Quantcast The Johns Hopkins News-Letter
College Media Network

News-Letter

Current Issue:

University closes doors to Confederate remembrance

Abstract:
Every January for 20 years, Hopkins has rented a room in Shriver Hall to the Sons of Confederate Veterans for a reception after their celebration of Southern Civil War rebel leaders Robert E. Lee and Thomas Jackson in Wyman Park. This January, however, Hopkins is ending this practice....

J. Stephen Conn

posted 12/05/08 @ 12:32 PM EST

For generations the University campuses of America were bastions of free speech, openness and tolerance. Now they are bowing at the altar of political correctness. As a proud descendent of numerous Confederate veterans, and as a Southerner who has a long record as a civil rights activist, going back to the early 1960s, it saddens me to see the close mindedness of John Hopkins University officials who have shut their doors to my compatriots.
Post a reply to this comment

Billy G. Greaser

posted 12/05/08 @ 12:49 PM EST

Sad as it may be, looks like John Hopkins University has gone ignorant and are attempting to become "politically correct" like the rest of the country. Probably has become infiltrated with Yankee liberals like so many of our colleges today. But I assure you, John Hopkins has way bigger problems than the SCV displaying the Confederate Battle Flag on campus just over their horizon. With their tuition fees ranking as some of the very highest in the US, and the US economy in the ditch for apparently years to come, Hopkins' administrators may in the future be happy for anyone to visit their campus for any reason, including an education.
Post a reply to this comment

Terry Ayers

posted 12/05/08 @ 7:04 PM EST

Can you imagine the outrage if Hopkins University had refused to rent the room to the NAACP or a Native American group? Hopkins is being selective in its prejudice and quite frankly there are laws against such things. It is unfortunate that while diversity is celebrated on campus, it is being discouraged by these discriminatory acts.
Post a reply to this comment

Elliott Cummings

posted 12/05/08 @ 7:43 PM EST

Someone once said that eventually Confederate descendents will become like the early Christians and be forced to honor their Confederate ancestors in secret in catacombs. This unjust decision by Hopkins unfortunately moves that day a little closer
Post a reply to this comment

Elliott Cummings

posted 12/05/08 @ 7:54 PM EST

So far, Hopkins has invented five different excuses, expressed to different people, for their disgraceful action:


1 . We are a "Confederate" organization.

2. Hopkins is conducting a review of all rentals, not singling out the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

This was probably Hopkins? most transparent subterfuge.


3. The General Lee and General Jackson Ceremony is "offensive. "

4. The General Lee and General Jackson Ceremony is near MLK Day.

I guess they couldn?t figure out that this was an accident of history.

5. We don't want the Confederate Battle Flag on Campus



I can hardly wait to hear excuse 6 , 7, and 8.
Post a reply to this comment

Elliott Cummings

posted 12/05/08 @ 8:02 PM EST

So far, Hopkins has invented five different excuses, expressed to different people, for their disgraceful action:


1 . We are a "Confederate" organization.

2. Hopkins is conducting a review of all rentals, not singling out the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

This was probably Hopkins? most transparent subterfuge.


3. The General Lee and General Jackson Ceremony is "offensive. "

4. The General Lee and General Jackson Ceremony is near MLK Day.

I guess they couldn?t figure out that this was an accident of history.

5. We don't want the Confederate Battle Flag on Campus

I can hardly wait to hear excuse 6 , 7, and 8.
Post a reply to this comment

Donald Steven Smith

posted 12/05/08 @ 8:21 PM EST

At the risk of making an incorrect assumption, I will guess that the two students quoted in the article as objecting to the use of Shriver Hall by the SCV for a post-event reception do not have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy. They might not have even had ancestors that were in this country at the time the War was fought. This is not a criticism, merely an observation. Certainly it might explain their indifference, or even their hatred, of Confederate heritage. Perhaps if they had a Confederate ancestor in their background and were not self-hating, they might understand the motivations of those of us who choose to celebrate our heritage.

As I grew to manhood, I found many instance when my views differed greatly from those of my Father. We often had very spirited arguments about a number of issues, both great and small. Yet, I loved, honored and respected him while he lived and continue to do so now that he is gone.

