Kneeling for National Anthem

[Replacematt]

On 9/25/2017 at 7:36 PM, jjb said:

Use words like “everyone knows”, and “institutional racism”, and you lose me; it’s much too vague. Far as I know, there are no meetings deciding to discriminate against anyone.

That's precisely what institutional racism is...issues within the system that disproportionately cause a negative effect on minorities. These are inertial, not necessarily deliberate.

[beerguy55]

It's interesting to note that though the anthem is over 200 years old, the notion of civilians standing for the anthem is barely 100 years (and the military standing not much longer than that)   It started as a show of solidarity during WW1.

Even better is the idea of NFL players standing for the anthem on the field is not even a decade old (except perhaps the Super Bowl).   Players stayed in the locker room for the most part until after the anthem was played.  So it's not like these guys are bucking a century old tradition.

What I find ironic is the (often mindless) act of standing for the anthem (which 99% of patriotic flag-lovers don't do in their living rooms) brings such a reaction of disdain and hatred for those who dare not stand, it more closely resembles Nazi Germany than a nation I would truly call "free"...which, amazingly, is the point of the anthem protests to begin with.   You know what...you have no idea what's going on with that guy who didn't stand up or take his hat off...it's none of your business.  If you want to stand, stand...put your hat on your heart, stare at the flag, and sing the words...don't worry about what people around you are doing.   It's their choice.  And the last time I checked, the flag is an inanimate object that doesn't have feelings.

What I find even better is during the American Revolution the "Patriots" were the people who fought and rebelled against the incumbent government....and now protesting the existing system is somehow unpatriotic.

 

btw - in their own rules the NFL recommends standing for the anthem...they do not require it.

 

Having, pragmatically, said all that, NFL players (black, white, yellow and brown) have to remember that their job is to entertain us, and maybe they should just do their job. They stop doing that, we stop paying, they stop making their millions.  So, yeah, America isn't perfect, and there certainly is a level of racism that needs to be addressed, but it rings hollow to protest the very system that made said protester a millionaire.  It's easy to protest when you're financially set for the rest of your life.

If you want to protest, go buy your own airtime and do it.  Don't do it on someone else's paid airtime, while you're at work.

[Gfoley4]

1 hour ago, lawump said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/09/28/parkway-high-school-louisiana-punish-athletes-national-anthem-protest?utm_campaign=sportsillustrated&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&xid=socialflow_facebook_si

This may never get challenged because, for all I know, every student in this high school may be of the same view as the principal.  But if not...it will be interesting to see if the ACLU comes-a-knocking.  I'll definitely be keeping my eyes out for this one.

 

[HokieUmp]

On 9/27/2017 at 6:55 AM, Cav said:

Here's some Cliff Notes, if indeed your questions are genuine.  I'll give you more credit than the perception your words portray.   

U.S. Flag Code

• At the venue- all present, except those in military uniforms, should stand facing the flag with their right hand over their heart out of respect. Follow the lead of those at the podium or onstage and share the moment together as Americans.

• If there’s no flag- if for some reason there’s no flag in the ceremony, face toward the music and act as if a flag were there.

• Hats- if you’re not in a military uniform and are wearing a hat, remove it with your right hand and hold it over your left shoulder, while your hand is over your heart.

• Military personnel- members in uniform should render the military salute at the beginning of the anthem and retain the position throughout.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CDOC-109sdoc18/pdf/CDOC-109sdoc18.pdf

Thanks for the credit;  does the assumption I'm an idiot come at no extra charge?

It is a fact, actually, that Fox News - and most of the rest of the conservative media - has led the charge in turning this from "hey, maybe cops shouldn't shoot unarmed black people in the early 21st century United States" to "we spit on the flag and the military that serve it."  And  I know it was the former, as the persons who first knelt explicitly said what their protest was about;  anyone whose emotional reaction to it turns it to the latter is, well, incorrect.

To your Cliff notes:  @lawump, being the actual lawyer, can tell you that "should" and "shall" have very different legal meanings.  Should is a recommendation word;  shall makes something "required."  So this isn't a legally enforceable set of instructions, bluntly.  And any attempt to enforce something like this - aside from making us look like Berlin in about 1936 - wouldn't survive the legal challenge, in my opinion.  Not least of which because of all the regularly occurring violations already mentioned.

More to my point:  my question wasn't "what's the legal aspects of this?"  It was "HOW is this disrespectful."  No one answers this.  And that makes it a FURTHER challenge to be enforceable, since that Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 8 part says "No disrespect should be shown" - without a definition of what "disrespectful" is.  There has to be something to violate.  So.  Tell me how it's disrespectful.

