Soon it will be the constitution, the bill of rights and America it'self since they were all founded by 'racists'.
Can you honestly say that the constitution's bones were made for Muslims, Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Gays, Jews, and so on? It took
constitutional amendments for the constitution to be an inclusive protector of rights for "all" - on paper at least. The constitution's bones was made for Columbians of the 18th century. Most all of those people I listed weren't even considered full humans, let alone "Americans."
Now, as far as Lincoln, Washington and the civil war - what is the problem? You want the country to parade these images of slavery, racism and bigotry throughout the 30th century? When will a country be progressive enough to appreciate the history of the nation, but at the same time sincerely denounce the behavior - removing
blatant historical taunts of culture and egrigious, inhumane activity? There is no problem putting these figures in a museum where the full truth of their importance can be revealed in context.
Leaving a monument of praise of a slave owner who tortured, raped and killed human beings in an alleged post-racial America should be an easy protest to make. Put them in museums and stop parading them in front of the very people you claim to accept as Americans - whose ancestors suffered at the hands of these extolled idols.
Oh, and yea by the way statues are
idols. They are graven images.
The common theory is that Lincoln was anti-slavery, and pro-African American. The north had slaves; they called them servants - and usually remained inside. This is not because they were treated differently,
it is because north of the Mason Dixie line is a topology that does not support agriculture/raw material production en masse. It is for this reason that the Civil War happened - not because of an alleged sentiment for the slaves, but because the South would have been too big of an economic power against the North - with both slaves, and the land to produce cash crops.
If the South wasn't an economic (and militaristic threat) to the North, it is very likely slavery would have continued.
All of the "founding fathers" have their place in a museum for correct study. Memorializing some ancient faces that - at best - were not opposed to slavery and slave owning (or, "indentured servants") is idolatry. I know this is a personal preference, but I don't understand a nation's obsession with making idols out of horrible people - as if the cement/marble/bronze wash their pasts and influences clean.
