And, you live this so well in your life! NOT
We did, we corrected the problem, and continue to keep it corrected. And, we put into place things to tilt the balance of favoritism away from whites and towards minorities. Virtually no one today would see slavery as an acceptable practice. What more do you expect from people 150 years after it was ended?
It is my position and my belief that we must take the noble and honorable path of facing our guilt and not to hide from it.
It is an act of strength to take the guilt and the blame, and defensive denials are the weapons of weakness.
I want us all to be strong by acting strong instead of pretending strength through avoiding blame and guilt.
The white population can face up to our immoral past slavery of the Africans without falling apart.
Even for some who might believe that guilt is not deserved and that it is not our blame to carry and that is putting a load onto us that we do not deserve, then remember Jesus took the blame and the guilt of us all onto the cross and Jesus did not deserve it but it was His act of strong virtue that Jesus carried the guilt and He never denied it and He did not hide from it, and Jesus is the best example to follow.
You know whats funny is all these left wing bleeding heart liberals that keep spouting diversity, and how we need to imbrace it. I scratch my head, I look at the root word devide, and wonder how pointing out differences brings us together in any way? People that strive for unity always point out things we have in common so whats their real agenda?
I have given this post a lot of thought.
Of course I still stand by my previous postings as mine are correct and mine are true,
but I believe I do understand your point.
By comparing your idea with the 9-11 event - then Bin Laden and the 9-11 attackers are seen by many people as heroes and that the attackers are seen by many as died in honor and glory.
So seeing African slaves fighting a war for their American slave-masters can be viewed in that same way.
I see Jefferson Davis and his generals as all a disgrace until they surrendered or died, and I say to see them otherwise is to give an immoral support to traitors and racist bigots.
So I do not agree with your position but I do believe that I understand it quite completely.
Well you seem to have no resistance to putting blame and guilt onto Minister Farrakhan and the group he represents. Well I certainly do not want to be aligned with the white KLAN. 
I have known some and I read their literature and like the Nation of Islam and Minister Farrakhan, link HERE.
I would say it is a mistake to look at them based on the white perspective.
Would you knock off all the raceist garbageA call for a USA National apology for the African slavery is well explained HERE, link.
Oh but thats right you said you wouldnt be happy anywhere else.
Why do not the two compare the same?
I will explain:
The Southern rebels (1861) were fighting against the United States,
and the Al-Qaeda attackers (9-11) were fighting against the United States.
And now some people see the Southern terrorist as heroes,
and others see the 9-11 rebels as being their heroes too.
See the comparison is right there and so I do understand your point.
Your point that some people can and do see violent criminals as being their heroes.
I will explain:
The Southern rebels (1861) were fighting against the United States,
and the Al-Qaeda attackers (9-11) were fighting against the United States.
And now some people see the Southern terrorist as heroes,
and others see the 9-11 rebels as being their heroes too.
See the comparison is right there and so I do understand your point.
Your point that some people can and do see violent criminals as being their heroes.
I like that verse in the KJV,link HERE but most people interpret that verse incorrectly. My idea of hero is in Abe Lincoln.
Are you for real?
You might as well be, one's as bad as the other, which was my point. I suggest you get glasses and start looking at people as people, rather than the color of there skin!
This whole thread was just to try to stir people up!
Satan's kingdom is a kingdom of IMPIETY.
Nothing but sin goes on in his kingdom. Murder and heresy, lust and treachery, oppression and division--are the constant trade driven in his dominions.
To "lay down thy life" means like in marriage or becoming a Priest or Minister for life.
To go out and get one self killed is throwing thy life away. Laying down thy death not thy life.
To lay down one's life means to keep living in loyalty as in becoming a Priest or getting married for life.
To lay down the "lifetime" and not to lay down in death.
Some one jumps in front of danger and gets killed in saving another person is not really "love" at all and getting one self killed most certainly is not a "greater love" then committing thy life to living instead of to death.
That works for me, do not let me get to any of you. I am a pro at this stuff and no one can stand against me. 
In a sense he is winning. By engaging him in conversation and asking his opinion, giving him any attention at all, we make him what he is. Yes, I know I am one of the worst offenders at giving him any attention, but it's true. Without acknowledgement of his posts, we could demonstrate that he has no voice. He'll get progressively more beligerant, more astonishingly stupid - in effect he'll try harder to get our attention. and, then, he'll dry up and blow away.
What I posted was and still is correct.
That verse changes nothing.
The shephard would stay alive and keep the wolves away.
If the shephard laid down his life by getting killed then the sheep would be helpless against the wolves.
For a shephard to lay down their lives for their sheep then they must remain alive and watch over the flock day and night.
It is utterly ridiculous to believe that some one getting them self killed is an act of "greater love" while the one staying alive in a committed relationship is the lesser love.