[To me, any a LOT of other people, quietly kneeling during the anthem isn't showing disrespect to either the anthem or the flag.  Raising hell, or trying to play another song over it, or something like, would go a lot farther towards a definition of disrespect.]

(And since it seems that people often have to show their "bonafides" on this subject, I'm a 32+ year federal employee, 29 with the DoD, married to a 21-year USAF retiree.  I have skin in the game.  But I'm a HUGE fan of the Bill of Rights, and always a little suspicious of both overly pious behaviour AND over-the-top patriotism.  Don't get me started on that Lee Greenwood song.)

And @lawump - no charge for the "Perpetual Outrage Machine"

[HokieUmp]

5 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

So, yeah, America isn't perfect, and there certainly is a level of racism that needs to be addressed, but it rings hollow to protest the very system that made said protester a millionaire.  It's easy to protest when you're financially set for the rest of your life.

So, there's a set of rules when one can protest what they see as an injustice?  Wouldn't a millionaire be in a better spot to protest, if he's set?  (And since NFL contracts aren't completely guaranteed, Kaep is probably doing okay, but might not be set for his WHOLE life.)

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, HokieUmp said:

 Kaep is probably doing okay, but might not be set for his WHOLE life.)

Seriously???

http://www.businessinsider.com/colin-kaepernick-record-49ers-contract-2017-8

[Cav]

8 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

Thanks for the credit;  does the assumption I'm an idiot come at no extra charge?

Don't assume anything.  

8 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

It is a fact, actually, that Fox News - and most of the rest of the conservative media - has led the charge in turning this from "hey, maybe cops shouldn't shoot unarmed black people in the early 21st century United States" to "we spit on the flag and the military that serve it."  

Your "fact" is as valid and probably as relevant as this one: Media intentionally has put "both thumbs on the scale" (Michael Goodwin, 2017) and what was once the news of politics morphed a long time ago into the politics of news (Lyn Nofzinger, 1980).  Blatant political hacks posing as reporters while reaching for entertainment's golden ring will say or do most anything to achieve celebrity status while literally performing to the networks' bidding.  (In 1997, for example, Geraldo Rivera struck a $40 million deal with NBC News; Rivera wanted to shed his image as a sleazy talk show host, and the network wanted a top celebrity for its news division.~Michael Medved, 1999) 

9 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

To your Cliff notes:  @lawump, being the actual lawyer, can tell you that "should" and "shall" have very different legal meanings.  

The reason that I posted the "notes" were to remind those who either didn't know or who may have forgotten the protocol warranted for Old Glory and the National Anthem.  The protocol is an element that makes up the compound patriotism.  Patriotism for this country matters, in my verbose opinion, even when it is time for rebellion.  And rebellion only succeeds when it unites instead of alienates the masses (Jefferson, 1782).   

10 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

More to my point..."HOW is this disrespectful."  No one answers this.  

My dictionary gives me this: Respectful - marked by or showing esteem or consideration, an act of giving particular attention.  Disrespect would be the opposite.  Many have interpreted kneeling during the National Anthem as a disrespectful act in expressing low esteem or in being inconsiderate of the National Anthem, the U.S. Flag and therefore the country and all those who have and still do defend it, your wife included.  

There's a time and place for everything.  Naturally results may vary if expressed at, say, a BLM meeting or at a VFW post.  

 

 

 

 

[beerguy55]

10 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

So, there's a set of rules when one can protest what they see as an injustice?  Wouldn't a millionaire be in a better spot to protest, if he's set?  (And since NFL contracts aren't completely guaranteed, Kaep is probably doing okay, but might not be set for his WHOLE life.)

Kap earned over $40 million...if he, and his children, and his grandchildren, aren't set for life he's an idiot.

The millionaire has very little to materially risk...it's all fine and dandy to put your 10, 20, 50 million in the bank and then make a stand.   Sure, he won't make MORE money, but it's not like he's going to get his water cut off, or be sent to prison.  The system he is protesting is the same system that made him filthy rich...if he doesn't like it maybe he should return his money.   The system he is protesting was just as bad when he was in college (on the free ride that unjust system delivered him), when he was a rookie, when he started the Super Bowl, when his fame was at its peak.  

He made his "stand" when he'd pocketed a bunch of money, and after his skills were declining and he lost his starting job.  It comes more as a "look at me" than a real protest.

