Most Americans Reject Leftists’ Assault on Columbus Day
Despite the fact 57 percent of Americans believe in celebrating Columbus Day, the late explorer Christopher Columbus is in the crosshairs of liberals again, more than 511 years after he died.
Among those targeting the late, great Italian navigator are Antifa and left-wing intellectuals, as well as the liberal governments of several U.S. cities who no longer acknowledge Columbus on his holiday this coming Monday.
The violent partisans at Antifa have named Monday "Deface Columbus Day," hoping to see acts of vandalism against Columbus statues.
The famed Italian explorer stirs leftist passions primarily because of traditional hatred of Western culture. The Italian navigator and discoverer, a vaunted legend to many Italian-Americans, and Americans in general, was hired by the Spanish crown in 1492 to find a new route to Asia. Instead, Columbus found North America.
Historians believe Iceland's Leif Erikson was likely the first European to find America, before his death circa 1020 A.D., but Columbus made the first official discovery for modern Europeans, notifying the queen and all of Europe. The race was on to settle this "New World."
Liberals claim the manner in which Columbus helped settled the Americas is the reason he should not be acclaimed.
By discovering the Americas for the Spanish — and starting the race to settle the Americas — Columbus kicked off a series of conflicts and wars between the Native Americans and the Europeans.
Millions of Native Americans would die from disease and warfare. Some would be enslaved, others would be exploited.
Meanwhile, the Left argues, land that did not belong to Spain, Portugal, France and England was seized from Native Americans. Columbus is blamed by some on the Left for starting this mistreatment of Native Americans.
Columbus has always been derided by the Left and Native American activists, but anti-Columbus efforts — including efforts to get his U.S. holiday renamed — have gained steam in the United States and Canada in recent years.
Last November the city of Bloomington, Indiana, announced it would call Columbus Day "Fall Holiday" for the purposes of employee vacations .
And Portland, Oregon, renamed the holiday outright in 2015, calling it "Indigenous Peoples Day."
New York City, under leftist Mayor Bill de Blasio, may add "an explanation plaque" to its famous Columbus statue. And Baltimore's Columbus statue was attacked by Antifa vandals in August.
Much of the credit for the recent anti-Columbus sentiment should go to the late Howard Zinn, a historian and former professor of political science at Boston University. Zinn, a socialist, retired from BU in 1988, and died in January 2010, but NewsBusters' Matt Philbin notes in a recent editorial that in the last five years, Zinn and his work have been cited 31 times by the New York Times, 52 times by the Washington Post, and over 180 times by the liberal Huffington Post.
Yet according to a recent Marist Poll, 57 percent of Americans still believe that celebrating Columbus Day is a "good idea," while only 29 percent oppose the holiday.
The survey also shows that a majority of American disregard Zinn's use of "presentism" in judgment of Columbus. Presentism applies modern ethics and standards to behavior in other centuries. Seventy-six percent of Americans believe that Columbus and other historical figures should be judged by the standards of conduct of their own lifetimes, as opposed to modern standards, the Marist Poll found.
"The polling shows pretty clearly history has to be viewed with a contextual lens," said Andrew Walther, vice president of communications for the Knights of Columbus, speaking to LifeZette on Thursday. "We need to be cognizant of the world in which Columbus lived."
Columbus is viewed either “favorably” or “very favorably" by 56 percent of Americans, according to Marist. Only 28 percent have a negative view of the Italian navigator. The Marist Poll surveyed 1,224 adults and was conducted between September 11 and 13.
Columbus Day will be celebrated on Monday.
"The Knights of Columbus joins the vast majority of Americans in celebrating Columbus Day," said Carl Anderson, CEO of Knights of Columbus, in a statement emailed to LifeZette. "He was a man ahead of his time, who brought two worlds together and began the process that led to the founding of this country. It is a testament to Americans' commitment to a fair reading of history that the explorer's popularity has endured despite the unfair and hateful attacks by British propagandists, the Ku Klux Klan and revisionist academics."
The Knights of Columbus is the largest non-clergy Catholic fraternal organization in the world. Founded in New Haven, Connecticut, the fraternity is named for the Italian explorer because of his breakthrough work in navigation and to combat anti-Italian and anti-Catholic bigotry present in many American cities for much of the 20th century.
Other Columbus defenders such as the National Christopher Columbus Association are fighting back. The association runs a website at TruthAboutColumbus.com.
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/long-dead-columbus-under-attack-by-left/
by Jim Stinson | Updated 06 Oct 2017 at 5:43 AM
Tags
Who is online
52 visitors
People are limited by the times they live in. Christopher Columbus was a great man despite his enormous failings. Simply based on what his 4 voyages accomplished for western culture and the world - he should remain in the history books with his status preserved.
Having grown up learning the wonder bread version of Columbus I never gave much thought to the holiday. IIRC when I was in school I got a day off. As an adult, there have been very few times I have had a day off. It was a day for some retail sales.
Granted, back then, sailing from Spain to some islands in the Caribbean to do Queen Isabella's bidding was no easy feat.
In going beyond the wonder bread version of Columbus as taught in the public system when I was a child the following becomes obvious:
Columbus was not nearly the first to have crossed the Atlantic,
Columbus did not discover America. In fact in his mind what he found was Asia. He did not disprove Flat Earth or geocentric solar system/universe theory. Educated people knew the Earth was round since Aristotle, Pythagoras, Eratosthenes, etc. Eratosthenes even calculated the Earths diameter using empirical data gathered using less than precision tools. He was off a little bit, yet he way pretty close.
Columbus did come across a lot of gold, however, there was no strategic plan that led him to the gold. He tortured, raped, maimed, killed and enslaved the Indigenous population he came across, while taking their natural resources such as gold.
