A retired Tennessee law enforcement officer was held in jail for more than a month this fall after police arrested him over a Facebook post of a meme related to the September assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
Prosecutors eventually dropped the criminal charge brought against Larry Bushart, but his stint behind bars came to exemplify the country’s tense political and legal climate following the tragedy, when conservatives sought to stymie public discourse about the late controversial figure that it saw as objectionable.
Now, Bushart is suing over his incarceration.
Everyone knows that owning other people is a topic with such significant moral subjectivity, so talking about racially justified ownership of other humans really emphasizes the need to have a nuanced perspective on property ownership.
Think about how you sound.
No one is saying slavery wasn’t involved, it clearly was.
No one is saying racism is a good thing.
What I am saying is that the federal government but it’s own explanation did not get involved because of racism or slavery but rather state sovereignity and succession.
Slavery may have been their reason for seceding, it isn’t however the framework of their disagreement with the federal government not the reason the federal government got involved. So to say it wasn’t about states rights is straight up, flat out wrong.
I can’t help not notice you didn’t provide any evidence for your claim that “no one cared about states rights” or that it states rights were solely a post war conjuring.
You’re wrong, call me a racist I don’t care since I know you’re wrong and simply attacking me on a personal level says you’re emotionally involved to the point you’re willing to ignore actual facts in favor of feelings.
lol. You’re such a doofus. You just spent a whole bunch of time complaining about me not backing my assertions when you are not even responding to the right person.
I just think that minimizing racially justified ownership of other humans, their children, and use of extreme violence to control them is not such a neat debate over property. I don’t think that racial ownership of other humans is really a matter of such nuanced morals. It is wrong, it’s disgusting, and I find it really strange that you’re trying to bend over backwards to minimize that.
I find it interesting that you are so eagerly anticipating being called racist in this thread. Why do you think that is? What remarks have you made that you think could be interpreted as racist? Nothing says not caring about something like preemptively bringing it up.
By all means, feel free to enumerate things that I haven’t said and that nobody at all has said. It seems like you’re carrying out an argument inside your own mind and you’re somehow still losing.
You should take a break. I think you’ve lost track of what’s going on. You can’t even respond to the right person.
I know you have two separate names, sure. You’re both still making the same idiotic argument blissfully unaware of nuance.
No one is minimizing it. No one said it is right either, you’re being obtuse.
You already have and just did again.
What things would those be exactly?
I think you’ve lost track of the contention hence your bullshit about minimizing things.