/u/_languageGames on Why is removing Confederate statues equated with removing history?

Suppose instead of confederate statues, it was a statue of MLK being torn down. Is it still the right decision?

Based on what argument? I would be confused with any argument that would want to tear down an MLK statue based on the values it represents since they're pretty universal. But say, for instance, they wanted to tear down the statue because he cheated on his wife and so was a misogynist. I would still not agree with that argument, although I could see it being made one day from the far left, because that aspect of him doesn't have anything to do with what the statue is honoring.

Either we are okay with all statues being torn down, or we are not.

No. Why would that be the case? We erect statues based on our beliefs. If there are statues standing that are completely antithetical to our beliefs why would we leave them up? It's not all or nothing.

The problem with this is that morality is subjective. Today it's confederate statues, tomorrow it could be something else.

I don't understand this argument. I think it's a very weak and confusing argument to say that we can't tear down statues based on our morality because some time in our future our morality could change.

This'll be my last comment since we're going in circles at this point but think about what if a statue were being made to commemorate the confederacy today, could you make a justification for it? Does it align with our values? I think it obviously does not.

from /u/_languageGames on Why is removing Confederate statues equated with removing history?