Oh, but the Indigenous population was at war and committing atrocities against one another too. Right? Response = So? Are we celebrating any of the Indigenous peoples who committed any atrocities where Columbus landed? Yet there is a celebration for Columbus.
Should Columbus be wiped from History? Absolutely not. However, the wonder bread version of Columbus belongs in the bin.
Is it appropriate to Celebrate Columbus, since learning more about him,? In my mind no. I saw a couple folks suggest Explorers Day. Something like that could be appropriate because in our past we had explorers resulting in our Nation. This even includes the very first explores of the First Peoples in several migration waves across an exposed land bridge.
Left, Centrist, Right really should not play a role in assessing and re-framing how Columbus' played a role in what we are today. Whatever it is, it should be the truth.
The nerve of the Spanish to impose their religion on those poor natives who were practicing human sacrifice!
The nerve of the Spanish for making slaves of natives who were practicing slavery!
People are flawed and cruel. Some more than others.
Leave Columbus alone!
Maybe Columbus should have left the Taino people alone
Like I said, people are cruel. Cruelty was also a part of native culture. Slavery and human sacrifice. Cannibalism has been shown in some of the southwest tribes in the US.
Even we "civilized" people have managed to kill hundreds of millions in just the last century.
And maybe the Tainos should have stayed in South America. Your point?
No, what’s amazing is how people will make empty supposition with nothing to back up said empty supposition. The Taino are the indigenous people that make up the Caribbean and consisted of Cuba, Hispaniola Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Antilles, Bahamas, and Jamaica. The number is based on historical findings going back to the 1500’s with Anderson Cordova, the priest that brought the atrocities to King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella’s attention as 600,000 just on ONE island….but hey! If you have facts to dispute mine then by all means show everyone……..waiting
And that's your justification?! They did it too?!
So Columbus killing women and children, burning them at the stake, or Spanish soldiers taking sport out of Tainos men by trying to see who can cut one in half in one swing? or if a cutting off the hands of slaves if they couldn't fulfill the quota of mining for 25lbs of gold per day....all that should just be forgotten or forgiven because.....people are cruel?!
Really? Care to tell me who they killed to get the land? who they tortured to mine gold, who they killed off to get rich or as Columbus put himself be "good servants"
So my point is regardless of who the INDIGENIOUS people would have been on that island Columbus still would have thought
Not my justification but my explanation of what was happening at the time. Many see the native culture of one of peace and harmony until Columbus came. It wasn't!
The left wants to make natives sound like they were Eloi.
But that was their right. It's call self determination.
Furthermore, this was part of a bigger picture of what was going on in Spain.
They were murdering innocent Jews for being just Jews. So it is hardly a justification to say that because the indians had a faith that we found barbaric because the Jews were hardly barbaric but were murdered, too. So the facts point to the Spanish having this brutal culture and hardly one to celebrate.
And they are the only one's allowed self determination. Wasn't that why Spain went exploring in the first place?
And you feel that is worthy of celebration?
Who's celebrating bad acts? I celebrate Columbus day because I am glad he found the place.
Hardly the first person who found the place, by about 12,000 yrs.
Get back to me after you're capable of posting an in-depth analysis of what ancient Assyria, Egypt, and Rome did. Then, analyze the conquering tactics of 15th-21st century African countries, England, France, Portugal, Russia, Germany, Turkey, China, etc. Please cite your data.
And, please do not forget to include the conquering tactics used by indigenous people throughout the world upon their fellow indigenous people.
And created a culture of human sacrifice and slavery. The same thing the left criticizes Columbus for.
Going after old Chris is just PC run amok.
Why do you want to celebrate and honor this cruelty, unless their lives don't matter because they weren't white, they didn't pray to your god?
Problem with your whine is the we don't have a holiday celebrating pre-Columbian civilizations. So why should we have this one?
And the Spaniards brought their Inquisition to the New World. No wonder Americans are effed up
What does that got to do with this discussion regarding the Tainos and Columbus's attempted genocide? Did Romans Egyptians or Assyrians visit the Carribean? Care to name me one Assyrian, Roman, or Egyptian we have a holiday named after?....nice deflection though (not)
Why? Care to name me ONE indigenous person we in the US celebrate?
Native American Heritage Day ?
I like it here in America. I celebrate that Ol' Chris found the place so my ancestors could come here.
My first statement was pointing out the irony of the natives finding themselves facing the same cruelty they dished out. I also have enjoyed watching the left twist themselves criticizing Columbus for the same things natives were doing.
I even enjoyed reading posts from those who thought the natives were just minding their own business creating an idyllic world of peace and harmony.
It was an essay test of history and the left failed.
Now you make it personal. You just trashed the rest of your comment.
Actually it's Native American Month.....but you still haven't told me ONE indigenous person
I don't know, dude, but the Taino weren't as peaceful and meek as you've tried to portray:
Bottom line: No one is forced to celebrate Columbus Day. If you (collective) don't like him, don't go to the parades and don't eat Spanish or Italian foods. But, don't remove those celebrations from those who do want to celebrate. Simple!
And your insistence of everything you find abhorrent on 'the left' is nothing but bigotry, and unless you have proof of that accusation, you are simply trying to inflame.
But...the people who land they usurped in the name of God and Spain were no longer given the right to self-determination. Therein lies the difference. A big one.
No, Columbus never discovered America, just some areas of South America and the Caribbean.
No, he never discovered America.
He didn't set foot on the continental US but his discovery led to others who did. The rutters Columbus kept opened the door.
That is in fact true. To say he discovered America is a lie. That he opened the door for others to 'discover' America is not the same as saying Columbus himself discovered America, which it seems many try to promote.
Caribbean islands are part of North America. That's a silly argument.