I'm also certain that if I were able to speak to my ancestors, the differences we would find between us might grow exponentially with each generation. Does this mean that I should disrespect them or even despise them for our differences? No, it does not. I have the advantage of hindsight that my ancestors did not. Future generations are likely to differ from us in very fundamental ways. I certainly hope they are more forgiving of our flaws than we seem to be toward our predecessors.
Post a reply to this comment

Christopher J Evans

posted 12/06/08 @ 12:24 PM EST

What a wonderful and well written post Mr. Smith. It's definitely one to save and pass on to others. Thank you.
Post a reply to this comment

Enough with zenophobia and nativism

posted 12/08/08 @ 6:35 PM EST

Originally posted by

Donald Steven Smith

 At the risk of making an incorrect assumption, I will guess that the two students quoted in the article as objecting to the use of Shriver Hall by the SCV for a post-event reception do not have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy. They might not have even had ancestors that were in this country at the time the War was fought. This is not a criticism, merely an observation. Certainly it might explain their indifference, or even their hatred, of Confederate heritage. Perhaps if they had a Confederate ancestor in their background and were not self-hating, they might understand the motivations of those of us who choose to celebrate our heritage.

As I grew to manhood, I found many instance when my views differed greatly from those of my Father. We often had very spirited arguments about a number of issues, both great and small. Yet, I loved, honored and respected him while he lived and continue to do so now that he is gone.

I'm also certain that if I were able to speak to my ancestors, the differences we would find between us might grow exponentially with each generation. Does this mean that I should disrespect them or even despise them for our differences? No, it does not. I have the advantage of hindsight that my ancestors did not. Future generations are likely to differ from us in very fundamental ways. I certainly hope they are more forgiving of our flaws than we seem to be toward our predecessors.


Even if it is just an observation that the people quoted might not have had ancestors in the country at the time of the Civil War, why make it. Why is it even a topic of discussion who there ancestors were or where they are from.
Post a reply to this comment

Donald Steven Smith

posted 12/09/08 @ 8:17 AM EST

Originally posted by

Donald Steven Smith

 At the risk of making an incorrect assumption, I will guess that the two students quoted in the article as objecting to the use of Shriver Hall by the SCV for a post-event reception do not have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy. They might not have even had ancestors that were in this country at the time the War was fought. This is not a criticism, merely an observation. Certainly it might explain their indifference, or even their hatred, of Confederate heritage. Perhaps if they had a Confederate ancestor in their background and were not self-hating, they might understand the motivations of those of us who choose to celebrate our heritage.

As I grew to manhood, I found many instance when my views differed greatly from those of my Father. We often had very spirited arguments about a number of issues, both great and small. Yet, I loved, honored and respected him while he lived and continue to do so now that he is gone.

I'm also certain that if I were able to speak to my ancestors, the differences we would find between us might grow exponentially with each generation. Does this mean that I should disrespect them or even despise them for our differences? No, it does not. I have the advantage of hindsight that my ancestors did not. Future generations are likely to differ from us in very fundamental ways. I certainly hope they are more forgiving of our flaws than we seem to be toward our predecessors.


At the risk of making another point that is not an allowable "topic of discussion" according to the arbiter of correct thought (free country?); I mentioned the mere possibility of their ancestry impacting their point of view because I'd prefer to think this than the alternative. That being that they are simply intolerant anti-Southern bigots.
Post a reply to this comment

B. B. Blythe

posted 12/05/08 @ 9:32 PM EST

As a member of the SCV and the Color Sgt. of my camp I was there last year holding our flag I marched in the small parade I stood at attention while the dedications were made when it was over I went with many to a reception at Shriver hall had refreshments visited with many of my old friends used the rest room and said adieu and went home just like everybody else where did that offend anybody Why I carry that flag ( the battle Flag) is because I have GGGrandfathers that fought under that Flag all my family is from Maryland and Virginia some of them got here in the 1600's way befor the Civil War I carry that flag to show respect for them and my fellow members of the SCV its my job I don't hold any hate or any misgivings of any kind towards John Hopkins or any one in Baltimore. That Flag isn't the only Flag we carry we carry the United States Flag...the Maryland Flag and a lot of others the whole purpose of our assembly is to show respect for our ancesters and our Country our freedom to do just that I'm really sorry the leaders Of the college don't feel the same way all those men on both sides fought so we could .. so we will continue to show them we will not forget
Post a reply to this comment

Christopher Cummins

posted 12/05/08 @ 11:23 PM EST

It is interesting to note that the names quoted in the article were names that are not of the founding the stock of this country. Where are the voices of the Scottish, Irish, English, Italian, French, etc., at Hopkins? Have they been pounded into silence? Can not European Americans, espcially, those with Southron roots, have equal rights and equal tolerance? Tis a shame and a sad day for these united States. Sic Semper Tyrannis
Post a reply to this comment

Disgusted by bigotry

posted 12/08/08 @ 4:44 PM EST

Originally posted by

Christopher Cummins

 It is interesting to note that the names quoted in the article were names that are not of the founding the stock of this country. Where are the voices of the Scottish, Irish, English, Italian, French, etc., at Hopkins? Have they been pounded into silence? Can not European Americans, espcially, those with Southron roots, have equal rights and equal tolerance? Tis a shame and a sad day for these united States. Sic Semper Tyrannis


Mr. Cummins, why should someone's ancestry affect the legitimacy of their views? Last time I checked, the United States of America was a country where it wasn't one's ancestry that mattered but the content of their charecter.
Post a reply to this comment

Leopold Bloom

posted 12/06/08 @ 12:48 AM EST

Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.
Post a reply to this comment

JosephineSouthern

posted 12/06/08 @ 1:09 AM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


What does that have to do with us honoring our ancestors? We as citizens are entitled. Your problem is systemic hatred of the South inbred in you from birth.

