NFL adopts new Anthem policy

[bluebombers87]

Just now, Buck Showalter said:

Lol... 

Seriously would not bother me... Intentions mean more to me then outer appearances & if "that person" in your analogy was close to "my loved one" in your analogy, I probably would not be surprised...

 

I do not believe for an instance that kneeling players want to offend. I believe their is a difference between wanting your voice to be heard & offending...

And that’s why we have the divide. You’d laugh, but others would be offended. 

 

I believe the players want people to notice, which generates discussion. I just happen to disagree with disrespecting/politicizing one of the few remaining unifying items this country had left.

[Myles]

18 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Lol... 

Seriously would not bother me... Intentions mean more to me then outer appearances & if "that person" in your analogy was close to "my loved one" in your analogy, I probably would not be surprised...

 

I do not believe for an instance that kneeling players want to offend. I believe there is a difference between wanting your voice to be heard & offending...

But the guy in the ripped up shirt and crocs could be considered an *.   Just like Kaep.  

Pehaps he wanted to protest Nascar not being accepted at events that people should dress up at.  

[DougDew]

3 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Overpriced is subjective. It's overpriced to you but someone else is perfectly willing to pay for it. The whole tax stuff is a whole ball of wax unto itself for sure. A lot of my tax money goes to causes I 100% don't support. Govt funds planned parenthood and I've got no choice in that. It isn't fair and I wish it would change but it happens. The NFL wastes tons of money on tons of things...this may or may not have a positive impact on those same communities that are being taxed to support the NFL in their community. I do think the organizations receiving money from this charity work should be monitored obviously...but it changes nothing. The 90 million is a small slice of the operating costs (and fully deductible tax write off for the NFL) so I doubt its affecting your cost of parking etc....and considering most parking costs are from private parking garages etc I would say just the ticket and beer prices should worry you. Fact is you don't have to pay anything to the NFL if you watch it on free tv. Am I mistaken part of the 90 million is coming from the players association? So actually the NFL isn't paying for this whole thing. The players association which gets dues from the players is putting money into this charity too. I guess I don't understand the problem. Why is giving money to social programs a bad thing?

Well, if we are being taxed by the government 1% to basically support a private enterprise, the fans should have more say than a few protesters about where ALL of revenue goes.  That seems fair.

 

But shakedowns are never fair, so that's a moot point.

[Buck Showalter]

3 minutes ago, Myles said:

My guess is that is was looked at differently by this guy.

Ok & out there on the internet there is a picture of a vet kneeling showing solidarity with the protesters???

 

It does not explain the distinction between acknowledging the anthem & disrespecting it

[PrincetonTiger]

17 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Lol... 

Seriously would not bother me... Intentions mean more to me then outer appearances & if "that person" in your analogy was close to "my loved one" in your analogy, I probably would not be surprised...

 

I do not believe for an instance that kneeling players want to offend. I believe there is a difference between wanting your voice to be heard & offending...

I am country kid and and have experienced workers coming right out the field and go directly to Church, Restaurant, Funeral Home, Sporting Events etc so nothing bothers me 

11 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Ok & out there on the internet there is a picture of a vet kneeling showing solidarity with the protesters???

 

It does not explain the distinction between acknowledging the anthem & disrespecting it

Thought of those men too

[Buck Showalter]

7 minutes ago, Myles said:

But the guy in the ripped up shirt and crocs could be considered an *.   Just like Kaep.  

Pehaps he wanted to protest Nascar not being accepted at events that people should dress up at.  

Could be, still very subjective...

 

If you like analogies would a veteran be offended that a person confined to a wheel chair can't stand during the anthem? Then why should someone be offended if people are symbolically saying "they can not stand" for the anthem while there is still injustice taking place in this country that their relatives may have also faught for???

[PrincetonTiger]

7 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Could be, still very subjective...

 

If you like analogies would a veteran be offended that a person confined to a wheel chair can't stand during the anthem? Then why should someone be offended if people are symbolically saying "they can not stand" for the anthem while there is still injustice taking place in this country that their relatives may have also faught for???

That is what we need to remember 

[Buck Showalter]

16 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

And that’s why we have the divide. You’d laugh, but others would be offended. 