The Caribbean is part of North America.
While it may be part of the North American Continent, it is in its own right a separate country, America. To say that Columbus discovered America is a lie. To say that the discovered part of the North American Continent would be true. There is a difference. And most intelligent people understand that difference.
While the Caribbean Islands are indeed part of North American Continent, they were not part of America at the time Columbus discovered part of the North American Continent. But, he did not ever set foot in America. Perhaps you should read up on your geography. before claiming someone else's comment is 'silly'
Most intelligent people would agree that that is a silly semantic argument.
Not if they were those who studied geography and knew the difference between specific areas of the North American Continent. Logic and fact would seem to prove that he could not have 'discovered; a country that he never stepped foot in. But, with some people logic and fact hold no merit.
You have your own opinion and I have mine.
Right. And my opinion is that he clearly discovered the Americas for a Europe that had no idea they existed.
I guess it depends on how the word America is defined. The political entity or the continent the islands are part of.
Both have self determination. When the goals of their self determination conflict the more advanced technology will win. You are placing value judgements on the self determination of each party and that is fine.
I see the conquest as karma. Some of the natives that were practicing human sacrifice now found themselves sacrificed to Spain's greed. Some of the natives who owned slaves found themselves slaves.
There are those on here that defend native culture and overlook the whole story. You describe your culture in a positive way. What you know of your history is the good.
Not all of native culture was good. That gets glossed over by the narrative that native people were just minding their own business being nice to one another.
You don't defend human sacrifice. You don't defend eating the enemy to steal his power. You don't defend slavery. Those were some of the practices found by the Spanish.
Native people were not Eloi.
Like I told RW. It's karma. All of the bad one does gets rewarded with bad when they least expect it. Also RWNJ is frowned upon on this site. There is no need for labels and derision. You have shown that you can make your case for the positions you hold without the divisive and inflammatory labels.
Please take that and this as a compliment because it is meant as one! You seldom resort to talking points and tend to go in depth for the comments you make. I will probably seldom agree with you but I usually like your posts because of that depth.
While there may have been some of the natives who engaged in such activities, does not mean that all the native peoples who lived in the areas that were 'conquered' did so. I can only imagine that Columbus picked out the worst of what he saw and attributed it to all those who lived in the "New World", which he determined gave him cause to try to annihilate them all.
IMO, it was not Karma, it was a lack of understanding the new people that he encountered and the lack of any effort to try to understand them or their way of life. His own Catholic church inflicted equally as perverse and inhumane treatment, not worse, on others as what he encountered with the natives. But, domination was the sole purpose of his trip, and I have no doubts that he would not have conducted himself in the same manner if he had in fact landed in India.
Just my opinion.
I would never say all did. My purpose of bringing it up is the false illusion that the native peoples were just sweet Eloi living in peace and harmony.
No, some of them were not. And no, I don't defend the customs that you describe, but, you are want to use a very broad brush when describing the culture of some natives at that of all natives, when in fact is was not the culture of all native people. Slavery is something that has been a part of the human race since humans first existed. And the Spaniards and Christians around the world were also guilty of engaging in slavery and mass murder.
So please take off your cloak of Christian piety when blaming the whole of native people for the acts of some.
Anyone can argue til the end of time if they choose to. However, Columbus did not discover America.
"America was named after an Italian explorer named Amerigo Vespucci who actually arrived in the continent before Columbus though there was no evidence of that voyage. Amerigo Vespucci."
And the land he discovered was named America long before the term 'North America' came to be. So to attribute Columbus with the discovery of America is inaccurate. He was a late comer that never made it to America.
Still writing with a very broad brush. Not all native people lived in the manner you have previously described.
As a Native American of the Cherokee Tribe, I do not know of any Tribes in America that every indulged in cannibalism, rituals or otherwise. There were however, some Tribes that did take slaves during times of war with other Tribes. But......not all did that.
Just because Columbus encountered a Tribe that did engage in cannibalism does not mean that custom should be broad brushed to all other people. That is a total misconception and untrue.
And yes, many Tribes and native people do indeed live in peace and Harmony. Mainly because that is the only way they could survive as a people in their own land.
However, if you are free to think as you wish. But, your own thinking does not change the truth.
I am just a child of the '60's! That or I watched a lot of "My Name is Earl".
Evidence of human bones with signs of being boiled have been found in the Southwest.
That aside, my goal isn't to condemn all with a broad brush but to point out that there were native peoples who got the same treatment from the Spanish that they gave to their own. Not all native peoples were living a peaceful idyllic life.
But, you left of the part here in your link:
"But the evidence is still disputed by some anthropologists and especially by modern American Indians. Archaeologists who previously reported suspected cannibalism said they were sometimes accused of contributing to racism and genocide; some early European colonists used stories of Indian cannibalism as justification for their conquests of the land."
Looks like you like to pick and choose the parts that seem to promote your own opinion.
Vespucci didn't sail to the New World until 1497. He made it to South America.
As a result of Columbus' discovery Ponce de Leon landed in what is now Florida in 1513.
It is disputed. The evidence is there though. The dispute in in the interpretation of the evidence. What archeology can't find is motive. The reason why the cut up bodies were cut up. Why digested human proteins would be found in human coprolites. At any rate that culture is far older than any of the native people the Spaniards would have encountered.
I don't believe I ever claimed all native people were doing all of those things. My comments have nothing to do with piety but dispelling a false narrative that some on this site have. History is what it is warts and all. Columbus had plenty but some of the native people did as well.
You can claim your own belief to be totally right all you want, but, thus far, it has not been proven true.
It is nice to see that you are now using a much smaller brush in using the word 'some' instead of insinuating that all native people were guilty.
It was never all since the Spanish never had contact with all native people.