Everybody knows it because the truth of the matter is the victors destroyed our Constitution. Hamilton's Living Constitution won out, might doesn't always make right, the living constitution can be written by the powers that be anyway they choose, and interpreted by the activist judges anyway they choose. Any reliable book on the subject will tell you that. The Confederate States of America was fighting with all their heart and soul, and all their treasure for their freedom in their SECOND WAR OF INDEPENDENCE. I honor that and I am proud of them. I am also, proud of those that lived through it and rebuilt the South with their sweat and toil just as their forefathers did. We were made poor, our men dead, our crops destroyed, our cities and farms laid waste, the struggle to recover was hard and lasted a very long time. We didn't make friends with the invaders until WWII when we began to overcome our poverty. I carry the Confederate Battle Flag for them as well. These are MY PEOPLE you are trashing and I don't appreciate it one bit, if you want to meet me outside I will be there in one New York Minute.
Post a reply to this comment

Elliott Cummings

posted 12/06/08 @ 4:07 AM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.



Neither General Lee, President Davis or any other high ranking Confederate officer or official was ever tried for treason. The U.S. knew that secession was Constitutional and that they could loss in any Court proceeding,


In addition , Confederate Veterans are recognized under the laws of the United States. They are entitled headstones from the VA and had commemorative stamp issued for them circa 1950.
Post a reply to this comment

J Kyle Jones

posted 12/06/08 @ 10:31 AM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


I note that Hopkins defends its bigotry by stating that they are a private institution and can ,as such, discriminate against anyone the choose. Do they not recieve taxpayer dollars and according to the record, are in fact discrimination is against American veterans?
Quoting from the United States Statutes at Large, Volume 72, Part 1, Pages 133-134, "By Federal act of Congress (May 23, 1958) all Confederate veterans are United States Military Veterans, and deserve all the rights and honors pertinent to such service. **They are thus not only recognized as United States citizens, but fully as a Federally-recognized member of the United States Military (with Veterans status) as well.**"

I now pose one question for every Citizen and Veteran. Should we deny these United States Veterans from the South the honor they deserve?
About the comment " the south lost the war". America lost the war! The south was defending the constitution and the same principles the founding fathers fought for. The Marxist government you live under today is a direct result of the South loosing its bid for self governance. You are now a TAX SLAVE as a result. Its called brainwashing! have a Dixie day
J Kyle Jones
Post a reply to this comment

Eddie Inman

posted 12/06/08 @ 12:23 PM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


Amazing arrogrance and misinformation, considering that not one Southron was convicted of treason. Jefferson languished in prison 3 years, charged with treason for 4, while federal prosecutors attempted to construct a case. They found it quite impossible. For a country established by secession, it is ludicrous to point fingers and declare secession illegal. States like Virginia, New York, Rhose Island had written into their constitutionnratification documents the right to resume the powers of government granted to the federal government. They wqere duly accespted and recorded by the Constitutional Convention.
Post a reply to this comment

Terry

posted 12/06/08 @ 2:57 PM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


Sir,
Your comments, and apparent lack of understanding of the Constitution, clearly illustrate why Hopkins should allow divergent views to be represented on campus.

Amendment X of the Bill of rights states:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people".

There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting States from seceding. T
his explains why no one in the Confederate Government was ever convicted
of Treason.
Post a reply to this comment

Christopher Smith

posted 12/06/08 @ 7:49 PM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


And you sir are a coward with a liberal agenda hiding behind a college that only wants your MONEY. Out in the WORLD (IF you get a job) you will have to deal with people who do not share your views and you will simply have to SHUT UP and keep your POISON in your self where it will eventaully kill you. Sucks to be a coward. I GUESS LOL!
Post a reply to this comment

Eddie Hightower

posted 12/06/08 @ 7:51 PM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


"LEGACY OF TREASON"???
How can that be?
The States which seceeded had a perfect moral and constitutional right to do so.
The new nation was the Confederate States of America.
And the two nations existed, and live in peace, until the Union invaded the Confederate States of America.
Since when is defending one's nation from a military attack from another twisted into being TREASON???
Political Incorrectness [so-called political correctness] is beyond reason. And almost treason, in itself.
Post a reply to this comment

D. A. Anthony

posted 12/07/08 @ 10:35 AM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.



I see that many of my fellow Southerners have already pointed out to you your apparent lack of knowledge of unvarnished American history, so I will not repeat their historically accurate and easily varifiable facts. The fact that a university such as John Hopkins would have so many students and faculty ignorant in American history is a sad statement for American education and the success of revisionist indoctrination that poses as public education in America.

Let me simply provide you with a quote by Congressman Abraham Lincoln of Illinois from a speech he made in the U.S. Congress on January 12, 1848, regarding the constitutional right of secession by the States:

"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right--a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit."

Those are future-President Lincoln's own words. Does this sound as though it is a condemnation of the American right of "government with the consent of the governed?" The right of secession has always been, and continues to be, one of the foundational building blocks upon which this Republic was constructed.


"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right--a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit."
Post a reply to this comment

Kevin Wright

posted 12/07/08 @ 1:33 PM EST

"With malice towards none and charity to all..." Abraham Lincoln, words of reconciliation, 1865

Most of the Confederate soldiers renounced the oath of loyalty to the Confederacy, and had their full citizenship rights restored. Would you seek to call this treason? The SCV does not re-fight the War of Northern Agression, the SCV merely recalls the true facts and honors the memory of brave heroes by, among other things, celebrating the reconciliation.
Post a reply to this comment

Max Basford

posted 12/07/08 @ 2:11 PM EST

Abraham Lincoln stated:


"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better."

I suppose he decided the Confederacy didn't have the power, so he denied them the right.
Post a reply to this comment

Kim Drapkin

posted 12/07/08 @ 3:59 PM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


I have read much of what has been written in response to your statement. I do think you need an education in what defines treason. President George W. Bush could easily be tried for treason. President Jefferson Davis could not. Use some of those research skills you have learned to check this out.

Using those skills, check on how President Abraham Lincoln treated the state of Maryland. Use source documents, as any secondary sources are unreliable, even some of the best written studies of the Civil War. I suggest you start with the Cherokee Declaration of Causes. This document was written in 1861, and was as clear a statement of the causes of the war as I have ever read. Take a look

PS I used to be a devout Unionist, too. Then I learned my history.
Post a reply to this comment

Hoss Ritenour

posted 12/09/08 @ 5:10 PM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


It is apparent that you are lacking in your education and maybe this
college should teach the facts. At the singing of the constitution the
states reserved the right to remove themselves from the union if it
didnot fulfill their needs. Why do you think that no confederate leader
was tried for TREASON.
Post a reply to this comment

Bill Watson

posted 12/09/08 @ 9:38 PM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


I am a proud member of the Sons of Conferate Veterans and I am very proud of my GG grandfather who fought for the Confederate States of America. I am sick and tired of all the pollitically correct ,racist and discriminatory statements and actions made by people who do not know and do not want to know and refuse to learn the true history of The War Between the States. They were certainly NOT TRAITORS'and it was NOT TREASON' Any one who thinks it was needs to learn the true history of why the war happened and the real truth about slavery . A good place to start is THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION'
Post a reply to this comment

David

posted 2/04/09 @ 10:51 AM EST

Originally posted by

Leopold Bloom

 Call it what you want; you are representing a legacy of treason to the United States. Congratulations!

p.s. the south lost the war. just a heads up.


What can one say when a simpleton makes a statement with no knowledge of the subject. Move on troll.
Post a reply to this comment

Terry A

posted 12/06/08 @ 7:40 AM EST

"If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not a rebellion. His [Jefferson Davis] capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason."

-- Salmon P. Chase, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, 1867
Post a reply to this comment

Elliott Cummings

posted 12/06/08 @ 8:13 AM EST

Originally posted by

Terry A

 "If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not a rebellion. His [Jefferson Davis] capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason."

-- Salmon P. Chase, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, 1867



That is a very important qoute Terry. Thank you for recalling it.


There is a monument to Sidney Lanier , poet of the Confederacy and Confederate prisoner at Point Lookout , on the Hopkins campus..

I wonder if, in accordance with Hopkins' anti Confederate policy, President Brody will get out the Hopkins forklift brigade and remove it. Perhaps he could get some help from the obviously uniformed English and History Departments.
Post a reply to this comment

Valerie Protopapas

posted 12/06/08 @ 9:26 AM EST

Let me get this straight... for 20 years, the University had no trouble whatsoever renting a room to these organizations. For 20 years the University acknowledged the worthiness of men who were heroes to such notables as Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Harry Truman, George Patton and Winston Churchill - to name just a few. For 20 years, the University has no problem with the display of a noble flag displayed by freedom fighters in Eastern Europe under the Soviet yoke as well as by many American soldiers going into battle on behalf of this nation.