 

[Umpire in Chief]

Some of you know my feelings towards government. I'm neither a righty or a lefty. But Hokieump and others have made comments about the media and I feel they (equally on both sides) are exasperating the situation for their own gains. This in turn divides the country greater than the issue itself. Then they don't let the issue go after the horse has been beaten to death. Also have you noticed when they interview people on the street about topics they deliberately select the absolute worst people to represent either side. They can never find someone with at least a 5th grade education who can make a clear, succinct point, be logical and not default to worn out bromides and clichés or even name calling.

The media's problem is they can no longer differentiate between fact and opinion. They cherry pick facts which support their world view and over-engross on the commentary/opinion. If you give me the real unfiltered facts I can form my own opinion.

 

[jjb]

"The media's problem is they can no longer differentiate between fact and opinion. They cherry pick facts which support their world view and over-engross on the commentary/opinion. If you give me the real unfiltered facts I can form my own opinion".

Agree, Warren. The media don't speak in "facts". It's now "spin". The don't deal in "opinion". It's now "a narrative".

FWIW, a good friend of mine spent many years in front of the news camera. He's now in Government, and now can't believe how bad the media's become. If it doesn't fit their "narrative", it didn't happen; if it fits their narrative, they'll blast it incessantly.

You'll never get "unfiltered facts" ; they don't produce ratings, so there's no advantage to air them. I've found that, if something happens, I'll watch Fox. Then, I'll watch CNN. I know the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

[lawump]

1 hour ago, Umpire in Chief said:

Some of you know my feelings towards government. I'm neither a righty or a lefty. But Hokieump and others have made comments about the media and I feel they (equally on both sides) are exasperating the situation for their own gains. This in turn divides the country greater than the issue itself. Then they don't let the issue go after the horse has been beaten to death. Also have you noticed when they interview people on the street about topics they deliberately select the absolute worst people to represent either side. They can never find someone with at least a 5th grade education who can make a clear, succinct point, be logical and not default to worn out bromides and clichés or even name calling.

The media's problem is they can no longer differentiate between fact and opinion. They cherry pick facts which support their world view and over-engross on the commentary/opinion. If you give me the real unfiltered facts I can form my own opinion.

 

Actually, there is good "media" to be found.  The problem is that the majority of AMERICAN consumers of media don't demand good journalism.  We don't demand it by the fact that we watch the crap that comes across Fox News (right) and MSNBC (left)...and a host of other entities.  If the shows on these networks didn't get the ratings, they wouldn't be on the air.

There used to be a time when a news department at a network existed to bring prestige to a network.  CBS obtained the nickname in the 1960's and 1970's of "the Tiffany network" because of the prestige its news department had brought to the network.  The network did not see its news department as a revenue source.  Rather, it saw it as something that brought a different kind of value (a non-monetary value) to the network.  Thus, they were willing to lose money on a news department in return for the prestige it brought the network.  In summary, journalism was valued over financial reward.  That changed in the 1980's and 1990's when networks saw news divisions as potential sources of revenue, and became more concerned about the news department's bottom line rather than the prestige it brought to the network.  Today we (the American people) are to blame.  We vote for this type of news coverage every time we watch it.  And we do watch it.  The ratings show that we watch it.  These news departments/channels are very profitable...so they continue to give us this crap.  Television network and radio shows are now created to intentionally have a political slant...while still calling itself a "news" show/network.  I live in South Carolina.  I eat at a lot of local restaurants all the time as part of my job.  A lot of them have televisions hanging over their bars or in their dining room.  The one thing these restaurants have in common is that their televisions...almost all of them...are always on Fox News.  This is the case at the Chinese restaurant, Japanese restaurant, hamburger joint, BBQ joint, etc.  Fox News is always on (unless the Gamecocks or Clemson Tigers are playing.  And that's the only exception!!!) 

The other very concerning thing to me is the amount of people who primarily get their news from Facebook.  A recent study suggests that 50% or more of Americans primarily get their news from Facebook.  This is hugely troubling because Facebook is full of blatant lies ("fake news") posing as news.  And so many people fail to use critical thinking skills...to the point that they believe everything (or most everything) they see in their Facebook news feed.  (And BOTH my liberal and conservative friends make this same mistake.)  By way of example, my mom is ultra-liberal and my brother is very conservative.  I spend about the same amount of time on each of their Facebook pages posting replies to their posts that link to snopes.com to basically tell them that the story they posted is a patently false "news" story.

