“Pure evil”? Who said anything about “pure evil”? I am saying that the cause for which the Confederacy fought included the right to own and treat other human beings as property. We no longer believe that to be a belief worth valourising. When the government builds, maintains and defends a heroic representation of such a person, it valourises the cause for which he fought. That is wrong. Empathy and sympathy for the people of the Confederacy does not entail sympathy for their cause or point of view.
“If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.” (Leviticus 20:13) Some Christians believe that to be true. The fact that they happen not to be in charge of the United States is a blessing, don’t you think? Does it prove that Christianity is evil? I don’t think so.
And really, again with the straw man arguments and false dichotomies? Does Stonewall Jackson merit consideration for starting a Sunday school? Yes. A monument to that, perhaps with him reading the Bible to Black children, would be lovely. That’s what was right about him. But a heroic statue on horseback has nothing to do with that. On the contrary, it valourises and heroicises his efforts to maintain a society in which people were treated like property. That’s what was wrong about him.
Now, regarding the path forward towards reconciliation. As I have stated elsewhere, it cannot be based on simply agreeing to “split the difference” between those who fought to retain slavery and those who opposed it. It is not necessary (and not what I am saying) to say that one side was “pure good” and the other “pure evil” to say that: Slavery is wrong. Fighting to preserve slavery is wrong. Fighting to eliminate slavery is better. Do you disagree?