An editorial in the San Antonio Express-News discussed the notion of evaluating whether to keep symbols of the Confederacy on public property. The article casts a wide net as it can appeal to anyone that is aware of the history of the United States and seems to be rustling up support for the cause of taking the symbols down. The credibility cannot be called into question as the San Antonio Express-News is a major newspaper outlet.
Recent events in Charleston, South Carolina have ignited fierce debate on outlets as far reaching as cable news to our local morning radio programs. This editorial stirs the pot ever so gently in, what I gather to be, a non-inflammatory way by making superficial observations that a number of these symbols may offend a number of people. Using the general claim that "It's offensive." (said in a whiny voice) is a tired strategy because everything is offensive to somebody.
In the case of symbols of the Confederacy, it is entirely obvious that they are offensive to plenty of people but the authors of the article should present a stronger argument. When a symbol universally incites violent action . . . that would be a legitimate reason to discuss its removal. Another point the editorial makes is that "placement on these spaces confers a legitimacy that seems to say all taxpayers agree with the respect extended." The same argument can also be applied to canceling every spending decision lawmakers make in our stead because not one law is accepted by every, single taxpayer.
Regardless of your opinion, if you intend to sway people toward a certain point of view, present a decent argument and do not use the aforementioned article as inspiration.
No comments:
Post a Comment