasizing it at a moment in which political correctness is making its entryism into many Christian churches and organizations.

It seems as if the organization’s figurehead is keen to present himself as a liberal-style suburban Evangelical to the Washington Post, but he changed his tune quite quickly when the rank and file membership of Southern Baptist churches learned that he was promoting the idea of a name change.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending