Confederate Grave, Part II. (Warning: dubious moral behavior mentioned)

[livetoread]

7 minutes ago, marbel said:

See, my feeling is, people here know that. This group does not need to be educated on this fact; people here talk about stuff like this often. I'd be quite stunned to see anyone here post "What?! I thought that feeling died with the Confederacy?!" 

I think, if you really want to educate people, it would do more to post it on your town Next Door group, or town Facebook page. I mean, I'm not suggesting you do that, but it would probably reach the right audience -- people who may be oblivious that this shit still goes on, right in their own city.

Yeah, everyone here knows it still goes on, but there is certainly no consensus on how important it is that it still goes on.

[Farrar]

I am a little surprised by the naivety about the intentions with this note. All the people defending it are defending an act of racism committed almost certainly by someone who is likely a member of an organization that's a hate group. The UDC literally does this still - they place flags, wreaths, notes, etc. - on the graves of veterans to prop up their cause. Their cause being... that it's sad that the confederacy lost and they were fighting a just battle.

Edited January 4, 2022 by Farrar

[WildflowerMom]

I can't believe they have stickers like that.  🤮😳😱

[MercyA]

1 hour ago, marbel said:

The only reason I can think of for sharing the note - and I hesitated for a long time to post this because I don't think this way at all about you Mercy, or Quill - is to show moral superiority to this person, and maybe engage in a little snark at this unknown person's expense.  So I am baffled. 

I honestly searched myself, marbel, and I don't think I'd share the note either to show moral superiority or to snark about it. I don't feel that way at all. I'd show it so people can see support for the confederacy and racism is real and happening right now. I'd post it for the same reason I posted that picture of the guy selling the Confederate flags at my small town's annual fair. This stuff is real.

There is nothing but denial about this in my circles. People honestly think BLM protestors, for example, are just complaining about old history. They think racism is a thing of the past.

I could probably say more and say it more eloquently, but I just woke up from a nap, my dog needs to go out, and then I need to head out for the afternoon. 🙂

In any case, marbel, I am always, always happy to hear your thoughts and value them greatly. 

Edited January 4, 2022 by MercyA

[Catwoman]

1 minute ago, Farrar said:

I am a little surprised by the naivety about the intentions with this note. All the people defending it are defending an act of racism committed almost certainly by someone who is likely a member of an organization that's a hate group. The UDC literally does this still - they place flags, wreaths, notes, etc. - on the graves of veterans to prop up their cause. Their cause being... that it's sad that the confederacy lost and they were fighting a just battle.

I don't think anyone is naive about the intentions of the card. I don't think any of us agrees with the sentiment expressed within it.

I think some of us are concerned about the idea of removing items from a person's grave. And it's not even like someone put a nasty note on Quill's great-grandfather's grave or something like that; she has absolutely no connection whatsoever to that Confederate soldier. If someone wanted to take the time to place a heartfelt message (in a card inside a sealed envelope) on that man's grave, I hardly think it's making a huge political statement that will be viewed by the masses. It was one person who wanted to pay her respects to that one deceased soldier. 

If that same woman had put a small bouquet on that same grave without a card, would it have been ok for Quill to have removed that, as well?

 

[maize]

My discomfort has more to do with taking something from a grave. Graves have a sanctity to me, and leaving things on or around a grave has spiritual overtones.

Removing something left in an apparently reverent spirit by another person feels sacrilegious. It doesn't matter how wrong I think their sentiment is; it wasn't being blasted to the world it was quietly contained in a card. 

It really is OK most of the time to let other people be wrong.

[Catwoman]

1 minute ago, maize said:

My discomfort has more to do with taking something from a grave. Graves have a sanctity to me, and leaving things on or around a grave has spiritual overtones.

Removing something left in an apparently reverent spirit by another person feels sacrilegious. It doesn't matter how wrong I think their sentiment is; it wasn't being blasted to the world it was quietly contained in a card. 

It really is OK most of the time to let other people be wrong.

Yes, that pretty much sums it up for me, too. 

 

[Bootsie]

18 minutes ago, Farrar said:

I am a little surprised by the naivety about the intentions with this note. All the people defending it are defending an act of racism committed almost certainly by someone who is likely a member of an organization that's a hate group. The UDC literally does this still - they place flags, wreaths, notes, etc. - on the graves of veterans to prop up their cause. Their cause being... that it's sad that the confederacy lost and they were fighting a just battle.

There is a difference in defending a person's views (which I have not seen anyone here do) and defending a person's right to express one's views, even if we disagree with them, especially when those views are written on a card and placed on a grave.

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, marbel said:

See, my feeling is, people here know that. This group does not need to be educated on this fact; people here talk about stuff like this often. I'd be quite stunned to see anyone here post "What?! I thought that feeling died with the Confederacy?!" 

I think, if you really want to educate people, it would do more to post it on your town Next Door group, or town Facebook page. I mean, I'm not suggesting you do that, but it would probably reach the right audience -- people who may be oblivious that this shit still goes on, right in their own city.

Not crazy enough to do that…I really might end up with someone standing in my bedroom with a gun. 

[Catwoman]

9 minutes ago, Quill said:

Not crazy enough to do that…I really might end up with someone standing in my bedroom with a gun. 

I have to admit that my first thought when that was suggested was, DON'T DO IT! THEY KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE! 

Some of the people on NextDoor are lunatics.

[marbel]

1 minute ago, Catwoman said:

I have to admit that my first thought when that was suggested was, DON'T DO IT! THEY KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE! 

Some of the people on NextDoor are lunatics.

That's why I said I wasn't suggesting she do it. 

[Catwoman]

1 minute ago, marbel said:

That's why I said I wasn't suggesting she do it. 

Oh, I know that! Sorry if I made it sound like you had. I was just joking with Quill because I am on NextDoor in my area, and some of the people post crazy stuff!   🙂

[Stacia]

1 hour ago, Quill said:

My feeling is, I want people to know this shit still goes on. This person still (STILL!) thinks confederate soldiers were “amazing” and “bravely fought the tyrants.”  And this person says they are committed to the “ongoing battle to honor” the confederate soldier’s memory.

I had to zoom in to see the top portion, where it reads, "Forever-Dixie".

Did the portion that's covered have her name? Because that's the part I find weird &, if so, think that she's looking to make connections (& not with the spiritual world) -- she wants to let other locals know her beliefs & is putting her name out there for other like-minded people.

1 hour ago, maize said:

Taking something someone else left on a grave because it was meaningful to them, and then posting and mocking that thing in public, feels pretty profoundly disrespectful of other humans to me.

This could be a whole separate conversation. When I read your post, my first thought was what about all the Black slaves who were buried in unmarked locations all over the place? Archaeologists are just now locating some of these burial areas. And not just slaves -- similar things happen all the time when there are new roads being built or foundations being dug where people find bones & archaeologists move in. Realistically we're probably walking on previous people all the time. What about people who are cremated & have their ashes scattered -- to become a part of the ground or sea? What about bodies that are left exposed for animals to consume (sky burials)? What about people who have their ashes shot into space? Is there less sanctity for any person because they are not in a specific, marked location? (A side note: What about roadside markers that people leave where a death happened yet nobody is buried?)

I am just musing about the (artificial?) societal bounds of marked graves & sanctity. I guess I feel like all the Earth (& space around us) is a sanctified space, a testament to all living (& dead) things through time, marked or not.

Not sure I'm explaining it well but I've appreciated the musing you inspired in me.

I don't want to derail Quill's thread but I think there are some intriguing conversations to be had about these topics.

[Mel9496]

6 hours ago, TateyBonetto said:

I'm still trying to figure out why someone thinks it's appropriate to take something that doesn't belong to them off of a grave and then ridicule the author on a public forum. Dubious moral behavior indeed.

This! To the OP, It doesn't matter what she has written in the card. It was left on a grave and you should have left it alone. Whether you like it or agree with it does not matter.

Edited January 4, 2022 by Mel9496

[Danae]

1 minute ago, Stacia said:

I had to zoom in to see the top portion, where it reads, "Forever-Dixie".

Did the portion that's covered have her name? Because that's the part I find weird &, if so, think that she's looking to make connections (& not with the spiritual world) -- she wants to let other locals know her beliefs & is putting her name out there for other like-minded people.