 

I believe the players want people to notice, which generates discussion. I just happen to disagree with disrespecting/politicizing one of the few remaining unifying items this country had left.

To the bolded, that is fair point. But I would also argue that as a country, you are in pretty big trouble if the last unifying item left is the ritual practice associated with a song (regardless of all the symbolic things that represents)...

[bluebombers87]

4 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

To the bolded, that is fair point. But I would also argue that as a country, you are in pretty big trouble if the last unifying item left is the ritual practice associated with a song (regardless of all the symbolic things that represents)...

No, this country is in trouble because a murdered 9 year old girl who was killed by gang members gets less airtime than some joke who kneels, wears cops are pig socks, and wears a Fidel Castro shirt. That girl, is one of thousands of people NOT killed by cops, but we’re being told the real problem are bad cops who kill (justified or not) a fraction of unarmed people by comparison.

 

Thats why this country is in trouble.

[Myles]

24 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Could be, still very subjective...

 

If you like analogies would a veteran be offended that a person confined to a wheel chair can't stand during the anthem? Then why should someone be offended if people are symbolically saying "they can not stand" for the anthem while there is still injustice taking place in this country that their relatives may have also faught for???

If you don't understand you are too far gone.  

[Buck Showalter]

9 minutes ago, Myles said:

If you don't understand you are too far gone.  

If I don't understand what?

 

The analogy between someone in a wheel chair & someone saying they can not symbolically stand?

Or why acknowledging the anthem by kneeling should be considered disrespectful? 

 

I would say that someone who can not distinguish between someone acknowledging the anthem by kneeling & purposeful direspect, may hold beliefs counter to what is being protested... 

[Finball]

2 hours ago, csmopar said:

from what I gather, the media didn't catch it until a couple days AFTER he started but that the day he started was hours after officially being benched for the second time to Gabbert. 

 

It was couple of weeks. He sat on the bench for the first two games, but it went mostly unnoticed. He was recovering from offseason injuries and didn't dress for the game. Then on the 3rd week it was noticed, apparently kind of accidentially.

 

https://www.sbnation.com/2016/9/11/12869726/colin-kaepernick-national-anthem-protest-seahawks-brandon-marshall-nfl

[dgambill]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Well, if we are being taxed by the government 1% to basically support a private enterprise, the fans should have more say than a few protesters about where ALL of revenue goes.  That seems fair.

 

But shakedowns are never fair, so that's a moot point.

Gotcha...yeah that is a question if the private enterprise is worth the 1% tax to have in the community. Through increased tax revenue, jobs, and tourist money spent in the community from those coming to the games etc. You also have the players and staff that are employed typically living in the community and paying property taxes and sales taxes on the money they spend in the community too. But yes...typically the community gets short changed. I just don't see how the team operates and spends its money on this endeavor any more significant then say how they spend their advertising dollars or what they pay their coaches? You have the right to be concerned but I don't see how a class action suit would do anything. I mean the Colts fired Pagano and are throwing money away at him and all the players they cut that have guaranteed money. Should you file a class action suit against them for miss appropriating those funds? To me it's their money and they can spend it how they choose fit....and I have the right not to support the team if I don't like what they are doing. That said maybe if you protest they will listen to you...after all only a few protesters got them to give them 90 million?

[DougDew]

14 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Gotcha...yeah that is a question if the private enterprise is worth the 1% tax to have in the community. Through increased tax revenue, jobs, and tourist money spent in the community from those coming to the games etc. You also have the players and staff that are employed typically living in the community and paying property taxes and sales taxes on the money they spend in the community too. But yes...typically the community gets short changed. I just don't see how the team operates and spends its money on this endeavor any more significant then say how they spend their advertising dollars or what they pay their coaches? You have the right to be concerned but I don't see how a class action suit would do anything. I mean the Colts fired Pagano and are throwing money away at him and all the players they cut that have guaranteed money. Should you file a class action suit against them for miss appropriating those funds? To me it's their money and they can spend it how they choose fit....and I have the right not to support the team if I don't like what they are doing. That said maybe if you protest they will listen to you...after all only a few protesters got them to give them 90 million?

We all make choices with our wallets.  Usually it comes down to price...not principles.  I get that.

 

Instead of raising taxes, some municipalities choose to give tax breaks for companies to locate there.  Same deal financially really.

