A bill appears to be on the fast track in the General Assembly that would provide protection to historical monuments and memorials from people who either want to erase history or can’t keep it in context.

The House passed the bill on Tuesday after two days of sometimes contentious debate, and we don’t see much resistance in the Senate and any wager that it would not gain Gov. Pat McCrory’s signature and become law would be foolhardy.

The bill would prohibit from removal any “monument, memorial, plaque, statue, marker, or display of a permanent character that commemorates an event, a person, or military service that is part of North Carolina history.” Although Confederate memorials are not mentioned specifically and the bill was crafted before the South Carolina flag flap that has morphed into a bigger assault on the Confederacy, it’s aim is pretty clear: It is intended to protect symbols from the South’s role in the Civil War, such as the one that sits on the steps of the Robeson County Courthouse, from those who believe that erasing history magically makes for a better future.

Three Democrats joined all the House Republicans in supporting the legislation during a first vote on Monday, but none of those Democrats represent Robeson County. Reps. Garland Pierce, Charles Graham and Ken Goodman all opposed the bill, and Rep. Ken Waddell was absent and didn’t vote.

This newspaper spoke with Pierce and Graham and their concerns are well-grounded, with both saying they worry about Raleigh making local decisions.

“That’s really telling Robeson County, ‘Look, you don’t have the right to do what you want to do,” Pierce said.

We are on record as saying that the Confederate flag needed to be removed in the South Carolina Statehouse grounds, which has happened, and that any effort the remove the statue of a Confederate soldier from the county courthouse should be swatted away, which remains to be seen. So perhaps we are in the middle of this road.

We agree with Pierce and Graham that Raleigh shouldn’t be telling Robeson County what to do or not do with the Confederate memorial. But we do, at the risk of now working both sides of this road, see a value in the legislation.

When — not if — it becomes law, it will make moot conversations about trying to erase history that someone claims to find offensive. These conversations are inherently divisive — we often wonder if that is not the real goal of those who insist on having them — and polarize instead of unite communities.

We can assure you that any local attempt to remove the courthouse memorial will cause hard feelings in this community, and for what gain? It’s simply a conversation unworthy of having when there are so many genuine challenges facing this county, challenges that need the attention of everyone.

Because of that, while we don’t like the idea of Raleigh having the final word, we do find value in the legislation. That’s a welcome thing, since it will become law.