My first sentence said it was disputed. I agree that it is in dispute. The evidence also exists. How that evidence is interpreted is what is disputed.
Here is an article that clearly proves that the Cannibalism that occurred in Jamestown and was formerly attributed to being done by the local natives, but was actually done by the English settlers there;
Source:
There is a lot of explanation regarding this discovery and why it happened at the source page.
Another act against the indigenous people in many places of discovery was the Doctrine of Discovery, in which was established the Papal Bull:
"Edicts issued by sitting Popes (in particular the Papal Bull Inter Caetera of 1493 issued by Alexander VI) granted permission to explorers like Christopher Columbus and John Cabot to claim for the Christian ruling monarchs the lands they "found" and implored their expedition crews to convert-- by force if necessary --the "heathens" they encountered, who would then become subject to the will of the Church. Their only limitation was that the lands they found could not be claimed by any other Christian monarchy"
And in addition:
"Aside from the criticism levied against the American legal system for its reliance on outmoded racist ideologies, critics of the discovery doctrine have also condemned the Catholic Church for its role in the genocide of American Indian peoples. The doctrine of discovery has also found its way into the legal systems of Canada, Australia and New Zealand."
And there is ever so much more to read about this document should you care to so.
Source:
Your argument does not seem to hold up that only native people engaged in Cannabalism.
Also, from the Papal Bulls it is apparent that the only thing that the Spanish were interested in was conquering native people for the 3 G's......God, Greed and Gold.
It has never been my argument that only native people were engaged in cannibalism.
It has been my argument that some incorrectly think the native people the Spaniards had contact with were living an idyllic life free from things they accuse the Spaniards of doing.
Where is the honor in "honoring " Columbus? Yes, he was a man of his times, does that make his actions "honorable"? Columbus and the Spaniards considered themselves a superior and advanced civilization. To demonstrate this they stole from and enslaved and murdered the natives. Is that your idea of "advancement"?
You are where you are and doing what you are doing thanks to the travels of Columbus. Was he flawed? Who isn't? Only one perfect man walked this earth and he got crucified.
Yes, it seems that more than one religion glorifies human sacrifice, not to mention cannibalism.
Once again Sandy you fail to understand one of the basic tenets of Christianity. The cross was an execution device and not a sacrificial one. Christ went willingly to the executioner's cross to show his power over the forces of evil that man creates. Power over sin when he rose from the grave!
Dallas Holmes lyrics describe it very well.
'Cause I'll rise, again,
Ain't no power on earth can keep Me down!
Yes, I'll rise, again,
Death can't keep Me in the ground.
He is honored for what he did good.
Funny thing...."Liberal". Why is it, "Liberal" means to find the BAD in everything.
I guess....in the "Liberal" Mind....THEY are PERFECT !
"We live in a world where finding fault in others seems to be the favorite blood sport. It has long been the basis of political campaign strategy. It is the theme of much television programming across the world. It sells newspapers. Whenever we meet anyone, our first, almost unconscious reaction may be to look for imperfections."
Henry B. Eyring
I understand that Christ supposedly had to die to atone for our sins. How is this not human sacrifice? If Catholics believe in transubstantiation, how is that not cannibalism?
I understand. I just am not blinded enough to see Christianity through a different lens as other religions. Human sacrifice is human sacrifice, no matter how you dress it up. And communion is purposely dressed up as cannibalism.
Their gods demanded a sacrifice, and so did yours. You just excuse yours.
It was both, according to Christianity.
It's more like "they were savages- who gives a shit?"
"Liberal" means to find the BAD in everything..... Thanks for YOUR support !
That is not technically true. A liberal refuses to ever look in the mirror. They view themselves as "Christ" like in their perfection.
Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]
She past away from Cancer 18 years ago.
Columbus did some good. He "discovered" America from a European point of view and eventually by and by one thing led to another and the US sprang out of it all. In the course of creating this "good" cultures and traditions and civilizations, and people, were destroyed.
Human decency, at the least, would require that we not "honor" someone who committed genocide, no matter what "good" came out of it eventually.
They view themselves as "Christ" like in their perfection.
I think you guys actually know that there is no God, and that Jesus is a farce. You all are blatantly the opposite of the Jesus character, but use it as a tool to bludgeon your opponents. If you thought there was any chance of Jesus being real, you would not be the capitalist hatemongers of the poor that you are. You use religion the way it has been used for ages - to try and control others.
Tada !
Now, lets look at the rest of your comment, which by the way, feeds right into my original comment:
"In the course of creating this "good" cultures and traditions and civilizations, and people, were destroyed. Human decency, at the least, would require that we not "honor" someone who committed genocide, no matter what "good" came out of it eventually."
Tada !
You don't appear to be capable of making a coherent point.
Apparently, "savages" is left-wing speak for those the left considers to be uneducated and uncontrollable groups of people. I may have missed it, but I haven't seen anyone but you directly accuse 15th -21st century Tainos of being "savages".
When one deals with incoherence, they respond in kind.
Again....which is very coherent on my part, and displayed by you:
"Liberal" means to find the BAD in everything.
Sorry, I can't respond intelligently to babbling. I'm not sure this format of trying to make intelligent comments in full sentences suits you.
I think you guys
You guys, really, that's funny I am a pagan.
actually know that there is no God, and that Jesus is a farce .
Well, I do have a god delusion, just not the one you think I do. But I've also studied history so I can link to the text supporting the fact that a Jewish man named Jesus existed in the non-Christian historical record.
Tacitus, possibly Roman's finest historian, pagan in good standing as well as a member of the Roman Senate, recorded it in Annals 15/44
Jesus
from whom the name had its origin suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea
Agreed !
As I saw on another article here:
IMPASSE ?