This could be a whole separate conversation. When I read your post, my first thought was what about all the Black slaves who were buried in unmarked locations all over the place? Archaeologists are just now locating some of these burial areas. And not just slaves -- similar things happen all the time when there are new roads being built or foundations being dug where people find bones & archaeologists move in. Realistically we're probably walking on previous people all the time. What about people who are cremated & have their ashes scattered -- to become a part of the ground or sea? What about bodies that are left exposed for animals to consume (sky burials)? What about people who have their ashes shot into space? Is there less sanctity for any person because they are not in a specific, marked location? (A side note: What about roadside markers that people leave where a death happened yet nobody is buried?)

I am just musing about the (artificial?) societal bounds of marked graves & sanctity. I guess I feel like all the Earth (& space around us) is a sanctified space, a testament to all living (& dead) things through time, marked or not.

Not sure I'm explaining it well but I've appreciated the musing you inspired in me.

I don't want to derail Quill's thread but I think there are some intriguing conversations to be had about these topics.

I took a Coursera archaeology class several years ago and I remember being shocked by the standards of when a burial site legally becomes a potential archaeology site.  I think it was 100 years.  Which means that WW I cemeteries, if the owners of the land agreed, could be dug up and the remains displayed in museums. Certainly Civil War sites could be.  
 

Not that I think that’s likely to happen to graves of the dominant culture and religion.  But it did, for me, bring the issues around digging up other people’s burial sites into sharper focus.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Stacia said:

had to zoom in to see the top portion, where it reads, "Forever-Dixie".

Did the portion that's covered have her name? Because that's the part I find weird &, if so, think that she's looking to make connections (& not with the spiritual world) -- she wants to let other locals know her beliefs & is putting her name out there for other like-minded people

Yes, I covered up her name with a sticky note. 
 

It is significant to me that she signed her name on there. Unless she believes in ghosts, the card was definitely not going to the dead soldier. 

[Stacia]

14 minutes ago, Danae said:

I took a Coursera archaeology class several years ago and I remember being shocked by the standards of when a burial site legally becomes a potential archaeology site.  I think it was 100 years.  Which means that WW I cemeteries, if the owners of the land agreed, could be dug up and the remains displayed in museums. Certainly Civil War sites could be.  
 

Not that I think that’s likely to happen to graves of the dominant culture and religion.  But it did, for me, bring the issues around digging up other people’s burial sites into sharper focus.

I will have to look for that course. It sounds quite fascinating.

[Danae]

1 minute ago, Stacia said:

I will have to look for that course. It sounds quite fascinating.

It was incredible. 

[maize]

33 minutes ago, Stacia said:

I had to zoom in to see the top portion, where it reads, "Forever-Dixie".

Did the portion that's covered have her name? Because that's the part I find weird &, if so, think that she's looking to make connections (& not with the spiritual world) -- she wants to let other locals know her beliefs & is putting her name out there for other like-minded people.

This could be a whole separate conversation. When I read your post, my first thought was what about all the Black slaves who were buried in unmarked locations all over the place? Archaeologists are just now locating some of these burial areas. And not just slaves -- similar things happen all the time when there are new roads being built or foundations being dug where people find bones & archaeologists move in. Realistically we're probably walking on previous people all the time. What about people who are cremated & have their ashes scattered -- to become a part of the ground or sea? What about bodies that are left exposed for animals to consume (sky burials)? What about people who have their ashes shot into space? Is there less sanctity for any person because they are not in a specific, marked location? (A side note: What about roadside markers that people leave where a death happened yet nobody is buried?)

I am just musing about the (artificial?) societal bounds of marked graves & sanctity. I guess I feel like all the Earth (& space around us) is a sanctified space, a testament to all living (& dead) things through time, marked or not.

Not sure I'm explaining it well but I've appreciated the musing you inspired in me.

I don't want to derail Quill's thread but I think there are some intriguing conversations to be had about these topics.

I would say that sanctity is determined both individually and socially. Marked graves feel sacred to me, and I think they do to many people in the greater society I live in. Respecting that sanctity is demonstrating respect for the other humans we share space with.

[livetoread]

 

1 hour ago, Farrar said:

I am a little surprised by the naivety about the intentions with this note. All the people defending it are defending an act of racism committed almost certainly by someone who is likely a member of an organization that's a hate group. The UDC literally does this still - they place flags, wreaths, notes, etc. - on the graves of veterans to prop up their cause. Their cause being... that it's sad that the confederacy lost and they were fighting a just battle.

This sent me down a fascinating and disturbing rabbit hole. I didn't know about this organization before, so thanks for posting. Really interesting how various websites describe them and how innocent and helpful one would have thought they were depending on which site one read. I think it's highly likely she is a member as well.

[maize]

I've dug up human burial sites as part of an archeology dig.

In the country we were digging in, there were guidelines about what sites could be excavated and how human remains should be treated. Those we excavated were not less than 2000 years old and there were no current people who considered themselves culturally or religiously tied to the groups we were excavating.

Grave markers, to me, exist primarily for the living.

[SKL]

We're talking about soldiers here.  Is there some assumption that all the soldiers of the side that won were angelic?  Isn't it more likely that the soldiers on both sides had more in common than not?  But it's OK to honor the Union soldiers' graves (and US soldiers in other wars that the US government entered), but not the Confederate soldiers' graves?  Just based on which current rhetoric we believe regarding the war / leaders of the time?

The South had a number of grievances, most of them economic issues other than slavery.  Most Southerners were not slave owners, and many wouldn't want to be slave owners even if they could have been.  Some of them were actively fighting against slavery.

As for racism, hopefully it's common knowledge that racism always has existed in the North as well ... and the North wasn't always free of slavery either.

The black and white way that this topic has been handled here is kind of disappointing.

[Doodlebug]

As a granddaughter to a beautiful 91 year old woman whose dementia and mental confusion has her write notes to "the boys overseas" which can contain rather ugly depictions that aren't otherwise typical of my memories of her...  I'll gently suggest that there are a number of potential motives and mental states behind the writing of that letter. 

It is worth considering that the reach and life of the handwritten note left on a grave is acutely limited.  However, that note and its sentiment is now alive and well on a message board which will likely resurrect it in 4 years.  Would you consider deleting it?

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Doodlebug said:

As a granddaughter to a beautiful 91 year old woman whose dementia and mental confusion has her write notes to "the boys overseas" which can contain rather ugly depictions that aren't otherwise typical of my memories of her...  I'll gently suggest that there are a number of potential motives and mental states behind the writing of that letter. 

It is worth considering that the reach and life of the handwritten note left on a grave is acutely limited.  However, that note and its sentiment is now alive and well on a message board which will likely resurrect it in 4 years.  Would you consider deleting it?

Sure

[WildflowerMom]

29 minutes ago, SKL said:

We're talking about soldiers here.  Is there some assumption that all the soldiers of the side that won were angelic?  Isn't it more likely that the soldiers on both sides had more in common than not?  But it's OK to honor the Union soldiers' graves (and US soldiers in other wars that the US government entered), but not the Confederate soldiers' graves?  Just based on which current rhetoric we believe regarding the war / leaders of the time?

There is truth in this, even if I don't really want to admit it.   It's easier to say, 'confederate bad, union good'.   My guess is that soldiers who've died recently in the Middle East conflicts will be up for ridicule 100 years from now.   Which is sad to me, even if I'm not military-minded at all.   If we mock conf soldiers, I guess we need to mock Vietnam vets, afghan-war vets, hell, maybe all service members, especially current ones since they are more aware now than any others what they're fighting for and representing. 

[HS Mom in NC]

Ancestral worship light, like we see demonstrated on that card, is so weird to me. I think it's an example of why the New Testament teaches people not to give much attention to genealogies.

Titus 3:9

But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless.

1 Timothy 1:4

nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith.

People that focused on the past and romanticizing the past with their version of revisionist history, have serious issues with the present-it's a distraction. And I think there's the other side that gets weirdly idolatrous of Lincoln too. The nonsense of idealizing his avoiding confronting McClellan's incompetence as long as he did got soooo many more people killed.  Someone needed to say, "Lincoln, lives are on the line.  Stop worshiping your own personal emotional comfort and do The Necessary or resign and let someone else do it. "

[katilac]

100% not acceptable to remove and/or read things left on a grave. 