 

And yes, if that company gave a chunk of their revenue over to a few agitators  I would want to hear the arguments.  The public deserves to hear the reason. 

 

Not just their explanation.  Hold  a public hearing, say, on television, forcing them to explain their position in a rational way.  Maybe have their positions challenged instead of just letting them talk, then dropping the mic.

 

.Yes, I would no longer want to give that company any tax breaks if the whole process reeked of fraud and kickback.   Please leave town. 

 

Another group will come along, with another issue, and just take more, so its best the company just leave town now....or get new CEOs.

[Cynjin]

1 hour ago, Buck Showalter said:

Could be, still very subjective...

 

If you like analogies would a veteran be offended that a person confined to a wheel chair can't stand during the anthem? Then why should someone be offended if people are symbolically saying "they can not stand" for the anthem while there is still injustice taking place in this country that their relatives may have also faught for???

 

You really don't know the difference between the two situations you mentioned?  Really?

[PrincetonTiger]

Friendly Reminder from TigerTown

  instead of arguing semantics people need to be thankful that they can enjoy Live Sporting Events

 

I know I struggle with it every day

[TheRustonRifle#7]

I am just glad that Football season is in sight!  If we all had the answers, then there would be no need for threads like this....GO COLTS!

[dgambill]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

We all make choices with our wallets.  Usually it comes down to price...not principles.  I get that.

 

Instead of raising taxes, some municipalities choose to give tax breaks for companies to locate there.  Same deal financially really.

 

And yes, if that company gave a chunk of their revenue over to a few agitators  I would want to hear the arguments.  The public deserves to hear the reason. 

 

Not just their explanation.  Hold  a public hearing, say, on television, forcing them to explain their position in a rational way.  Maybe have their positions challenged instead of just letting them talk, then dropping the mic.

 

.Yes, I would no longer want to give that company any tax breaks if the whole process reeked of fraud and kickback.   Please leave town. 

 

Another group will come along, with another issue, and just take more, so its best the company just leave town now....or get new CEOs.

Gotcha...yes the way sports teams hold cities hostage...about as bad as unions, politicians on both sides, lobbists, mega churches, social advocates...I could go on and on. A lot of crud in the world...hard to keep up with all of it.

[dgambill]

We have almost 20 pages of people with differing opinions that feel a great deal about each side they stand on....whether its this issue or 100 others. So NFL makes a policy no matter what its going to tick off half the people basically. It's why they don't want their employees speaking out on these issues during prime time games...because even if both sides have a point...and good intentions these things detract and stir up issues for the organizations that have nothing to do with their product. The NFL can't win. To me they are doing the best thing...let those that want to protest do it on their time and dollar...not on the NFLs. Their objective is to make money and attract as many people as possible not alienate. Taking sides one way or another will do this. They don't have to force their employees to stand for the anthem. I respect that...they want to give to social causes to support the communities they operate in...I support that too (if the money is put to good use and not exploited for political purposes). People have good intentions I believe...but how to go about change and how to enact change is different...but that doesn't mean one side is bad or another...we just have to work towards the goal...but understand we may have to compromise on how we get there. All I know is the NFL doesn't want the controversy...its bad for business. They are compromising and trying to appease both sides and then move the discussion back to the product on the field. If only the media would let us have our football back without all the extra commentary we would be happy. I doubt that happens because both sides have an agenda to push in the media so we are stuck hearing it. As far as I'm concerned I'm done with this topic with the NFL. I won't be mad if someone wants to stay in the locker room....and I'm not mad those on the field have to stand. Let's bring it back to the fun of sports...and we can save the social justice for the dinner table at the in-laws....where we are already uncomfortable and miserable lol.

[Buck Showalter]

1 hour ago, Cynjin said:

 

You really don't know the difference between the two situations you mentioned?  Really?

 

I obviously know the physical difference, however, like in the analogy, if someone is saying "I can not symbolically stand" while there is injustice going on, but, I will acknowledge the anthem by peacefully kneeling, some players even bowing their heads in a motion often associated with prayer, I do not see the difference, or see a reason to associate it with disrespect. 

 

Now if the players were doing silly TD or sack style dances, yes, I would get the outrage & the association with "disrespect"... 