Now, suddenly what had been totally acceptable for 20 years is to be censored as an horrendous blot on the escutcheon of the University that needs to be blotted from the campus. What happened? Certainly, the University which (ostensibly) stands for intellectual freedom cannot have adopted the mindset that led to book burnings in Nazi Germany and the gulag for Russian intellectuals in the old Soviet Union! I do not wish to believe that - but, alas, it seems to be true. Whether through fear of the routine extortion practiced by race-mongering hate groups or through a politically correct mindset among Johns Hopkins "leadership" that brooks no viewpoint other than the accepted "orthodoxy" - however false and mendacious - it appears, alas, that another bastion of academia has fallen prey to the Marxist machinations of political correctness. Sad, really, but something that free men have come to expect in his ruinous culture.
Post a reply to this comment

Valerie Protopapas

posted 12/06/08 @ 9:33 AM EST

Let me get this straight... for 20 years, the University had no trouble whatsoever renting a room to these organizations. For 20 years the University acknowledged the worthiness of men who were heroes to such notables as Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Harry Truman, George Patton and Winston Churchill - to name just a few. For 20 years, the University has no problem with the display of a noble flag displayed by freedom fighters in Eastern Europe under the Soviet yoke as well as by many American soldiers going into battle on behalf of this nation.

Now, suddenly what had been totally acceptable for 20 years is to be censored as an horrendous blot on the escutcheon of the University that needs to be blotted from the campus. What happened? Certainly, the University which (ostensibly) stands for intellectual freedom cannot have adopted the mindset that led to book burnings in Nazi Germany and the gulag for Russian intellectuals in the old Soviet Union! I do not wish to believe that - but, alas, it seems to be true. Whether through fear of the routine extortion practiced by race-mongering hate groups or through a politically correct mindset among Johns Hopkins "leadership" that brooks no viewpoint other than the accepted "orthodoxy" - however false and mendacious - it appears, alas, that another bastion of academia has fallen prey to the Marxist machinations of political correctness. Sad, really, but something that free men have come to expect in his ruinous culture.
Post a reply to this comment

Gene Henley

posted 12/06/08 @ 10:30 AM EST

I have moved from Lansdowne,Md. to Ohio. Thence to New York
I`m a member of the New York Constutution Paqrty and an officer.
I`m speaking in behalf of myself. Should the NAACP rent, I say YES!
Should any organization which does not promote bigotry,violence,or
intentional disrespect, I also say rent to them.
I lived long enough in Mareyland to have a deep respect of Hopkins as
a center of learning. Yet,now I find what appears to be a display of
PC bigotry to the SCV. What offense have they done? What disrespect?
What acts of bigotry?
If they have,then what?
At your service
Gene Henley
Post a reply to this comment

Greg Stewart

posted 12/06/08 @ 11:49 AM EST

Thanks for the update Leo. We know our ancestors lost the war, we spent two genrations rebuilding the towns, railroads, and whatever was laid waste in their path. If it is okay with you, we would like to toast our great great grand parent's heroic effort in defense of a vicious invasion that caused enorous loss of life for 4 years and suffering for years after. If you are a student of history and government you might know that in 1860 and 1861 the Christian population of the states desiring to peaceably leave the union they peaceably joined actually took the time to legally secede. (Almost how West Virginia did from Virginia, but not quite!) However, at some point Might makes Right and that is ultimately what happened. "Treason" would have been to stay within the Union and work actively against it in favor of an outside, hostile force. There is a distinct difference that is unfortunately lost on people who otherwise are fairly intelligent. For the record, following the subjugation, our ancestors have served honorably against all outside forces in any number of forays into other nations to "spread democracy", keep the peace, show them a thing or two......many times just whatever our Yankee Big Brothers got us into. No treason here.

So, we have "gotten over it", to borrow a phrase and to answer you. Have you gotten over it? If you join the chorus against the flag, a simple banner, does that absolve you of the darknesss in your own soul? What could be threatening to anyone for people to take a day out of the year in honor and remembrance? When the public cries out for the televison companies to quit clogging the channels with different sorts of progaramming that robs us all of dignity, we are told to turn the channel, just don't watch it. If the sight of a Confederate Flag is so ugly to you, could you just take that same tack? Or, is it as I suspect most, not the flag at all, but just plain me that is abhorrent?

Johns Hopkins is guilty of bigotry. They can make all the excuses they want but it is clear. I visited ther this summer to pick up my son from a People to People Program (we are MS residents). What kind of school has a lacrosse team but no football? The administrators have shown to me that they are too shallow and small minded to be graced with our presence.
Post a reply to this comment

T. Joseph Funk

posted 12/06/08 @ 11:58 AM EST

As a former student at Johns Hopkins Homewood Campus I find this refusal to rent to the SCV deplorable. As others have said here; Where is the openess and tolerance that supposedly belongs on a university campus?