Settle down there sis, lets not get personal....
So you're the pagan who believes in Jesus. Congratulations, you might have just started a new hybrid religion.
(LOL)
As a historical figure, yes I do. But I'm sure you know that. The rest is just trolling, isn't now?.
I just ignore it, as shit like that has never bothered me. But please, continue, if it makes you happy.
There was no demand of Christ to die. As part of the trinity he gave up his earthly body for our sins. He didn't die!
He was actually the last of many peoples who "discovered" America, while not intending to. So, he had one lucky mistake and then spent the rest of his life murdering, torturing enslavi9ng and raping indigenous peoples. This is good enough for you to celebrate. Most people who can define the word morality will differ.
Oh Well. He did it, mistake or no mistake. Good for him that he gets credit for doing it.
"So, he had one lucky mistake and then spent the rest of his life murdering, torturing enslavi9ng and raping indigenous peoples."
There's that "Liberal" thing again. I guess Liberal Types just have a hard time when people look at everyone else besides them.
Columbus had nothing to do with my ancestors coming to the US. Columbus wasn't the first European to see the Americas.
There is no proof that the biblical Jesus ever lived, despite your religious beliefs.
Then what was all that talk about Christ's sacrifice that I heard about in Church?
sorry to derail
He found the place so indirectly he had something to do with mine. Until he did there was no established European settlement.
As to your religious rant. I see nothing has changed. Never pass up a chance to take a shot at Christianity.
It was a response to a poster that hates Christianity and claimed Christians support human sacrifice because of Christ's crucifixion.
Why is the left so determined to rewrite history? It was what it was and this isn't 1984.
Sometimes it's easy to go there after the millionth insult. Thanks for the reign-in. I need it on occasion. ♥
Comes as no surprise....except I'd have expected "worship" in lieu of "celebrate"........heck - getting lost would make Chris the patron saint of liberals everywhere.
ItsOkay.
Sure he did, if he was ever alive. And whether or not it was voluntary is irrelevant. According to your scriptures, he died to atone for our sins, and he did it because it was god's will. "Not my will, but thy will, be done". That's a human sacrifice.
And he wasn't the first human sacrifice demanded by the god of Abraham.
Isaac.
Jephtha's daughter.
That is a lie.
For someone who is supposedly so against flame-throwing, you sure do a lot of it yourself.
Your scriptures describe what is undeniably a human sacrifice, if they are to be believed. And yet you condemn the same in others.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy.
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality . [1] [2] [3] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas and programmes such as freedom of speech , freedom of the press , freedom of religion , free markets , civil rights , democratic societies, secular governments, gender equality and international cooperation . [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
From Wiki.
Tell me again how horrible liberals are.
when I had to go to church, we heard He died and rose again. That was a big thing in Lutheran Church
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
As I said in my post, he gave up his earthly body. The body died but he didn't.
That is what you want to believe. It was not human sacrifice.
In spite of your protestations I have seen nothing but hatred toward Christianity from you. Show me I am wrong don't just say I am.
You are saying Jesus Christ committed suicide?
In your opinion.
Once again you inject your hatred of Christianity with your snide insertions of "if he ever lived".
Isaac was a test and the sacrifice was not done. The Lord provided the sacrifice.
Jeptha's daughter was not demanded by God but happened because of jeptha's arrogance by making the vow. He sent her away to mourn her virginity then she went into service at the temple and never bore children. Judges 11.
He willingly left the human body behind. He still lives so he didn't commit suicide.
This has gone far beyond the topic of Columbus and we need to return to it.
I've told you, I respect Christians who practice what they preach. Those who, for example, lie about others, repeatedly, earn my disrespect.
If you're not familiar with him, look up John Pavlovitz. That's a good Christian. Nonjudgmental, honest, charitable, nonhypocritical - traits exhibited by the person your religion directs you to emulate.
I have several Christian friends who are the same.
But then there are the holier-than-thous, who earn disrespect.
I don't believe in Christianity, but I don't hate it, if its believers would stick to being Christ-like.
Doubting its veracity isn't hatred. What is with this persecution complex? And why are you making this personal, when you object to anybody else getting personal with you? That is hypocritical.
And sacrificing a human to atone for anybody's "sins" against some god is by definition human sacrifice. Any attempt to spin it as otherwise is ridiculous. Just prettier packaging than the human sacrifices committed by those you condemn, whose gods were just as real to them as yours is to you.
Isaac was a test and the sacrifice was not done.
But it was demanded, wasn't it? According to your scriptures? And Abraham was willing, according to your scriptures? Why is the willingness of a man to sacrifice his son not appalling to you, when it occurs in one place and time, and to one god, as it seems to be when it occurs in another place and time, to another god?
The fate of Jephthah's daughter in scripture is ambiguous, I'll grant.
But it seems that human sacrifice is hardly unheard of in the Abrahamic religions, so there is no room for those who practice them to go condemning the same in other religions.
religion is a big part of Columbus Day discussion and he brought it with him
If that were true why would we even have dictionaries ?
Hmmmm.....
(grin)
Then it should be a comparison with the religions practiced by the peoples the Spaniards had contact with.
Which one would you like to start with? The Aztec?
You take shots that reflect your contempt. If you didn't feel that way why would you include them in your comment? Believe or not. That is the choice Christ offered. You are free to do so or not.
None of the Abrahamic religions demand human sacrifice. To come to that conclusion you use a test of faith and an execution. That is quite a stretch. Abraham witnessed the human sacrifice of children to Baal. God condemned that practice and forbade it.
Deuteronomy 12:31English Standard Version (ESV)
31 You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the Lord hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.
So there was no human sacrifice demanded by God in the Abrahamic religions.