 

1 hour ago, Cynjin said:

The players are not acknowledging the anthem by kneeling, they are purposefully disrespecting it to garner attention.

The anthem holds symbolic meaning which can mean several things to several people. Many people associate the anthem directly with Veterans due to the lyrical content, while others may look at the anthem standing for America for more general nationalistic pride, as that is also a role of an anthem. I think, symbolically, the anthem can be and is both, and in different instances should be viewed under the two different microscopes. I do not think that is too far of a stretch, and I feel anyone who argues that, is also somewhat limiting of the anthems symbolic meaning & role.

 

Therefore, as the protests stand, I feel that many players are protesting the very real injustices that have gone on in America, choosing to kneel during the anthem, suggesting "they can not stand" for an anthem, a unifying call in this instance, of a country where significant racial injustices take place. I feel they are acknowledging the anthem, because that is when they are kneeling. They may not be acknowledging the "expected" ceremonial behavior of standing, but, they are assuming what I consider a respectful position, one that could suggest submission, and even prayer, so I would very much argue that they are acknowledging the anthem.

 

That image does not look like disrespect to me. I would fully understand why people are upset if the protesters were doing something aggressive, but I do not understand the immediate association with disrespect to a peaceful position.

 

Disobediance does not always have to equal disrespect in my mind. Disrespect, to me, suggests at least a level of intent or refusal to acknowledge, & like I said, to me, the players seem to very much be acknowledging the anthem because that is when they are kneeling. 

[Narcosys]

3 hours ago, csmopar said:

Ok not sure if serious but if so, wouldn't that pretty much confirm it was a protest that started because he was benched?

Oh it was a joke. But it makes sense, he sat on the bench originally until after preseason game 3 he got noticed and then some time after it went national he started kneeling.

[PrincetonTiger]

13 minutes ago, dgambill said:

We have almost 20 pages of people with differing opinions that feel a great deal about each side they stand on....whether its this issue or 100 others. So NFL makes a policy no matter what its going to tick off half the people basically. It's why they don't want their employees speaking out on these issues during prime time games...because even if both sides have a point...and good intentions these things detract and stir up issues for the organizations that have nothing to do with their product. The NFL can't win. To me they are doing the best thing...let those that want to protest do it on their time and dollar...not on the NFLs. Their objective is to make money and attract as many people as possible not alienate. Taking sides one way or another will do this. They don't have to force their employees to stand for the anthem. I respect that...they want to give to social causes to support the communities they operate in...I support that too (if the money is put to good use and not exploited for political purposes). People have good intentions I believe...but how to go about change and how to enact change is different...but that doesn't mean one side is bad or another...we just have to work towards the goal...but understand we may have to compromise on how we get there. All I know is the NFL doesn't want the controversy...its bad for business. They are compromising and trying to appease both sides and then move the discussion back to the product on the field. If only the media would let us have our football back without all the extra commentary we would be happy. I doubt that happens because both sides have an agenda to push in the media so we are stuck hearing it. As far as I'm concerned I'm done with this topic with the NFL. I won't be mad if someone wants to stay in the locker room....and I'm not mad those on the field have to stand. Let's bring it back to the fun of sports...and we can save the social justice for the dinner table at the in-laws....where we are already uncomfortable and miserable lol.

The problem is that for many Football is not entertainment it is life

 

  in my case it brought my parents together and provided therapy for me 

 

 

  

[Buck Showalter]

1 minute ago, Narcosys said:

Oh it was a joke. But it makes sense, he sat on the bench originally until after preseason game 3 he got noticed and then some time after it went national he started kneeling.

If I remember correctly, it was also after he consulted a Marine on the most "appropriate" way to protest...

[csmopar]

4 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

If I remember correctly, it was also after he consulted a Marine on the most "appropriate" way to protest...

Source please? Google turned up nothing for me

[PrincetonTiger]

12 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

If I remember correctly, it was also after he consulted a Marine on the most "appropriate" way to protest...

I might be wrong but he had toyed around with what to do and then asked a former NFL player and Green Beret what would be appropriate 

[Buck Showalter]

4 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Source please? Google turned up nothing for me

As I said I was just trying to recall from memory, would have no idea where it was documented.. 

