On liberalism and statues

Dear editor,

What is the definition of "liberal"? As an adjective, it means "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.”

"Open to new behavior or opinions" sounds perfectly normal until the left of society hijacks it.

Black Lives Matters' new behavior is calling for the death of police officers, guilty or not of a crime. How many guilty police officers have been killed? Zero. How many innocent police officers have been killed? Twenty and counting.

To have an opinion, you must be able to express that opinion. If your opinion isn't theirs, you're not allowed to express it, even if you have a permit. Black Lives Matter and the left were allowed to freely march in many cities around our nation without confrontation from any segment of the right and without permits.

Our Bill of Rights’ First Amendment states we have "the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble." It does not state who is granted these rights other than "the people.” The reason Charlottesville was not a peacefully permitted assembly is the left showed up to deny that same right with the use of violence.

Had the left not been there, would that assembly of people still been violent?

Were the permitted protesters armed because of the left?

Why did the police let non-permitted protesters to combat with a permitted protest?

Were the left's protests peaceful when they burnt Berkley College in California or any other city in America?

Ignoring both extremes takes away their voice. Allowing them to fight on TV for ratings offers each an undeserved platform for their morally wrong agendas. Violence and bloodshed is not the answer.

Our Constitution is not a conservative or liberal document. It is a document of required processes for the purpose of a civil government of "We the People."

From a political perspective, it is a libertarian document, which both extremes of the political spectrum have violated throughout its history.

But the left are more than "willing to discard traditional values" with unconstitutional changes or totally discarding our Constitution and the last six commandments of the Bible so that a few elitist leftists can make all the decisions regarding our nation.

And how does southern California have confederate statues without having a southern Democrat racist mentality, as mentioned with the 1992 L.A. riots, but the now Republican south must be racist because of past Democrat erected statues?

Destroying all aspects of history will not correct the willingness of totalitarians to completely rule others, disregarding all their constitutional and God-given rights. Our true history will tell a story of its own hijacking. Wiping history clean of the evidence only helps to cover it up as it has been.

A possible solution would be putting up plaques on each statue denouncing the morally wrong act of black slavery and the indentured servant system used against the poor white man.

Erect statues for the oppressed of that era, the Underground Railroad, the stories of the good people that opposed these morally wrong acts with their lives.

Tell the complete story and not just a portion picked out by the offending party.

Our true history will tell a story of its own hijacking; wiping history clean of the evidence only helps to cover it up as it has been!

STEVEN KING

Milton

What's your view? Write a letter to the editor.

This article originally appeared on Santa Rosa Press Gazette: On liberalism and statues