I guess you're saying "there's good people on both sides"
Quite the opposite; I am saying "bad" people can do good things. And celebrating those things is not celebrating the individual. So no, there are not "good" people on both sides, but there may be good deeds.
So, I don't follow that you are somehow not endorsing the naming of public places/events after people who have done the most appalling things - as long as they did something nice at some point. Columbus discovered "America" (cough) thereby opening up the New World to . . . all sorts of good things, including the United States eventually. Objecting to Columbus Day is therefore out of order? And Confederate statues should all be replaced by government authorities where relevant? That sort of thing.
And everyone should stop objecting to Cesar Chavez' name being publicly boosted? Because he did some good union work back in the day and we can brush the crap under the carpet.
I fully understand that you don't endorse such things, but you make an argument which says that you do. IMO
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
People can object as they see fit, seek name changes, etc.; when did I ever say otherwise? All I a saying is that I think that it is not problem to celebrate the achievements of someone who has also done bad things. And IMHO, that should be balanced against the complaints. One side will win, the other will lose, and someone will always be unhappy with the decision, but then where does it say you have a right to always be free from unhappiness?
Is it your opinions that only perfect people should be publicly honored (or even that there are perfect people)?
Our wannabe dictator installed a statue of Columbus on the grounds of the White House in defiance of the removal of said statues in Philly (and maybe some other places) during the BLM protests of 2020, when lots of nasty exploiters and murderers of innocent humans were being dishonored by such removals around the nation - and in other nations too.
Funny (not ha ha) that the Spanish recognized his crimes and held him somewhat accountable for them 500 years ago, but USA can’t get all on board with that even now.
We don’t need to honor rapists, no matter their other good deeds. It’s called progress.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan
As as far as I can tell, the great sailor, Chris Columbus, never visited any place that is now part of the Nation/state of USofA. Not any of the 50 states, not a territory, not a protectorate. So just what is the reason our stable genius leader wants the stature on his front porch? Did Columbus perhaps have something to do with the Airplanes Trump said were used in the American Revolution?
As as far as I can tell, the great sailor, Chris Columbus, never visited any place that is now part of the Nation/state of USofA. Not any of the 50 states, not a territory, not a protectorate. So just what is the reason our stable genius leader wants the stature on his front porch? Did Columbus perhaps have something to do with the Airplanes Trump said were used in the American Revolution?
snailgate
He landed on Puerto Rico on his second voyage.
Contrary to our MAGA brethren (who think Bad Bunny is a foreigner), Puerto Rico is in fact a part of the U.S.
Death is Nature's way of telling you to slow down.
All I am saying is that I think that it is not a problem to celebrate the achievements of someone who has also done bad things.
You (seem) not to understand that this places you firmly alongside Trump and in opposition to minorities and others objecting to the celebration of racists (to name just one example). Your statement appears to endorse the argument that there is no "problem" with public recognition of the name of Cesar Chavez and that abused women (and subsequently their supporters and the organizations acting upon their testimony) should just shut up.
I know that's not you at all . . . but you're the one that's defending honoring events and objects depicting/naming accused rapists, racists and rats because they "did something good despite all the nasty things they did". How you are separating "achievements" from "crimes" baffles me because it has all the hallmarks of rightist opposition to "wokeness".
I would always (nevertheless) support naming a street BIG RR, for your achievements outweigh the offending sentence
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