2 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I might be wrong but he have toyed around with what to do and then asked a former NFL player and Green Beret what would be appropriate 

However, this seems correct, as to what was reported...

[PrincetonTiger]

4 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Source please? Google turned up nothing for me

It was Nate Boyer and I found it very quickly on my phone 

[PrincetonTiger]

4 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

As I said I was just trying to recall from memory, would have no idea where it was documented.. 

However, this seems correct, as to what was reported...

It was Nate Boyer

 

 

  I am on my phone so I can’t provide a link

 

   but I searched “Colin Kaepernick Protest” and it was discussed on a USA Today article 

[Narcosys]

15 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

If I remember correctly, it was also after he consulted a Marine on the most "appropriate" way to protest...

Green beret, but Ya. 

12 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Source please? Google turned up nothing for me

https://www.sbnation.com/2016/9/11/12869726/colin-kaepernick-national-anthem-protest-seahawks-brandon-marshall-nfl

[DougDew]

51 minutes ago, dgambill said:

We have almost 20 pages of people with differing opinions that feel a great deal about each side they stand on....whether its this issue or 100 others. So NFL makes a policy no matter what its going to tick off half the people basically. It's why they don't want their employees speaking out on these issues during prime time games...because even if both sides have a point...and good intentions these things detract and stir up issues for the organizations that have nothing to do with their product. The NFL can't win. To me they are doing the best thing...let those that want to protest do it on their time and dollar...not on the NFLs. Their objective is to make money and attract as many people as possible not alienate. Taking sides one way or another will do this. They don't have to force their employees to stand for the anthem. I respect that...they want to give to social causes to support the communities they operate in...I support that too (if the money is put to good use and not exploited for political purposes). People have good intentions I believe...but how to go about change and how to enact change is different...but that doesn't mean one side is bad or another...we just have to work towards the goal...but understand we may have to compromise on how we get there. All I know is the NFL doesn't want the controversy...its bad for business. They are compromising and trying to appease both sides and then move the discussion back to the product on the field. If only the media would let us have our football back without all the extra commentary we would be happy. I doubt that happens because both sides have an agenda to push in the media so we are stuck hearing it. As far as I'm concerned I'm done with this topic with the NFL. I won't be mad if someone wants to stay in the locker room....and I'm not mad those on the field have to stand. Let's bring it back to the fun of sports...and we can save the social justice for the dinner table at the in-laws....where we are already uncomfortable and miserable lol.

Nothing wrong with protesting, civil disobedience, or exercising freedom of speech.

 

But civil disobedience for simple disruption's sake is no different than vandalism.  Ruin something just for the heck of it.  It needs to be supported by a reason, and it gains a lot more traction if the reason is clearly understood by everyone.

 

Agreeing or disagreeing comes later.  You first have to understand how the disobedience even makes sense.

 

Somebody said ESPN now stands for...Exceptionally Stupid Political Network.  For whatever reason, they can't talk about sports without trying to link it to some social meaning.  I think they just got too big for their britches and think their opinions about other things are too important for the world not to hear.  Kinda like Colin Cowherd full time.

 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

40 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Green beret, but Ya. 

https://www.sbnation.com/2016/9/11/12869726/colin-kaepernick-national-anthem-protest-seahawks-brandon-marshall-nfl

Thanks for doing the “leg” work 

 

  Because  I can’t provide the link for the article I found

[Cynjin]

50 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

 

I obviously know the physical difference, however, like in the analogy, if someone is saying "I can not symbolically stand" while there is injustice going on, but, I will acknowledge the anthem by peacefully kneeling, some players even bowing their heads in a motion often associated with prayer, I do not see the difference, or see a reason to associate it with disrespect. 

 

Now if the players were doing silly TD or sack style dances, yes, I would get the outrage & the association with "disrespect"... 

 

The anthem holds symbolic meaning which can mean several things to several people. Many people associate the anthem directly with Veterans due to the lyrical content, while others may look at the anthem standing for America for more general nationalistic pride, as that is also a role of an anthem. I think, symbolically, the anthem can be and is both, and in different instances should be viewed under the two different microscopes. I do not think that is too far of a stretch, and I feel anyone who argues that, is also somewhat limiting of the anthems symbolic meaning & role.