Nothing about the leaver's beliefs or intents changes that. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

8 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

There is truth in this, even if I don't really want to admit it.   It's easier to say, 'confederate bad, union good'.   My guess is that soldiers who've died recently in the Middle East conflicts will be up for ridicule 100 years from now.   Which is sad to me, even if I'm not military-minded at all.   If we mock conf soldiers, I guess we need to mock Vietnam vets, afghan-war vets, hell, maybe all service members, especially current ones since they are more aware now than any others what they're fighting for and representing. 

Most soldiers who die in war are pawns on a chessboard.

In the case of unjust wars, we should always make a distinction between those put on the front line, and those behind the lines, directing movement on the chessboard. 

In the case of historical wars, we should beware the false but seductive idea that we would have been on the right side. That's generally a matter of context and luck ( though a few individuals truly can transcend that - no guarantee we would have been those individuals.)

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, WildflowerMom said:

That's what I thought, too.   I wonder why this particular grave?   Is he the only soldier there?

Its a tiny historic cemetery. This is the only Confederate soldier (AFAIK) of rank who died in that specific battle and was buried in that cemetery. There is, I think, another soldier’s grave there, too, but he did not die in that battle. The church was literally employed as a war hospital there. The courthouse flew the Union flag, but presumably, the parishioners helped the wounded from either side. 

[Scarlett]

7 hours ago, TateyBonetto said:

I'm still trying to figure out why someone thinks it's appropriate to take something that doesn't belong to them off of a grave and then ridicule the author on a public forum. Dubious moral behavior indeed.

The grave doesn't belong to the lady who left the card either.  @Quill had as much right to remove it as the lady had to leave it.  More IMO  because it is hate speech and the person is looking for a platform or like minded people.

And also, the author is hardly an injured party here.  Unless  one of you know her and are going to go tell her.  

2 hours ago, Mel9496 said:

This! To the OP, It doesn't matter what she has written in the card. It was left on a grave and you should have left it alone. Whether you like it or agree with it does not matter.

Interesting topic for new posters to dive right into.  😕

Edited January 4, 2022 by Scarlett

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Most soldiers who die in war are pawns on a chessboard.

In the case of unjust wars, we should always make a distinction between those put on the front line, and those behind the lines, directing movement on the chessboard. 

In the case of historical wars, we should beware the false but seductive idea that we would have been on the right side. That's generally a matter of context and luck ( though a few individuals truly can transcend that - no guarantee we would have been those individuals.)

 

I definitely agree with that and was saying this to the law clerk today. (I told him about the card.) 

And if there’s one thing thats been made vividly clear in the past few years, it’s how susceptible we all are to propaganda and whatever messaging we consistently see/hear. 

[Ellie]

9 hours ago, Quill said:

So, I’m sure some of you remember me talking about the confederate grave in the cemetery I pass walking to work. It’s a legit soldier’s grave, who died in the Civil War battle fought right outside my office window.

The flag did eventually disappear; not sure where it went. But for the past few weeks I have been walking by and saw a Christmas card lying atop the grave.

Well, now it has been quite affected by the weather and…well. I took it. I wanted to see what sentiment it had in it. It had writing on the front that is obviously supportive of the Confederate army.

Inside is a sentiment in support of the cause of the Confederacy from someone who says she (yes, you read that right; not some beer-swilling middle-aged white guy in a red cap, but a woman) is a descendant of a confederate soldier.

It does actually have her actual name in there.

I have no plans to do anything; what would I even do? But it bothers me that a site that should be historical is functioning as a shrine for “believers”. I don’t know what the answer is but I really dislike that quite a bit. 

Frankly, I dislike your comments quite a bit. You might try reading both sides of an issue before passing judgement. And I find your actions (taking the card someone left) tacky, to say the least, and I could say more.

[Melissa Louise]

8 minutes ago, Quill said:

I definitely agree with that and was saying this to the law clerk today. (I told him about the card.) 

And if there’s one thing thats been made vividly clear in the past few years, it’s how susceptible we all are to propaganda and whatever messaging we consistently see/hear. 

Yes, none of us are magically immune. We are all shaped by our context. 

Since I first learned about the Holocaust, I have always wondered - how would I, as an ordinary German citizen, have behaved?

Odd are I would have gone along. Out of fear, maybe, or because I was influenced by propaganda. Maybe not. 