Then why do you take shots at it when you post? Because not all are what you think Christians should be? How can you judge what you show limited understanding of?
I don't show a limited understanding. I'm looking at it in an unbiased fashion, which you choose to interpret as hating. If a god is violent, I don't choose to gloss over that. If a religion's central premise is human sacrifice, as is the case with Christianity, I don't try to twist that into NOT human sacrifice, while accusing other cultures and religions of practicing human sacrifice.
I also don't accuse people who don't share my beliefs of not feeling "conviction" when they do wrong, which is religious bigotry.
Odd that you think I'm the hater.
Actually you do. When you confuse a Roman execution as a human sacrifice you show that limited understanding.
You have consistently taken shots at Christianity in your posting. That reflects your contempt for the religion.
This conversation is going nowhere but further off topic.
Actually, both sides can be argued, as the Bible was written by many people over thousands of years and you find both sides represented. The best comment I found was this:
The Old Testament stops just short of forbidding all human sacrifice, for Jesus was a (voluntary, adult) human sacrifice and clearly his sacrifice was acceptable to God. (See Was Jesus' death a violation of the commandment against human sacrifice? by Glenn Miller for more on this.) However, the OT doesn't prescribe or require human sacrifice. All the rules concerning what sorts of offerings were acceptable for various purposes mention only animals, birds, and grain - humans are never mentioned as an option. In fact, humans in general would not be acceptable as sacrifices because their sin made them imperfect, and only perfect sacrifices were acceptable. 1 (Hence Jesus is the only human who could ever be accepted as a sacrifice.)
Ausmth,
I have looked up and down this article to see if that claim was made by Sandy and it was not. Please do not put words into other people's mouths and be accurate in what you are claiming.
She didn't use the word hate but has used many snide hateful comments in her posting about Christianity. She does indeed make the claim that the Abrahamic faiths were involved in human sacrifice. She does indeed call Christ's death a human sacrifice.
3.3.1.1 sandy-2021492 replied to ausmth @ 3.3.1 4 days ago
Yes, it seems that more than one religion glorifies human sacrifice, not to mention cannibalism.
Sure he did, if he was ever alive. And whether or not it was voluntary is irrelevant. According to your scriptures, he died to atone for our sins, and he did it because it was god's will. "Not my will, but thy will, be done". That's a human sacrifice.
And he wasn't the first human sacrifice demanded by the god of Abraham.
Isaac.
Jephtha's daughter.
The nerve of the Spanish who murdered countless Jews for being Jewish and made the ones they didn't kill or force convert leave the country.
See how that works?
This was all part and parcel of Queen Isabella. 1492 was a great year for genocide.
Miss the irony in the two statements Perrie?
I thought they were well written for an old shop teacher. Of course my favorite teacher was my English teacher Mrs. Duncan.
Actually, yes I do. Please explain.
Making slaves of slave owners.
So were 1915, Hitler's WW2, and other years in the 20th century.
First of all, not all of the tribes of South America had that custom. Second, you are going with two wrongs make a right again. And you never address the fact that these exact same Spanish were brutal to the Jews who lived in their country at that exact point in history. So really, who stinkith the most?
And evidently for you, that is a reason to celebrate.
But it did exist. My point was the irony of making slaves of slave owners.
Right and wrong evolve. 500 years ago slavery was an accepted practice. It still goes on today in some places. Today's values make it an unacceptable practice. Are we to hold a dead person to the standards of today?
Yes we should. Because he was a European, and this was not accepted in most of Europe. When Queen Isabella did it to the Jews, England too mercy and took them in. So they knew right from wrong.
Then we will just have to disagree on that one.
Your comment indicates a wish to fantasize and make a "personal attack" without knowing anything about me. Unfortunately for you, you targeted the wrong person so find someone who might fall for that bait. I stated facts that are well-documented. That you don't like them is your problem, not mine.
The "reality" here is that you are willing to ignore 1,000 wrongs top celebrate one right. Sort of like celebrating that Mussolini made the trains run on time.
I agree with you, I am just asking why genocide should be celebrated.
---------------------
As you can see from 3.5.2.1, your agreement wasn't evident but I appreciate the clarification.
You'd have to ask someone who celebrates genocide, because my family and I do not. Several of my wife's ancestors were raped, enslaved, and murdered during the Armenian Genocide. Our families also have several members who died in Hitler's concentration camps. So, we have zero tolerance for genocide.
My parents were German Jews, so I understand what you're talking about. That is why things like genocide are not something I can "overlook". So, I believe that he should be in our history books, and older students should be exposed to all the good and bad done by the man. I just do not see the reason for a holiday for anyone other than Italians and maybe Spaniards. I also understand Native Americans looking on it as a day of mourning.
Columbus is a tough one. He has essentially been honored for 500 years, which is a long , long time. He is considered a symbol of ethnic pride by an American nationality, Italian -Americans. Columbus is not "honored" for slaving or killing natives, but for "discovering" America and thus setting the stage for the "new world". The new world was a history changing development.
Objectively Columbus is not someone who should be looked up to, he was cruel to innocent people, and took away their lands and lives. But this is an issue that is beyond objectivity. I give Italians the right to parade in Columbus "honor" and celebrate, but perhaps the rest of us should be more thoughtful about it.
Well I'll be damned, every once in a while John you say something I can agree with, this is one of them.
Give Columbus his due, the did sail all the way over on a hunch in a set of tubs that were lucky to stay afloat, out of food, almost out of water. if he hadn't stumbled into Hispaniola he would have dissappeared, unknown to history.
As it was it was an incredible feat, and he should be lauded for the courage such took.
After that? he demonstrated a lot less courage and a lot more savagery.... Yes he proved to a disbelieving world that the church was wrong and the world wasn't flat. But that wasn't his intent, just a way to rationalize a good reason for the trip by later historians. His intent was greed.
