Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SHRED

(28,136 posts)
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 07:09 PM Aug 2017

Need some help refuting this

A relative sent me this in defense of the Confederate statues.


Confederate soldiers, sailors, and Marines that fought in the Civil war were made U.S. Veterans by an act of Congress in in 1957, U.S. Public Law 85-425, Sec 410, Approved 23 May, 1958. This made all Confederate Army/ Navy/ Marine Veterans equal to U.S. Veterans. Additionally, under U.S. Public Law 810, Approved by the 17th Congress on 26 Feb 1929 the War Department was directed to erect headstones and recognize Confederate grave sites as U.S. War dead grave sites. Just for the record the last Confederate veteran died in 1958. When you remove a Confederate statue, monument or headstone, you are in fact, removing a statue, monument or head stone of a U.S. VETERAN.

18 U.S. Code § 1369 - Destruction of veterans’ memorials (a) Whoever, in a circumstance described in subsection (b), willfully injures or destroys, or attempts to injure or destroy, any structure, plaque, statue, or other monument on public property commemorating the service of any person or persons in the armed forces of the United States shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. (b) A circumstance described in this subsection is that— (1) in committing the offense described in subsection (a), the defendant travels or causes another to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or uses the mail or an instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce; or (2) the structure, plaque, statue, or other monument described in subsection (a) is located on property owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the Federal Government.
19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Need some help refuting this (Original Post) SHRED Aug 2017 OP
Just go to the Google and type: PoindexterOglethorpe Aug 2017 #1
try this lapfog_1 Aug 2017 #2
Googled, got this: Leghorn21 Aug 2017 #3
This law was passed to benefit widows gratuitous Aug 2017 #4
I stole this... SHRED Aug 2017 #8
+1 dalton99a Aug 2017 #11
'When you remove a Confederate statue' is not analogous to gravesites and headstones. elleng Aug 2017 #5
My take. Ptah Aug 2017 #6
Good point SHRED Aug 2017 #9
Duplicitous, not disingenuous Major Nikon Aug 2017 #12
good point. Ptah Aug 2017 #13
It was about States Rights I agree! SHRED Aug 2017 #17
Actually, it was the exact opposite Major Nikon Aug 2017 #18
Good to know SHRED Aug 2017 #19
Funny how things like laws and statutes GallopingGhost Aug 2017 #7
Here's how you refute that. you just say, "fuck you" world wide wally Aug 2017 #10
Thank you! This will probably make the rounds so I'm bookmarking this... WePurrsevere Aug 2017 #14
Yep. SHRED Aug 2017 #15
Update SHRED Aug 2017 #16

PoindexterOglethorpe

(25,873 posts)
1. Just go to the Google and type:
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 07:14 PM
Aug 2017

Did an Act of Congress make Confederate Soldiers of the U.S.

You'll get a lovely treasure trove of information.

The short answer is that no, the act of Congress didn't exactly do that. It is a bit more nuanced.

lapfog_1

(29,216 posts)
2. try this
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 07:14 PM
Aug 2017
https://www.facingsouth.org/2015/07/busting-the-myth-that-congress-made-confederate-ve

"If you're referring to the 1958 legislation, all it did was make Confederate veterans eligible for the same VA benefits as Union soldiers were. It did not make them U.S. veterans, make any other official change in their status, or extend any particular protections to graves or monuments."

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
4. This law was passed to benefit widows
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 07:18 PM
Aug 2017

The conflation of two very disparate sections of the U.S. Code is a tip-off that someone is trying the old flim-flam. In 1957, Congress passed Public Law 85-425, increasing the pensions of widows of veterans and for the purposes of defining who was an eligible widow, Congress generously included the surviving widows of Confederate soldiers. The last confirmed confederate soldier died in 1951, six years before the law was passed. The claim is bogus.

As for statues on public lands, I'd prefer we give that space over to statues of Americans who didn't take up arms against our government to maintain their right to buy and sell human beings, break up families, rape women and children, and degrade humanity.

Ptah

(33,033 posts)
6. My take.
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 07:28 PM
Aug 2017
under U.S. Public Law 810, Approved by the 17th Congress on 26 Feb 1929 the War Department was directed to erect headstones and recognize Confederate grave sites as U.S. War dead grave sites. Just for the record the last Confederate veteran died in 1958. When you remove a Confederate statue, monument or headstone, you are in fact, removing a statue, monument or head stone of a U.S. VETERAN



The bold text does not include statues.

Adding statues to the protection is disingenuous.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
12. Duplicitous, not disingenuous
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 08:12 PM
Aug 2017

It sounds like the same kind of bullshit that neo-confederates spew, such as nonsense like the Civil War wasn't about slavery and was instead about "states' rights". It's a deliberate white washing (pun intended) of history for nefarious purposes.

 

SHRED

(28,136 posts)
17. It was about States Rights I agree!
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 09:07 PM
Aug 2017

The rights of states to continue with slavery.

That's what I tell them.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
18. Actually, it was the exact opposite
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 09:14 PM
Aug 2017

Nobody was telling the southern states they couldn't own slaves. What they were being told was when their slaves went to certain other states, either by fleeing or traveling with their slave owners, they were no longer slaves.

So historically speaking, the rational for the Civil War was an anti-states' rights position and this was fully articulated in numerous confederate documents, not the least of which was all the articles of secession issued by the confederate states.

GallopingGhost

(2,404 posts)
7. Funny how things like laws and statutes
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 07:29 PM
Aug 2017

and pesky Constitutions only apply when they're trying to justify their warped viewpoint.

WePurrsevere

(24,259 posts)
14. Thank you! This will probably make the rounds so I'm bookmarking this...
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 08:34 PM
Aug 2017

For future reference. There's some excellent facts shared in this thread.

 

SHRED

(28,136 posts)
16. Update
Fri Aug 18, 2017, 08:43 PM
Aug 2017

Thanks all.

I had an informed discussion thanks to all your help.

Not sure how much I got through but it did help.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Need some help refuting t...