In a way, by leaving it to the individual states, you’re setting up a similar situation as was seen with secession. Each state decided their fate based on their beliefs and the south went one way and the north chose another. One could see a similar situation with the monuments.Why would one want to remove the states say?......It would seem the state would be the target audience of memorials to the soldiers of a state.......so it would seem the proper jurisdiction to decide.
I’m really torn on this subject. The more it is discussed here and the more areas and statuary which are being vandalized I keep looking not only for an answer, but the right answer.
To leave things as they are is not a viable answer. To add more information to further explain the era, doesn’t seem to be thought enough. To remove the monuments is against those whose family lost countless members to the war- whichever side they were fighting under. This is a situation where no answer is going to make everyone feel as though the correct thing happened.
But, to vote on the retention or removal could give a decision by the people- and, once it is established- is it for every monument in the state? Or would each monument be voted upon...step by step. And are memorials for fallen soldiers exempt from consideration or are they equally as negative of permanent imagery to those who oppose the monuments? I’ve got more questions than answers. And just when I have logically come to a mental decision, another point I hadn’t considered is raised or another situation happens or something else makes me question my thought processes.