Let him have his glory from that which was rationalized for him, accept that the Norsemen figured out the world wasn't flat hundreds of years earlier, (and kept the info to themselves for entirely greedy reasons themselves) and be sad of the fact that the Indians shouldn't have been condemned cause they did not see the need for Custer's last stand 400 years earlier.
I like your comment. Goes well with John's
Well you see there we are beginning to reach common ground....
500 years! Thank you, Mr. Columbus!
1,000 years!! Thank you, Leif Erikson, Son of Erik the Red!!
Suck it Columbus! You Johnny-come-lately, headline stealing, genocidal, CHARLATAN!! (winking smirk)
I think Leif is one of my ancestors.
Why fear historical accuracy? Mama always told me..."A half-truth is a lie". Why perpetuate a lie, particularly to elementary school children? If we don't want a five-year-old to know the complete truth...teach it later when the ability to weigh the time period, goals, impact to Native Americans are taught and discussed.
No different than accurately teaching Hitler's rise and fall. How he came to power, beloved by the people, the economics of the country, the propaganda, the atrocities, and those that rose up to stop this madman.
The Columbus story taught to children is propaganda...imo.
-----------------
de Blasio needs to re-think his strategies if he wants his political career to last. His own police force turned their backs to him. He was blasted after saying that he told his biracial son to be wary of cops. He was criticized for trotting off to a demonstration in Europe instead of attending a NYC police memorial, and he wanted to eliminate historic Central Park horse carriage rides which generate a great amount of city income from tourists. And this is his "reward":
This just keeps going on and on. No matter what!
Let's all go back to our original country......I have no idea which one as my ancestors were French, Irish with a little American Indian thrown in. Give it all back to the American Indians and they can settle with Mexico.
Most of our FFs are damned as well as our First President because slaves are in there somewhere. It has been decided that Thomas Jefferson is really a no no.
So much more, but why go on? It is ridiculous!
All I know is, I get paid triple time for working Monday Night. Thanks Columbus!!!
Let's go back to the ''Doctrine of Discovery'' and the Papal bulls of the 15th century.
In short the ''Church'' gave the right of conquest of native lands by what ever measure was needed, Columbus used slaughter, murder, ethnic cleansing, slavery to accomplish those goals.
Gotta love that old time religion. Of course ''Doctrine of Discovery'' led to Manifest Destiny and we know how that turned out for Indians.
A couple of more things regarding Columbus and the ''they did it to'' defense.
The Arawak or Taino Indians were not were war like, you should read Columbus's own words on it.
I saw that it was suggested that SW Indians were cannibals. You should look to Jamestown to see who the cannibals were. But that's beside the point. Here is what were talking about.
Q : Were Native Americans cannibals?
A : Not for the most part, no, but there were some groups who were. The Aztecs were notorious for ritual cannibalism (warriors would eat a strip of flesh from enemies they had slain in combat). Some people dispute this, but the Aztecs' own written and oral histories seem to support it as the truth. The Karankawa tribe of southeast Texas was also said to practice ritual cannibalism on defeated enemies. There were a few Amazonian tribes who practiced funerary cannibalism (family and friends would eat part of a dead tribal member's body as a religious ceremony at the funeral). Finally, the Carib people of South America were said to kill and eat prisoners of war, though it's been pointed out that the Spaniards who made this claim were lining their own pockets by doing so (Queen Isabella had forbidden her subjects from selling Africans, or Indians, as slaves unless they were cannibals).
None of the other 1200 Native American cultures engaged in culturally sanctioned cannibalism at the time of European contact. That doesn't mean cannibalism never happened--there were certainly stories in the American Indian oral history about cannibalistic incidents (a hunting party trapped in a snowstorm who fell to eating each other, a war chief who taunted captives by striking them in the face with their leader's heart and then taking a bite out of it.) Such incidents also occurred in American and European history under similar starving-in-the-wilderness and war-atrocity circumstances (a company of Crusaders, for example, bragged of having grilled and eaten a Saracen; a Jamestown settler was executed for cannibalizing his wife during a famine). Cannibalism should not be considered part of American Indian culture on this account any more than it would be considered part of European or American culture--it was culturally unacceptable behavior. The Sioux considered cannibalism a sin, the Cree considered it a mental illness, the Algonquin and Ojibwe considered it a sign of possession by an evil spirit. In almost all cases, American Indian cannibals--just like European or American cannibals--were put to death as soon as they were discovered.
Q: But weren't they cannibals before that--in ancient times, before European contact?
A : Most of them definitely were not. It's been suggested that the pre-Iroquois Mohawk and the ancient Anasazi may have practiced group cannibalism. This is possible, though it has not been proven. The Mohawk were called "man-eaters" by their Algonquian enemies on account of this belief about their lurid past. Some Mohawks think it was probably true, others that you shouldn't give too much credence to slurs people's enemies cast at their ancestors. The claim about the ancient Anasazi came more recently, when anthropologists found a burial site with skeletons whose flesh had apparently been hacked off the bones after their death. Personally, I'm not too impressed by that evidence. Even if those bodies were cut up for cannibalistic purposes, we're talking about one anomalous site with only seven bodies in it. Of the hundreds of ancient Indian burial sites exhumed by archaeologists--including dozens of Anasazi ones--this was the only one with this strange appearance. For all we know it was the work of some Anasazi psychopath. We can't assume ancient Anasazi culture included cannibalism from this one unusual case any more than we could say American culture includes cannibalism because of Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahmer.
The interloper claim is really funny. Indians were interlopers...The first people (thus far) of the Americas were the Clovis people. DNA test done on the ''Montana Boy'' documented the link between the Clovis people and modern American Indians, yup we are definitely descendants of the Clovis people.