 

Therefore, as the protests stand, I feel that many players are protesting the very real injustices that have gone on in America, choosing to kneel during the anthem, suggesting "they can not stand" for an anthem, a unifying call in this instance, of a country where significant racial injustices take place. I feel they are acknowledging the anthem, because that is when they are kneeling. They may not be acknowledging the "expected" ceremonial behavior of standing, but, they are assuming what I consider a respectful position, one that could suggest submission, and even prayer, so I would very much argue that they are acknowledging the anthem.

 

That image does not look like disrespect to me. I would fully understand why people are upset if the protesters were doing something aggressive, but I do not understand the immediate association with disrespect to a peaceful position.

 

Disobediance does not always have to equal disrespect in my mind. Disrespect, to me, suggests at least a level of intent or refusal to acknowledge, & like I said, to me, the players seem to very much be acknowledging the anthem because that is when they are kneeling. 

 

You can write all you want about hypothetical situations, but in this case, they are purposefully being disrespectful towards the national anthem in order to draw attention to there cause.  They were told that a lot of people found their kneeling to be disrespectful yet continued to do so.  Why?  Because they don't care about what I or the millions of others that find this disrespectful think.  However, they somehow want me to care about their cause even in the face of their blatant disregard for my thoughts.  If you want to continue to throw hypotheticals against the wall to see if any of them stick, fine, but I doubt anyone with a different opinion is going to buy into any of them.  All you will be left with is a pile of B. S. next to a wall.

[Buck Showalter]

26 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

You can write all you want about hypothetical situations, but in this case, they are purposefully being disrespectful towards the national anthem in order to draw attention to there cause.  They were told that a lot of people found their kneeling to be disrespectful yet continued to do so.  Why?  Because they don't care about what I or the millions of others that find this disrespectful think.  However, they somehow want me to care about their cause even in the face of their blatant disregard for my thoughts.  If you want to continue to throw hypotheticals against the wall to see if any of them stick, fine, but I doubt anyone with a different opinion is going to buy into any of them.  All you will be left with is a pile of nonsense next to a wall.

I agree I do not expect to change many peoples opinions this thread is evidence of that. 

I do not feel like I have thrown many hypotheticals around, however, I did make an analogy, but, I feel it is very particular to this anthem protest, so, not exactly a hypothetical.

 

While your point about disrespect is not lost on me, we will have to agree to disagree, because I do not see the disrespect. Disobedience yes, but I see America's anthem very much supporting disobedience if the cause is just, & as a God fearing man who just so happens to be an American (I feel lucky I was born here, but do not feel that it makes me better than any other person on this planet) I feel that those disobeying the expected ceremonial act of standing during the anthem & are doing so in a peaceful manner, have the right to be heard & are in the right as I feel their cause is just. I also feel, that, their cause is supported by the Declaration of Independence, a document that, in my mind, goes hand in hand with the anthem the players are peacefully protesting...

 

In my mind a Veteran or anyone who agrees with the Declaration of Independence should try to listen to what is being protested instead of imediately being offended by someone who assumes a peaceful, submissive stance.

 

 

[bluebombers87]

31 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

I agree I do not expect to change many peoples opinions this thread is evidence of that. 

I do not feel like I have thrown many hypotheticals around, however, I did make an analogy, but, I feel it is very particular to this anthem protest, so, not exactly a hypothetical.

 

While your point about disrespect is not lost on me, we will have to agree to disagree, because I do not see the disrespect. Disobedience yes, but I see America's anthem very much supporting disobedience if the cause is just, & as a God fearing man who just so happens to be an American (I feel lucky I was born here, but do not feel that it makes me better than any other person on this planet) I feel that those disobeying the expected ceremonial act of standing during the anthem & are doing so in a peaceful manner, have the right to be heard & are in the right as I feel their cause is just. I also feel, that, their cause is supported by the Declaration of Independence, a document that, in my mind, goes hand in hand with the anthem the players are peacefully protesting...

 

In my mind a Veteran or anyone who agrees with the Declaration of Independence should try to listen to what is being protested instead of imediately being offended by someone who assumes a peaceful, submissive stance.

 

 

Agreed. All parties should hear each others side of the story. It’s only through dialogue that balance is achieved to the satisfaction of both parties, which is what I think happened here.

