A trio of bills dealing with Confederate monuments are to be debated by a House subcommittee on Tuesday.
Two measures calling for removal of statues on federal properties, including the National Park System, that memorialize the Confederacy are scheduled to be discussed Tuesday by the House of Representatives' subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands. A third measure asks for an inventory of "Confederate commemorative works" on federal lands.
One of the measures, introduced by U.S. Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-District of Columbia, calls for removal of the Albert Pike statue erected near Judiciary Square in the District of Columbia. Pike was a senior officer of the Confederate States Army and supporter of slavery. The statue was toppled by protesters this past June.
Another measure, introduced by U.S. Rep. Anthony Brown, D-Maryland, calls for removal of the monument to Robert E. Lee at the Antietam National Battlefield. The statue was vandalized last week, with graffiti sprayed on the statue calling Lee a racist and calling for "Death to Slavery."
The hearing is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. EST and will be live-streamed at this page.
Comments
Well said, Randy Robinson. There truly is a difference between the study of history and the worship of idols. After all, "Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the Lord your God." That too was well said.
I say we need to vandalize vandals. Anyone who vandalized public property or any property not belonging to them should be.treated as what they truly are, criminals.
And why don't we start using correct terminology again? Illegal instead of undocumented? Looters instead of demonstrators?
Let's fix this world with common sense.
Hey, get the check off of my statue!
Yes, indeed we do need to start using correct terminology again! Let's start with conspiracy rather the less precise collusion, espionage instead of campaign activity, extortion of a foreign leader instead of phone call, bribery instead of favor, treason instead of hoax, obstruction of justice instead of executive privilege, withholding evidence instead of executive immunity, retaliation against whistleblowers instead of staff transition, and racketeer influenced corrupt organization instead of GOP.
Yes, indeed let's fix this world with common sense. I'm with you 100%.
The Civil War was a way of brother against brother, father against son. Both union and confederate generals were West Point (NY) graduates. Lee, from Virginia, felt condlicted but decided that deep within himself he could not fight and kill fellow Virginians.
Lee's statue and all Civil War statues evoke deep sadness in me, a history major and former history teacher. In addition to the horror of slavery I reminded of the anguish and tragedy of both the system of enslavement of Africans and the fight of brother against brother. The fight to change an economic system enabled by slavery cost blood, not unlike the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and revolutions across all of Europe.
History is not just a collection of dates and facts it is an Opportunity to step into the shoes of another in another time and place....and to meditate on their experience.
Why is it we as a country have not learned our lesson by now, with all blood that has been shed in the fight for what person feels is their right or what has happened , today , or yesterday or in the past, What we must do is learn from our past . The Statues are part of our past which reminds many of the pain and hurt that was caused by people wanting to control others, especially people of color, why do we need to remind people of color the hurt and pain of salvery !!!! Yes it is part of the past history of our country. Slavery was, Wrong ! Why should the people that wanted slavery and those that caused so much hurt, Still be part of nations future as we will call that , part of our history in the days and weeks , months , years too come !
Yes, I agree. Sticking the hurtful past right up the noses of people of color just to satisfy the egos and prop up the positional power of today's most hurtful minority is just not necessary or appropriate. On the one hand, the NPS proclaims and advertises it's dedication to diversity and to making people of color feel welcome in their national parks and park units while, on the other hand, it continues to, not just tolerate this graven imagery and idolatry, but to outright fund and maintain these shrines to racism, white supremacy, and sadistic evil.
People are so ignorant.If the civil war was solely about slavery then why did the border states that sided with the north keep slaves for two more years after they were freed in The south.The north had slaves too,read a history book people! I am a descendant of several confederate ancestors and guess what just like the vast majority of them they did not own a single slave.Would you just leave your homes and family if you were put in that horrible situation or would you fight for it because it is where you are from.
I would grow up and recognize 1) that, although the civil war was not solely about slavery, denying that slavery was at the root of everything it was about is to be shamefully disingenuous; 2) that everything about the culture and economy of the confederate states was built upon, saturated with, and, in one way or another, dependent upon slave labor; 3) that everyone who was part of that culture or relied upon any part of that economy could not help but be complicit; and 4) that, while there might be plenty of guilt to go around, expending energy and resources to continue memorializing anyone or anything complicit or even involved in the confederate efforts is narcissistic, childish, needlessly cruel to so many fellow Americans who don't need to be pointlessly reminded of the monstrous evil that was directly or indirectly inflicted on their ancestors, and counterproductively destructive to America. The operative terms of your comment are "horrible situation" and the operative question is "would you fight for it because it is where you are from?" And, the correct answer is no; no at the time, when the question was ripe for discussion, and no 150 years later, now that the question is moot.