There's definitely a good dose of humility in not knowing. 

Had you been born in this soldier's time and context, would you have done differently? If you were this woman, in her context, would you be the letter leaver or the letter taker?

It's comforting to us to think we are on the side of angels now, so were we born in a different context, of course that brave, principled part of ourselves would make us letter takers. 

There's a lot of luck in where history finds us, and our ethics. 

Ultimately, I think the humility in understanding that is important to humankind. 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2022 by Melissa Louise

[Stacia]

25 minutes ago, katilac said:

100% not acceptable to remove and/or read things left on a grave.

Why would it be unacceptable to read something left on a grave?

Yes, it might contain personal thoughts. While the leaver might believe that the dead person is reading the note, I think the leaver must also realize that currently living people might also read the note. In fact, sometimes (most of the time?), the point may be for others (currently alive) to read the note as it's pretty likely the dead person won't (or that you could communicate with the dead person just as well through prayer vs. a written note that is open to scrutiny among the living). I would think a note like that is almost serving as homage to the buried, so the leaver might want other living people to read it.

If it's not ok to read it when it's on the grave, is it ok to read it if it blows off the grave?

[Melissa Louise]

I wouldn't read it.

I don't think notes left on graves are public. They are private communications between a person and the dead. 

If it had blown off, I would try to leave it with the church, or return it, unread, if it had an address. If it was degraded by weather such that it was unreadable anyway, I would dispose of it. 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

We're talking about soldiers here.  Is there some assumption that all the soldiers of the side that won were angelic?  Isn't it more likely that the soldiers on both sides had more in common than not?  But it's OK to honor the Union soldiers' graves (and US soldiers in other wars that the US government entered), but not the Confederate soldiers' graves?  Just based on which current rhetoric we believe regarding the war / leaders of the time?

The South had a number of grievances, most of them economic issues other than slavery.  Most Southerners were not slave owners, and many wouldn't want to be slave owners even if they could have been.  Some of them were actively fighting against slavery.

As for racism, hopefully it's common knowledge that racism always has existed in the North as well ... and the North wasn't always free of slavery either.

The black and white way that this topic has been handled here is kind of disappointing.

There’s no assumption from me that Union soldiers were angelic and Confederate soldiers were rotten to the core. Not at all. However, the Union won the war and that is why we are The United States of America. There is literally no point whatsoever in “honoring” Confederate soldiers. Parts of the original 13 colonies are bound to have a bunch of descendants of Loyalists who thought the “New World” should continue under the Crown.  Are there lots of monuments to British generals? Any schools named after them? Any highways? 

Of course there was racism in the north and there still is. That is the entire point of why honoring Confederate soldiers should be condemned. 

There is an entire narrative of people who believe a) the south should have won; b) non-white people are literally inferior; and c) this is how the nation should be: white men in places of power (oh, excuse me, hetero white men) and everyone else can just serve their needs. You dont ever see that narrative? I do. 

[Melissa Louise]

I think this goes back to a pp's point, which is the utility of posting it here. 

 

[Scarlett]

6 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I wouldn't read it.

I don't think notes left on graves are public. They are private communications between a person and the dead. 

If it had blown off, I would try to leave it with the church, or return it, unread, if it had an address. If it was degraded by weather such that it was unreadable anyway, I would dispose of it. 

 

If this were a private grave and the author was leaving it for her dead husband or child I would agree (although I don't think a dead person is 'hearing' anything written or said to them).  This is not what is going on in this church yard of a long dead soldier.  The author did not know this person and furthermore she is writing hate speech and leaving her name!  Which I believe means she is looking for like minded people.  But what do I know.

At any rate I don't think @Quill did anything all so terrible and this is coming from me---raised up in the south where we do big annual clean ups of graves and cemeteries and make a big covered dish out of the entire affair.  

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, Scarlett said:

If this were a private grave and the author was leaving it for her dead husband or child I would agree (although I don't think a dead person is 'hearing' anything written or said to them).  This is not what is going on in this church yard of a long dead soldier.  The author did not know this person and furthermore she is writing hate speech and leaving her name!  Which I believe means she is looking for like minded people.  But what do I know.

At any rate I don't think @Quill did anything all so terrible and this is coming from me---raised up in the south where we do big annual clean ups of graves and cemeteries and make a big covered dish out of the entire affair.  

