The fact is that as a soldier in an army you cannot fight a morally pure war. Armies require group action and that means individuals subjugating their personal views for the goals of the group. It is inevitable that any army a morally pure man joins will do some things he disapproves of. Moral culpability depends on the conduct of each individual himself, and not really the conduct of the group he joined for his own purposes, unless the groups known overarching goal and behaviour was clearly immoral. Since the Confederates were fighting for legitimate state self-determination as well as for illegitimate slavery, one cannot judge all Confederates in blanket fashion. The ones who fought to defend their lands were not committing any immoral acts per se by doing so. The ones who fought so they could keep some slaves, on the other hand, were in the wrong.
elegantly said. Many southerners were wrong... but they were not terrorists. I think it is vital that we reserve that word for real terrorists.
People need to be aware that the Civil War ended the great and noble experiment our founding fathers won from the king. What emerged was subservience to another form of rule unrivaled by any king. Of course it has it's own moral lackeys, dupes and buttkissers such as optional, derangedbar, gadfly & maxipad.
Jail people for owning flags? I think that the Soviets had similar rules, although not as draconian. Coincidence?
I need to amend my quote above as I thought about it. I researched terrorism and after melting together a few of the definitions.... A confederate solider was not a terrorist when he was in uniform. If he wore a sheet over his head when he was back home... he was a terrorist. As such... the democrats do have a former terrorist senator.