As to my original point in this post: good media is out there to be had.  One is just required to go looking for it.  For instance, I have found some on my satellite radio: BBC (which scores high marks from media watchdog groups for being politically neutral.)

[beerguy55]

22 minutes ago, lawump said:

That changed in the 1980's and 1990's when networks saw news divisions as potential sources of revenue

It's like they all watched http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074958/ and saw it as a "how to" rather than the satire it was supposed to be. 

Rarely has a film predicted the future so effectively.

[beerguy55]

On 9/27/2017 at 4:55 AM, Cav said:

Here's some Cliff Notes, if indeed your questions are genuine.  I'll give you more credit than the perception your words portray.   

U.S. Flag Code

• At the venue- all present, except those in military uniforms, should stand facing the flag with their right hand over their heart out of respect. Follow the lead of those at the podium or onstage and share the moment together as Americans.

• If there’s no flag- if for some reason there’s no flag in the ceremony, face toward the music and act as if a flag were there.

• Hats- if you’re not in a military uniform and are wearing a hat, remove it with your right hand and hold it over your left shoulder, while your hand is over your heart.

• Military personnel- members in uniform should render the military salute at the beginning of the anthem and retain the position throughout.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CDOC-109sdoc18/pdf/CDOC-109sdoc18.pdf

 

 

From the same document - these are the acts that actually ARE being performed by people and organizations, that are in contravention to a section of the flag code specifically called "Respect for the Flag",  that I'm not hearing any objections about.  Christ, in last night's NFL game, letter (c) was violated during the anthem by several dozen people in a way that could not be missed by anybody.

 

Respect for the Flag

No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.

(a) The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.

(b) The flag should never touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water, or merchandise.

(c) The flag should never be carried flat or horizontally, but always aloft and free.

(d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker’s desk, draping the front of the platform, and for decoration in general.

(e) The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.

(f) The flag should never be used as a covering for a ceiling.

(g) The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature.

(h) The flag should never be used as a receptacle for receiving, holding, carrying, or delivering anything.

(i) The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not be fastened to a staff or halyard from which the flag is flown.

(j) No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.

(k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.

[Cav]

 

As early as 1974, congressional conferences on the televised news media were held so legislators could get “further insight into the problems that concern journalists,” bias in the news being high on their list.  Theodore Kopp, CBS VP, flippantly dismissed biased reporting as “in the eyes of the beholder,” his evidence being the integrity of Walter Cronkite whom no one present felt the urge to impinge.  But, the focus on journalists provided the smoke and mirrors to advert the attention to the real issue of news bias: the organization itself…CBS and several others.  (Dr. E.J. Epstein, 1974).

I agree wholeheartedly that it is the television viewer who is responsible for “the triumph of ‘infortainment.”  The distortions that entertaining “news” provides are threefold.  It encourages: (1) Self-pity; (2) A shortened attention span; and, (3) Superficial and emotional responses (Michael Medved, 1999).

My background provided me the opportunity to witness the American media erroneously report the progress of wars, from Viet Nam to Kuwait.  I suspect most other “events” also are reported in a way to fit the media’s mold, or not at all.  It was and still is simply reported wrong when it doesn’t fit the newsrooms’ agenda.  It’s as if they are hostile to the facts. 

Great leaders always have and probably always will “tangle” with the media.  Other leaders either use or are used by the media. 

       

 

[kylehutson]

6 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Kap earned over $40 million...if he, and his children, and his grandchildren, aren't set for life he's an idiot.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of "idiot" sports stars. Here's my first Google result - there are many others. http://thesportsdrop.com/15-broke-nfl-stars-and-how-they-blew-their-millions/

[HokieUmp]

12 hours ago, Cav said:

My dictionary gives me this: Respectful - marked by or showing esteem or consideration, an act of giving particular attention.  Disrespect would be the opposite.  Many have interpreted kneeling during the National Anthem as a disrespectful act in expressing low esteem or in being inconsiderate of the National Anthem, the U.S. Flag and therefore the country and all those who have and still do defend it, your wife included.  

(Emphasis added.)

And in response, I can only say "And many have not."  (A variation of "nuh-uh.")  As you might guess, I'm one of those who does not feel that disrespect to the flag or the military, or even the anthem, was shown.  Does everyone bow their heads if/when a prayer is offered?  Nope, because I know I don't.  Does that mean I'm showing disrespect to that person's prayer?  Nope.  (If I were to raise a ruckus of some sort, different story.)

