Stone Mountain facade

I read somewhere that there was some legal jargon somewhere that said if that happened then the ownership rights automatically shifted back to the original owners who were recognized klan members.

A. I have no idea if that’s true
B. Their current decendants may not be klan members so it may not matter
C. I’m not in favor of the removal of such things.

It's all just a grand facade. It's all been a lie.

The majority of daily users of the park are now Black. I think the park had a Black GM for a while.

I agree, the carvings will not last another 5 years.

Only when the state decides its not a money maker.

The allure of Stone Mountain is actually seeing what was chilled in that large piece of granite.

You sand blast it and what is there to stare at? One large rock?

They would chisel something new into it.

quote:

---

Same man carved Rushmore, time to blow it up too.

---

don't think it's not coming

Francis Scott Key and Useless Assed Grant had statues toppled this last week...

quote:

---

Wonder how hard it would be to change the law around it.

---

can't change the law, but they CAN push for imminent domain

seems that would be their only option

personally, I would love to see the descendants of the original owners take ownership

quote:

---

I assume the laws can be overturned that protect the Stone mountain carving

---

not really, the land was bequeathed to the state under certain conditions

if those conditions are not met, ownership reverts back

the only legal way I can see 8s a declaration of imminent domain

having said that, the left has demonstrated that they do not care about the law

Memorials to the confederacy are about as silly as anything in the world can get....they have nothing at all to do with southern heritage as most southerners did not want to seceded and were very happy simply being Americans and wouldn't have anything to do with a bunch of traitors if they weren't forced to do so at gun point. There was some support for the effort initially but it failed miserably shortly after the beginning of hostilities....

Having said that I don't see the difference in pulling statutes down and burning books in the square....no one should destroy a work of art....art can be offensive....as can humans....that doesn't make it OK to destroy something an artist created, even if almost EVERYONE agrees it is offensive...because there is nothing that could be more offensive that destroying art in a public manner as a political statement. Most of the monuments to the confederacy were placed in the last 70 years or so....they don't represent anything other than southerners love of a lost cause....but they are works of art which should be protected and studied and housed somewhere that people who enjoy such art can do so without ridicule or persecution.....what the protestors is doing is burning books in the town square....no difference as I can see it....