My family has been on this continent since 1635, landing at Jamestown. During the Civil War I had 23 relatives fighting for the Confederacy, and 4 fighting for the Union. They all made sacrifices that, quite apparently, the Administration at Hopkins (and some students) cannot comprehend. Today I honor all of those ancestors, from the North and the South, equally.

As has been pointed out elsewhere in these posts, they are all United States Veterans and are entitled to and deserving of the honor and respect that comes with that status. I suspect that the only place on the Hopkins Campus that is understood may be in the ROTC Corps. That is, of course, assuming that the University allows the ROTC Corps to express their position.

If this decision is allowed to stand I, for one, can no longer respect nor support Johns Hopkins University.

T. Joseph Funk
Post a reply to this comment

Martin Jones

posted 12/06/08 @ 12:17 PM EST

Without exception, those who complain and rant against the South and the Confederacy do so out of gross ignorance. They are grossly ignorant, bigoted, and arrogant on a subject they know nothing about. They have no desire to learn the truth, they prefer to wallow in their ignorance. The truth is easy to learn, but they have no interest in it.
Post a reply to this comment

David Hammett

posted 12/06/08 @ 1:07 PM EST

So discriminating against one group makes the world a fairer more tolerant place?

9th generation Marylander, member of the Sons of the American Revolution and member and Past Commander of the Maryland Division of the Sons of Confederate Veteran.
Post a reply to this comment

Elliott Cummings

posted 12/06/08 @ 1:09 PM EST

Thanks to all those who have posted to show their disagreement with this bigoted decision by Hopkins.

I can assure each of you that regardless of this unjust action by Hopkins against our Confederate Heritage, the General Lee and General Jackson Birthday Ceremony will be held on Saturday, January 17, 2009 at 11:00 a.m. at the Lee and Jackson double equestrian monument in Wyman Park. Please try to join us.

This affront by Johns Hopkins University provides those of us who understand and respect our American history an opportunity to show the Confederate colors in a positive and honorable way. Bring every Confederate flag you own, Battle, 1st National, 2nd National, 3rd National, Bonnie Blue, State flags, unit flags, and SCV Camp Confederate flags.

In case Hopkins, or anyone else thought otherwise, our Federal friends in blue and the Stars and Stripes are always welcome. In addition, the flag of the United States will be carried by all Sons of Confederate Veterans Color Guards at the event.
Post a reply to this comment

Clyde Magee

posted 12/06/08 @ 2:22 PM EST

It is a fact that the First American Revolution was fought over taxes.

It is a fact that the 2nd American Revolution was fought over taxes.

It is a fact the incoming Lincoln party passed a 50% tarriff.

It is a fact the South left the Union for this reason.

It is a fact the bore a major portion of these taxes.

It is a fact the Confederacy passed a 10% tarriff for its revenue.

It is a fact that business in the North couldn't let the South go.

It is a fact ships were sent to Charleston to provoke the South.

It is a fact secesstion was legal.

It is a fact 600,000+ Americans died to force the South to stay.

It is a fact the South was fighting for freedom and liberty.

It is a fact that the war resulted in the end of slavery.

It is a fact that it was not a cause of the war.

It is a fact that high taxes was the cause of the war.

It is a fact that the winner gets to define the cause.

It is a fact that the loser was the South and the Constitution.
Post a reply to this comment

R M Bragg

posted 12/06/08 @ 4:09 PM EST

"Not for fame or reward
Not for place or for rank
Not lured by ambition
Or goaded by necessity
But in simple
Obedience to duty
As they understood it
These men suffered all
Sacrificed all
Dared all - and died."

by The Rev'd Randolph McKim of Baltimore, Confederate veteran

The War between the States was the great American tragedy. There were both scoundrels and good and decent men on both sides. To honor the self-sacrifice and courage of those who were ultimately unsuccessful in their struggle denigrates no one. To refuse to allow the SCV to hold their ceremony is an act of graceless discourteous bigotry.
Post a reply to this comment

Linda Atwell

posted 12/06/08 @ 4:26 PM EST

It is always a sad day when an institution of higher learning decides to become a racist institution rather than continue to uphold the ideas under which they were founded -- to teach & enrich the minds of their students in a fair and unbias manner.

Being a descendant of numerous Confederate soldiers who fought to protect their families and homes, there is absolutely NO reason for Dr. Brody, his staff or Johns Hopkins, et al to deny the rental of this room to the Sons of Confederate Veterans whether it's the 1st year or the 20th year. I would hope that the recent national elections did not have any weight on this decision!!