Which is sort of the point I was trying to make about the enforceability of the Code you have quoted.  It's a VERY subjective matter, and opinions vary widely, even more so than other parts of the criminal code.  So how are you going to enforce disrespect, when, like obscenity, there's not a universal opinion on it?  As guidelines for handling the flag go, the Flag Code is fine;  as law, it doesn't make for great law.

As to the actual point of this - the kneel itself - I'll just tell you the exchange between my wife and myself just the other day, lest anyone think there are universally held feelings on this.

[CNN is on.  Discussion about Pres v NFL, claims of disrespect, etc.]  Me:  "So..... what do YOU think of this protest thing, as a retiree?"  Her:  [no kidding, tears come to her eyes] "Well, isn't that the reason I spent 21 years, so people would have the right to do that?  That's the point!"

As to NFL salaries:  yes, my bad.  I barely watch any length of The Shield on TV, and don't know game-related stats, never mind salary details.  I know not everything is guaranteed in the NFL, and honestly don't pay attention to contract numbers. I know that even minimum salary dogs my paycheck in a big way, so it's a matter of scale after that.  So yes, Kaep is set.

[HokieUmp]

12 hours ago, Umpire in Chief said:

The media's problem is they can no longer differentiate between fact and opinion. They cherry pick facts which support their world view and over-engross on the commentary/opinion. If you give me the real unfiltered facts I can form my own opinion.

But, then - where are you going to get your facts from, if not "the media?" 

So you watch a source, you know its biases and adjust appropriately.    If you see a person making news actually making their statements on video, at least those aspects of a story are pretty set, with no prism filtering them.

This will probably catch me more grief, but what about ..........  NPR or PBS as your media source, then?

//Runs for cover

[udbrky]

One thing that always bothers me at any game, is that everyone starts standing down and cheering during "and the home of the brave". 

 

I always stand with my hand over my heart through the end. (Do not take that as a condemnation of those that kneel protesting injustice, I just think if you are standing for it, stand for the whole thing in reverence). I agree with @lawump that you have to respect the flag fully. Too many pick and choose and it's annoying. 

[Cav]

7 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

Does everyone bow their heads if/when a prayer is offered?  Nope, because I know I don't.  Does that mean I'm showing disrespect to that person's prayer?  Nope.  (If I were to raise a ruckus of some sort, different story.)

You list disrespectful behavior while others pray to their God or object of worship, a myriad in which you may not believe, if any at all.  But, therein lies a difference: While there may exist myriad Gods or objects of worship, there is but one U.S.A. represented by Old Glory with which its ceremonies and customs U.S. citizens should comply, as cited within the code provided above.  Those that do demonstrate respect for the flag and the country; those that don't, disrespect.      

That code also lists respectful behavior for peoples who are present at a U.S. flag ceremony but not citizens of the U.S.  

8 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

Which is sort of the point I was trying to make about the enforceability of the Code you have quoted.  It's a VERY subjective matter, and opinions vary widely, even more so than other parts of the criminal code.  So how are you going to enforce disrespect, when, like obscenity, there's not a universal opinion on it?  As guidelines for handling the flag go, the Flag Code is fine;  as law, it doesn't make for great law.

Barring desecration of the U.S. flag by its citizens*, there is no behavior or act to "enforce."  Disrespect is in the "eyes of the beholder" much like your take on obscenity or an umpire's standards for malicious contact.  Many were offended by what they judged to be disrespectful behavior during a ceremony honoring the country, which the U.S. flag represents.  Many were not.      

Again, there is a time and place for everything.  Religious zealots who believe U.S. military deaths are somehow linked to our country's tolerance towards [insert grievance du jour] demonstrate disrespect when they protest at a service member's funeral.  It's neither the time nor the place for such acts.  Doing so offends and alienates the masses.    

 

 

*  http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section700&num=0&edition=prelim

[Kevin_K]

47 minutes ago, Cav said:

Barring desecration of the U.S. flag by its citizens*, there is no behavior or act to "enforce." 

*  http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section700&num=0&edition=prelim

If I read your comment correctly, it seems as though you indicate that desecrating the flag is illegal and you provide a link providing the details of a statute banning such practices.

The Supreme Court struck down the statute referenced in your link in the Texas v. Johnson case centered around flag burning. Congress has considered other bills regarding desecration of the flag but has not enacted any since this case.

If I have misinterpreted your words, please forgive my trangression(s).

[Cav]

1 minute ago, Kevin_K said:

If I have misinterpreted your words, please forgive my trangression(s).