 

However, I don’t believe that all sides aren’t being listened to. As another poster pointed out, in all interactions with police, fatal shootings of unarmed individuals represent such a minor percent that it is my contention that this protest is truly missing the big picture. Namely that non-police murders involving gangs, criminals, etc. are magnitudes larger and more frequent and pose a significantly larger threat to citizenry.

 

We can focus on more than one thing but one would be led to believe that the real issue are cops mowing down innocents left and right. That isn’t the case.

 

This is why many on the other side of the anthem protest are befuddled that a long held tradition that United us is being used as a political prop.

 

If they wanted to protest violence in general, I’m on board.

[Cynjin]

12 hours ago, Buck Showalter said:

I agree I do not expect to change many peoples opinions this thread is evidence of that. 

I do not feel like I have thrown many hypotheticals around, however, I did make an analogy, but, I feel it is very particular to this anthem protest, so, not exactly a hypothetical.

 

While your point about disrespect is not lost on me, we will have to agree to disagree, because I do not see the disrespect. Disobedience yes, but I see America's anthem very much supporting disobedience if the cause is just, & as a God fearing man who just so happens to be an American (I feel lucky I was born here, but do not feel that it makes me better than any other person on this planet) I feel that those disobeying the expected ceremonial act of standing during the anthem & are doing so in a peaceful manner, have the right to be heard & are in the right as I feel their cause is just. I also feel, that, their cause is supported by the Declaration of Independence, a document that, in my mind, goes hand in hand with the anthem the players are peacefully protesting...

 

In my mind a Veteran or anyone who agrees with the Declaration of Independence should try to listen to what is being protested instead of imediately being offended by someone who assumes a peaceful, submissive stance.

 

 

 

Yeah, because you do not care about the national anthem.  You have made that abundantly clear. Guess what millions of people do, why don't take into consideration the thoughts and feelings of those people.  I would ask the same of the players, most of those people would be willing to listen to their issues and offer support if this was gone about in a different way, not all but most.  Now they don't have any of them in their corner, they are now being told to shut up and play.  Somehow I don't believe their goal was to alienate a large segment of the population, but that is exactly what they have done with their actions.  So now, many of us have little sympathy for them.  They are leading a protest that is counterproductive to their employment and counterproductive to their cause and that seems to be lost on you and others.  I have said it before, don't do something that I consider to be disrespectful and then expect me to support your cause.

 

Also, I think you mean the Constitution of the United States unless you are talking about the part where the Declaration of Independence says something to the effect of that when a government becomes destructive to the ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that it is the right of the people to alter or overthrow that government and institute a new one.  That was really a call to a revolution against the King of Great Britain, I am assuming you are not calling for a revolution against the current government.

[Buck Showalter]

11 hours ago, Cynjin said:

 

Yeah, because you do not care about the national anthem.  You have made that abundantly clear. Guess what millions of people do, why don't take into consideration the thoughts and feelings of those people.  I would ask the same of the players, most of those people would be willing to listen to their issues and offer support if this was gone about in a different way, not all but most.  Now they don't have any of them in their corner, they are now being told to shut up and play.  Somehow I don't believe their goal was to alienate a large segment of the population, but that is exactly what they have done with their actions.  So now, many of us have little sympathy for them.  They are leading a protest that is counterproductive to their employment and counterproductive to their cause and that seems to be lost on you and others.  I have said it before, don't do something that I consider to be disrespectful and then expect me to support your cause.

 

Also, I think you mean the Constitution of the United States unless you are talking about the part where the Declaration of Independence says something to the effect of that when a government becomes destructive to the ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that it is the right of the people to alter or overthrow that government and institute a new one.  That was really a call to a revolution against the King of Great Britain, I am assuming you are not calling for a revolution against the current government.

I am sorry that you feel I am not taking into consideration those who are offended by the protest. But as someone else mentioned,  to look at the bigger, I see racial tension as the heart of the protest, so if choosing  between two sides who feel wronged, I will always side, with the side that has seen a history of terrible & horrible oppression. In the process I would hope that those who are offended because a ceremony is not upheld, could understand & put things into perspective, & especially since the protest came in a peaceful manner...

 

We are literally arguing people kneeling, rather than standing up... Is there no irony in that???

 

Peace to all this Memorial Day Weekend.