What did the Confederate flag ever do to them?????? They need to reconsider their decision and show that they are worthy of further respect; otherwise, you can bet that my 3 grandsons who are in their teens will definitely not attend a school that does not respect the southern history of this country.
Post a reply to this comment

Michele Carrington

posted 12/06/08 @ 5:25 PM EST

Imagine the national outrage if a member of the Islamic faith, atheists, NAACP,SCLC SPLC, ACLU, virtually any group on the politically correct list was denied the room. A university should teach accurate history and everyone would be a lot more content. Considering Hopkin's failure in this area, read The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Dr. Thomas E. Woods Jr./Harvard and Columbia University. As for the two students quoted, would it be fair to assume they don't have a horse in this race?
Post a reply to this comment

A concerned student

posted 12/06/08 @ 11:08 PM EST

Originally posted by

Michele Carrington

 Imagine the national outrage if a member of the Islamic faith, atheists, NAACP,SCLC SPLC, ACLU, virtually any group on the politically correct list was denied the room. A university should teach accurate history and everyone would be a lot more content. Considering Hopkin's failure in this area, read The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Dr. Thomas E. Woods Jr./Harvard and Columbia University. As for the two students quoted, would it be fair to assume they don't have a horse in this race?


I find it funny that we all speak of the Confederacy as it were some organization. Last time I checked, the Confederacy was a rebel nation that broke away from the Union. More importantly, it was led by rich southern plantation owners who cared more about their money and keeping their slaves than they did about the plight of the poor white farmer. The Civil War, on the confederate side, was a rich man's war fought by the poor man. Also, unlike the NAACP, the Confederate constitution enshrined the doctrine that all men were not created equal by our Lord and that the black man was beneath the white man. Not sure I would want to celebrate a heritage like that.
Now I think we should let the son's and daughters of the conf. march through Hopkins. Not only will it show the Hopkin's community how ridiculous they are but it will also prove that bigotry is not dead.
Post a reply to this comment

JosephineSouthern

posted 12/07/08 @ 5:24 AM EST

Originally posted by

Michele Carrington

 Imagine the national outrage if a member of the Islamic faith, atheists, NAACP,SCLC SPLC, ACLU, virtually any group on the politically correct list was denied the room. A university should teach accurate history and everyone would be a lot more content. Considering Hopkin's failure in this area, read The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Dr. Thomas E. Woods Jr./Harvard and Columbia University. As for the two students quoted, would it be fair to assume they don't have a horse in this race?


This one too, Just out "The Politically Incorrect Guide" to the Civil War by H. W. Crocker III.

Some say the South fought to extend slavery: p 8 Extending Slavery? Jefferson Davis believed the phrase "the extension of slavery" - used by Northerners to besmirch Southern motives - was a "most fallacious expression" The South had never sought to extend slavery., he said.

Au Contraire:

"The questions was merely whether the slaveholder should be permitted to go with his slaves, into territory (the common property of all) into which the non-slaveholder could go with his property of any sort. There was no proposal nor desire on the part of the Southern States to reopen the slave trade, which they had been foremost in suppressing, or to add to the number of slaves...Indeed, if emancipation was the end to be desired, the dispersion of the negroes over a wider area among additional Territories, eventually to become States, and in climates unfavorable to slave labor, instead of hindering, would have promoted this object by diminishing the difficulties in the way of ultimate emancipation."

I had come to this conclusion on my own when I ran across a memo from Lincoln to the Governors of the Western states, wherein he promised them not to worry, the negroes would be "bottled up" in the South. I thought about all the experiences they were denied, because the South was kept as a poor colony to keep em down on the farm.

It must have really rankled to know that their fathers not that long ago had won the King's War for Independence, had conquered the wilderness, built towns and cities and railroads, had made farms from old fields, had written and ratified a Constitution and a Bill of Rights for a central governmnet, and now are denied the right to move with their family of slaves to any where in this country.
Post a reply to this comment

D. A. Anthony

posted 12/07/08 @ 10:59 AM EST

Originally posted by

Michele Carrington

 Imagine the national outrage if a member of the Islamic faith, atheists, NAACP,SCLC SPLC, ACLU, virtually any group on the politically correct list was denied the room. A university should teach accurate history and everyone would be a lot more content. Considering Hopkin's failure in this area, read The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Dr. Thomas E. Woods Jr./Harvard and Columbia University. As for the two students quoted, would it be fair to assume they don't have a horse in this race?



You are missing the point of the article. The article refers to the Sons of Confederate Veterans--an "organization"--being prohibited from using the meeting hall at John Hopkins because the SCV's role is to honor the sacrifices of the Confederate soldier. Surely such bigotry and discrimination aimed at other "organizations" such as the NAACP, SPLC, and others named above would not be tolerated. Therefore comparing the SCV to "organizations" that honor other segments of society is entirely appropriate in these comments.