I don't think it's terrible either. It's just different to what I would do. Had I decided to read it, I probably would have thought as above - that we are all shaped by luck. 

I don't really understand the utility in posting about it here, other than as an interesting anecdote. I am unsure as to whether WTM Chat board is full of Confederate honouring women.

 

[Scarlett]

Just now, Melissa Louise said:

I don't think it's terrible either. It's just different to what I would do. Had I decided to read it, I probably would have thought as above - that we are all shaped by luck. 

I don't really understand the utility in posting about it here, other than as an interesting anecdote. I am unsure as to whether WTM Chat board is full of Confederate honouring women.

 

Well sure.  I mean, that is about 90% of this board anyway.  We post the things that interest us or that we think might interest the group.

[Melissa Louise]

6 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Well sure.  I mean, that is about 90% of this board anyway.  We post the things that interest us or that we think might interest the group.

Sure. 

I'm just not sure I'd describe sharing it here as political action. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I don't think it's terrible either. It's just different to what I would do. Had I decided to read it, I probably would have thought as above - that we are all shaped by luck. 

I don't really understand the utility in posting about it here, other than as an interesting anecdote. I am unsure as to whether WTM Chat board is full of Confederate honouring women.

 

It’s sharing something important to me. Not much different from what a lot of posts are about; just sharing. I did think there would be some interesting discussion (and there is) and I’m not bothered that not everybody thinks it was okay to do and a couple people really think it’s awful. I mean, I figured some people would disagree. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Sure. 

I'm just not sure I'd describe sharing it here as political action. 

Taking it was a political action. Kinda like scrubbing graffiti off a park wall. 

Sharing it here was because I thought it would be an interesting thing to share. And, lo. 

[Melissa Louise]

3 minutes ago, Quill said:

Taking it was a political action. Kinda like scrubbing graffiti off a park wall. 

Sharing it here was because I thought it would be an interesting thing to share. And, lo. 

I'm not sure the graffiti analogy works, but that's ok. We can agree to disagree. 

[Moonhawk]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

We're talking about soldiers here.  Is there some assumption that all the soldiers of the side that won were angelic?  Isn't it more likely that the soldiers on both sides had more in common than not?  But it's OK to honor the Union soldiers' graves (and US soldiers in other wars that the US government entered), but not the Confederate soldiers' graves?  Just based on which current rhetoric we believe regarding the war / leaders of the time?

The South had a number of grievances, most of them economic issues other than slavery.  Most Southerners were not slave owners, and many wouldn't want to be slave owners even if they could have been.  Some of them were actively fighting against slavery.

As for racism, hopefully it's common knowledge that racism always has existed in the North as well ... and the North wasn't always free of slavery either.

The black and white way that this topic has been handled here is kind of disappointing.

It seems a bit of an odd jump you made: that this woman wrote this card about "unwavering devotion" to the Confederate cause he died for, and somehow try to turn it into as if people are saying you can't honor a soldier's grave at all because of "current rhetoric we believe regarding the war / leaders of the time."

There is a difference between honoring the soldier as a man, worthy as a man, and honoring the cause he died for. 

She isn't honoring him as a man, she is honoring the Confederate cause and using him as a way to do it. That isn't honoring him. Honoring him would be tending to his grave, putting flowers, etc. Once it becomes about the "cause" he died for, this argument cannot justify her actions.

I don't know why other grievances of the South would be relevant at this point, or racism in other parts of the country. I know you brought it up to show "Southern soldier can be a good guy, too, or at least other people can be just as bad," but it doesn't matter how good or bad he is when he is only being referenced as a part of the cause. You know she isn't honoring him because he lived his life in a Southern state or because he may have been a good guy. She is honoring him because she sees him as an extension/link to the Confederate Cause she believes in. She only saw him as a vessel of her own political beliefs.

In case I'm not being clear: You can honor a soldier, and his grave, regardless of what side he was on. This is separate from honoring his cause (which you don't even know if he agreed with).

What this woman did was not that. She honored the Confederate cause. For all we know, he was completely against whatever she sees him as "standing for", and this is a disgrace to his memory and he could have been rolling over in his grave the entire time the card was on top of him. If we are going to play hypotheticals.