I would suggest that the ''they did it to'' defense should take a step back. Columbus and the following Europeans invaded a land that was not there's. Nothing you can pontificate on can deny that fact.
I just told you we would vacate. Good luck!!
You don't have to Magnoliaave, you supposedly have Indian blood.
But, you will not like how I got it!
I will be ostracized! I would rather leave!
France doesn't want a refugee. I don't know about Ireland.....maybe.
Now, the ones who are really up a creek without a paddle are the Africans. Don't know why they would want to go back there. But, if you gotta you gotta.
Italians? That's good. The Muslim countries might be a problem. But, you gotta do what you gotta do. Spain is ok. PR....might want to wait a bit. Mexico? you can stay and fight it out with the American Indians.
We are in a mess. Ole C. Columbus really did a number on us. Next time, don't tell Queen Isabella what you found. Big mouth! Just leave it alone and go back home.
None of this would have happened if not for you. Some people don't even like you. I like you.
Hey Kavika! Just an Archaeological Checkup! Testing on the Clovis People has actually been proven to be incorrect in terms of chronological originality, as there was a 7,000-10,000 year gap between the first Bering Migrations and the earliest evidence of the Clovis Culture. There is actually evidence of four specific genomes from mitochondrial DNA that prove at least 4 migrations of four genetically different ethnic origins from Asia. Clovis Points, the characteristic and "defining" aspect of Clovis culture is actually being proposed to be technologically influenced from a very early European migration of the Solutreans. This is genetically proven by a mitochondrial DNA test on the Ojibwe People, where strangely enough there is evidence of a fifth genome, therefore a fifth ethnic origin that is only found in isolated areas of Europe. This contact occurred around 17,000 years ago, where Solutrean Culture in itself seemed to disappear from Europe.
I completely agree with this. Not to mention the fact that genocides among the Native cultures of the Americas was on a much smaller scale than that of the First Contact and what came along with it. While genocides have been happening for millennia, Columbus and the encomienda system led to a wide-encompassing destruction that not only wiped out several groups in the Caribbean (which is really what Columbus found, having never actually set foot in North America, only sailing along the coast of what is now Guatemala to Panama), but also led to the destruction of every advancements that went along with the cultures he and his successors stamped out. There's no real reason why he should be celebrated, as he had failed his mission and initiated the a large scale form of near-immediate genocide that wiped out countless generations of possible knowledge for his own gain and the gain of imperialist nations.
Missed you! Mom says hey!
Hi Rockhound, good to hear from you. Sounds like you're doing well in your studies.
The ''Montana Boy'' was 12,500 years old, the Clovis people date back to 14,000 years ago (I'm going from memory) the dna testing showed that a direct link between the Clovis and modern NA's. Modern being over 12,000 years ago. I'm sure that they were more than one migration from Asia to the Americas. In fact there are a couple of interesting discoveries. One being Polynesian remains on the west coast of Mexico and another that showed that the 7 % of Easter Islanders had Indian DNA. There are a number of articles and studies on this.
Regarding the Solutrean. The last study that I read discredited this theory using DNA evidence. If there is something that I missed I sure love to see it.
Agree with the rest of your comment.
Say Hi to mom, and keep up the good work in your studies.
As far as I know, this has been refuted.
Hi Rockhound! Great to see you posting here. Hope you are liking college. Say Hi to your Mom for me too. (smile)
Historical figures who contributed to the birth and story of our great nation often come under attack by members of the Left. Not even our Founding Fathers are safe from Leftist vitriol as Leftists have advocated for the removal of monuments and memorials. These attacks are often misguided and look for the "bad" in our nation just so certain individuals can put themselves on a moral pedestal to virtue signal. When Leftists decide to besmirch historical figures and misrepresent their stories, someone needs to defend tradition and the historical record. One historical figure, in particular, is getting some backup.
The Italian explorer Christopher Columbus is, as he has been the last few years, coming under fire by Leftists. "TruthAboutColumbus.com" has had enough and is looking to combat the misinformation about Columbus with historical facts. The National Christopher Columbus Association (NCCA) that maintains the site hopes to preserve history, Columbus monuments, and keep Columbus Day traditions and celebrations alive.
Patrick Korten of the association stated, "Up to now, the campaign of flawed history and misinformation against Columbus has been allowed to proceed with barely any pushback."
And even though there has been no pushback, Korten says "new Marist polling shows the majority of Americans support celebrating Columbus and his key role in our history."
SEE ALSO
In California, It's Now a Crime to Use Wrong Gender Pronoun For LGBT Seniors
The website gives Columbus's biography and combats the most popular myths that continue to spread. The site also explains how Columbus Day came under attack by the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s and how anti-Spanish propaganda influences the attacks on Columbus's memory today.
Korten explains that “It is both tragic and frightening that far-left groups like Antifa are picking up where the KKK left off. Americans need to recognize that this attempt to destroy one of the great figures in our national experience is part of a shameful racist tradition.”
Attempts to demonize Columbus are misguided. The holiday is a uniquely American holiday in that Columbus's expeditions are directly related to our history as a nation. The idea is not to promote him as a perfect man. Celebrating the beginning of our story is patriotic. Americans should have a sense of their own history and it basically begins with Columbus.
Are there some negative aspects to Columbus? Absolutely. We can study them in school, but we don't need to undo the holiday. If we require perfection in the people we remember, we won't remember anyone.
Needs to be repeated.
Biggest problem with Columbus Day is there is not enough drinking involved
And I don't get the day off
Says who? It's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't get enough to drink!
I didn't see any Columbus Day beer sales, but my refrigerator stays stocked