The vast majority of the SCV members of whatever race (this is not exclusively a "white men's club," but has members of all races, colors, and creeds)are descendents of Confederate servicemen, who, as previously mentioned, have been declared by the U.S. Congress to be "American military veterans" who are entitled to all the honors of any other American military veteran, including, but not limited to, V.A. headstones for their gravesites.

When the uneducated or historically ignorant members of American society decide to attack our Confederate ancestors who are no longer capable of defending their own names, it is left to us--their descendants--to defend their honor and their Cause on their behalf.
Post a reply to this comment

Clyde Magee

posted 12/08/08 @ 5:10 PM EST

Originally posted by

Michele Carrington

 Imagine the national outrage if a member of the Islamic faith, atheists, NAACP,SCLC SPLC, ACLU, virtually any group on the politically correct list was denied the room. A university should teach accurate history and everyone would be a lot more content. Considering Hopkin's failure in this area, read The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Dr. Thomas E. Woods Jr./Harvard and Columbia University. As for the two students quoted, would it be fair to assume they don't have a horse in this race?

Concerned Student, Why don't you post your name? I had four great-grandfathers, none of whom owned any slaves, that fought to defend their family and state from the invading Union Army. When Mississippi's convention met to vote on secession, my county here in Mississppi along with most of the other counties with very few slaves voted overwhelmingly to leave the Union. The majority of the counties with large plantations voted to remain in the Union. You need to study history and not be told by the winners, what you should believe. In the end the South will be vindicated for standing up for freedom & liberty.
Post a reply to this comment

Anonymous

posted 12/06/08 @ 5:59 PM EST

To those of you who are venting here about JHU's decision:

Since many of you seem to suggest that the underlying issue here is that 1st Amendment rights (i.e. the freedom of speech) were violated, why not leak the news to the media outside the university? And have you considered organizing a more formal protest as a response?
Post a reply to this comment

Elliott Cummings

posted 12/06/08 @ 6:07 PM EST

Originally posted by

Anonymous

 To those of you who are venting here about JHU's decision:

Since many of you seem to suggest that the underlying issue here is that 1st Amendment rights (i.e. the freedom of speech) were violated, why not leak the news to the media outside the university? And have you considered organizing a more formal protest as a response?


It was already in the "Baltimore Sun"

Baltimore "Sun" article, Re: Hopkins, Thursday. November 20, 2008

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/education/bal-md.confederacy20nov20,0,5354741.story
Post a reply to this comment

JHU student

posted 12/06/08 @ 6:56 PM EST

I disagree vehemently with those who think the Southern Confederacy is worth celebrating.

Nonetheless, I am a firm believer in free speech. Hopkins is well within its legal rights keeping the SCV off campus because the university is a private institution. But they should still respect free speech even if they aren't legally required to do so. Even if a group's viewpoint is vile, it should be allowed to express that viewpoint. As Thomas Jefferson said:

"If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it."
Post a reply to this comment

Valerie Protopapas

posted 12/07/08 @ 9:54 AM EST

Originally posted by

JHU student

 I disagree vehemently with those who think the Southern Confederacy is worth celebrating.

Nonetheless, I am a firm believer in free speech. Hopkins is well within its legal rights keeping the SCV off campus because the university is a private institution. But they should still respect free speech even if they aren't legally required to do so. Even if a group's viewpoint is vile, it should be allowed to express that viewpoint. As Thomas Jefferson said:

"If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it."


Johns Hopkins is not "within its rights" because though it is a private institution, it receives government funding and I'm certain that had it acted in the same way against a minority group, the University would soon have found the full force of government taking issue with the decision. As it is, there are regulations regarding the treatment of memorial celebrations for "American" veterans and Confederate soldiers have been found to be such by the United States government.

Secondly, it was not the South that "overthrew the Republic" but the North. The South wished to continue with the Republic as defined by Jefferson and Madison whereas the power structure in the North wished a Hamiltonian Empire with a strong federal government, a fascistic relationship between government and business and reduced rights accruing to the sovereign states and the people.

However,whatever the debate about the constitutionality of secession, no apologist for the North has ever pretended that Lincoln had the constitutional right to wage war against the South, to commit countless war crimes in the prosecution of that war, to suspend habeas corpus and make war on the press in the North and all the other unconstitutional, illegal and tyrannous actions performed by the forces of the "Union" during the war.

Unfortunately, what is happening here is simply one more example of the Marxist system of political correctness being forced upon the culture in the effort to stifle debate and undermine what freedoms under the Constitution still remain. Sad to say, considering the comments I see here by so many who supposedly have been "educated" in our schools and universities, that doctrine has been and continues to be eminently successful.
Post a reply to this comment

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Advertisement

Advertisement