No transgression; it's a debate.  I provided the link as it appeared in a research article.  Despite the expressions of so many around me, I'm not so thick as to be obtuse.         

[jjb]

I don’t know. I was brought up different. I’m a Baby Boomer, born just after a war, and was brought up to know that there’s a “right” and a “wrong.” Even through the 60’s and 70’s, things were the same; what you did was “right” or what you did was “wrong”.

Now it’s a mess; the lines that I was brought up with are being deliberately blurred. Kill your parents? “Not your fault, it’s because you weren’t breast fed”. Kill your ex-wife and her boyfriend? “Not a problem, one of the cops used the N-word 5 years ago”. Try and take the gun from a police officer? “not your fault, your great-great-grandmother may have been a slave”. For crying out loud, you can’t even call your son “he” anymore, without being called a “bigot and Dr. Suess is a white supremacist!”.

It seems that virtually everything in the country that’s designed to bring us together is being deliberately cast side. No longer are we “Americans”. We are now, “---------americans (small “a”), “------privileged americans”, “rich” “marginalized” “fascist” and “supremacist”. We’ve been broken up into parts to be eliminated one at a time. It seems that everything that’s supposed to keep us together is being cast aside as “old”, “antiquated” and “racist”.

Now we’re looking at symbols of America. First, it was “the confederate flag”. “Racist, gotta go, tear them down”. It then morphed into “confederate statues”. “Racist, gotta go, tear them down”, Then, it was Jefferson, Washington, Columbus. No one is safe. Where does it end?

Now we’ve gotten into sports. The one thing that brings us together. A guy in a Raider shirt can sit next to a guy in a Charger shirt, and, (aside from a little good-natured ribbing), together watch a competition away from work, politics or just “the real world”. And the competition starts with everyone standing together, hands across hearts and TOGETHER hearing that we are one nation. We’ll break up into Patriots and Jets later, but, for now, we are one….

Now it’s changed. The National Anthem is being discarded as “antiquated”, “obsolete” and “racist”. Burning, spitting on or turning your back on the symbol of the country is now considered “courageous”. Holding your hand over your heart is now “promoting white supremacy”. Right is now wrong and wrong is now right. What is “legal” but “wrong” no longer matters, as  long as its “legal”  IMHO Screw legal, can we do what’s RIGHT?!

[ElkOil]

4 hours ago, jjb said:

Screw legal, can we do what’s RIGHT?!

Therein lies the rub. Who's definition of "right" do we use? Those who kneel know in their hearts they are right. Those who condemn their actions wholeheartedly believe that they, too, are right. You cannot and should not legislate what is right in this scenario. We are all left having to agree to disagree and live and let live.

And while I agree with your post and your sentiment, it is the Constitutionally-protected right of the kneelers to kneel and the right of those to speak out against them to do so.

Maybe exercising those rights is the "right" you seek?  Because that's the only way we can all be "right."

[lawump]

On 9/30/2017 at 9:44 PM, jjb said:

Now we’re looking at symbols of America. First, it was “the confederate flag”. “Racist, gotta go, tear them down”. It then morphed into “confederate statues”. “Racist, gotta go, tear them down”, Then, it was Jefferson, Washington, Columbus. No one is safe. Where does it end?

 

I, and many others, have never considered "the confederate flag," or statutes to confederate leaders/generals to be "symbols of America".  I say this even though my wife and children (whom I love more than life itself) are direct descendants of a confederate army colonel.  For me (and many others...including my wife) they are symbols of the Confederate States of America...a self-professed separate nation/country.

[VolUmp]

On 9/25/2017 at 1:13 PM, stevis said:

Mm-hmm.  And Kapernick is employed where again?

He's paying the price. 

Kaepernick was NOT showing bravery ... rather, stupidity.  Tom Brady — he could have gotten away with it.  Cam Newton, Russell Wilson, and a few more black, healthy, starting QBs could have gotten away with it. 

Kaepernick had the misfortune of thinking he was more valuable than he is — that he’d raise an army like JACOB and all would follow like CALEB, 

Well ... first off ... everyone seems to forget that he did NOT start by taking a knee ... he started by sitting on the bench with his arms draped lazily on the bench back, and his protest “style” was pi$$ poor.

Secondly, sometimes your value ON the field is not worth the distractions and problems of your antics OFF the field.

That is NOT an act of bravery.  That’s an act of Gross Miscalculation of self-worth. Kaepernick thought he ha a golden halo around his head, and much to his surprise, he didn’t.