[katilac]

21 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

The grave doesn't belong to the lady who left the card either.  @Quill had as much right to remove it as the lady had to leave it.  More IMO  because it is hate speech and the person is looking for a platform or like minded people.

And also, the author is hardly an injured party here.  Unless  one of you know her and are going to go tell her.  

Interesting topic for new posters to dive right into.  😕

You think people have the right to remove things from graves? I don't even know what to say to that. Leaving flowers, cards, and other remembrances on graves is a long-standing and well-accepted tradition in American society. I know of no corresponding tradition related to removing things from graves. 

Do you really think you have the right to remove things from graves? You go around removing cards from graves? Flowers? Photographs?  

The person might be looking for a platform or like-minded people, who knows? I've never in my life known anyone to remove a card from a stranger's grave and read it, so it seems like a might ineffective method, but no matter: that's on her. 

Also, that's an interesting way to welcome a new poster. They didn't start a controversial thread, they merely responded to one, which is absolutely okay (I mean, it's also okay if a new poster wants to start with a controversial thread, just not recommended). 

3 minutes ago, Stacia said:

Why would it be unacceptable to read something left on a grave?

Yes, it might contain personal thoughts. While the leaver might believe that the dead person is reading the note, I think the leaver must also realize that currently living people might also read the note. In fact, sometimes (most of the time?), the point may be for others (currently alive) to read the note as it's pretty likely the dead person won't (or that you could communicate with the dead person just as well through prayer vs. a written note that is open to scrutiny among the living). I would think a note like that is almost serving as homage to the buried, so the leaver might want other living people to read it.

If it's not ok to read it when it's on the grave, is it ok to read it if it blows off the grave?

Because one does not read correspondence not addressed to one (I had to switch on my Emily Post vibes for this one). 

No, you do not read it if it blows off the grave either, nor any other correspondence that might be blown down the street. In the graveyard, you turn it in to the office, or dispose if it if it is beyond saving. If not in a graveyard, 

If someone writes something and leaves it on a placard or easel facing the public, or taped to the headstone, then you can assume they are okay with anyone reading it. Otherwise, assume not/

[katilac]

11 minutes ago, Quill said:

Taking it was a political action. Kinda like scrubbing graffiti off a park wall. 

It's nothing like scrubbing graffiti off of a park wall, because graffiti is not only meant to be seen, it is impossible to not see. You know what the message is whether you want to or not. 

In this case, you did not know what the message was until you removed a card from a grave and read it. 

[Moonhawk]

re: grave tending

I did a clean up this weekend of family graves, clearing of sad-looking gifts, etc. In my mind, once the object is detracting from the grave, and there is no sign that the original leaver is going to come back/take care of it, it's reasonable to clear up the past items.

If a card is in an envelope, I don't expect it to be opened. If a card is sans envelope, I feel it is okay to read. Just how when you go to offices during the Christmas season, they display the cards they receive: you are allowed to read them, but you can't open their mail and read it even if you know it's a Christmas card.

Our cemetery doesn't have an office where you can turn things in if something blows around or can be kept after being on the actual grave, so maybe this colors my view.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, katilac said:

It's nothing like scrubbing graffiti off of a park wall, because graffiti is not only meant to be seen, it is impossible to not see. You know what the message is whether you want to or not. 

In this case, you did not know what the message was until you removed a card from a grave and read it. 

I actually had a pretty good idea what the card contained on the inside, because on the outside, the part that could be seen by anybody without touching it, was this: 

“To the Amazing Confederate army and...(unreadable part due to damage)...Silent Warriors.” And a sticker of the Confederate Flag. And a 💜

So really, it seems like a good point raised by @Stacia and a few others: surely the letter-leaver didn’t expect *the soldier* to read it. More likely, they were hoping some other I-Heart-the-Confederate-Flag people would, at minimum, feel validated, or possibly would open it up and get in contact with her. 

[Melissa Louise]

I dunno. It's a weird way to recruit. Especially if the narrative is already out loud and proud in your area. 

This thread reminded me that when I was an angsty teen, I left a letter on Sylvia Plath's grave and boy, oh boy, I hope nobody read it! Hopefully it rained that night and a kind person dumped it, unopened, in the bin!