Re-reading my post, it did come across as if I was blasting you. That wasn't my intention and I apologize if I sounded harsher than I intended.

None taken.

although I think most reasonable people on both sides of the issue could agree putting the damned thing on a government building was absurd.

How about it being part of our state flag? Our most famous flag was adopted in 1956. I don't know about you, but I can't think of a well founded reason to incorporate the "rebel flag" into our state flag aside from the obvious.

I guess I just think that as educated southerners aware of the history, we do have some responsibility to be realistic about it, to avoid sugarcoating it, and even perhaps to correct some of the more obvious fallacies when they emerge.

We absolutely do. I usually don't talk much about this subject publicly because of the backlash from both sides if something isn't said right. Northerns, Southerners, West Coastians, etc. come into this conversation with a certain opinion and it is rather difficult to have this conversation without being exiled by virtually everyone. With that said, I'm more than happy to discuss the complex with intelligent, open-minded people if they meet me halfway. Otherwise, my mouth is shut.

After all, I think when people say "This is what it means to me" there's an implicit acknowledgement in the statement that it can mean different things to different people, and I think every once in awhile those folks need to hear exactly why someone who's ancestor was lynched under that flag might have a different feeling about it.

Which is why this debate is so complex, fragile, and difficult to have to begin with, referring to my paragraph above. Once we can have this debate without any irrational emotions involved, the country will be better off. Getting there might take a bit, though.