Will Blazers protest the anthem this year?

[MARIS61]

The politicians and the government of this country are shady, and it's people are extremely divided. This is a great country because of the freedom and rights given to its people, but other than that...

There are 2 kinds of countries in the world.

America, and the rest.

We're the greatest country in the history of the planet, and nobody else even comes close.

 

[Natebishop3]

There is absolutely no protected right to disregard your job description or rules of your workplace while you are on the clock and receiving pay for it.

The NFL quite clearly states exactly how players are to act/perform during the National Anthem. It also prescribes fines, suspensions, and loss of draft picks for any and all violations. Every player, coach and team that has violated these rules needs to be punished or the NFL will be setting a legal precedent that will prevent them from ever being able to discipline any employees for anything in the future.

Demonstrating/making political statements at work is not a protected right, in fact it can be in violation of quite a few Federal Workplace Laws. Burning a flag at work is no different than burning a jewish dummy in effigy at work. Hate crime against a particular culture.

Burning your own flag is not a hate crime. And it's up to the NFL to punish their players. If the NFL agrees with the reasons, or chooses not to punish them, then that's up to league. It's not up to you, it's not up to me, and it's not up to the President. Your power is that you can choose not to spend your money. That's it.

Everyone can choose to either support the NFL, or don't.

Did our forefathers commit hate crimes against the crown?

 

[BonesJones]

There are 2 kinds of countries in the world.

America, and the rest.

We're the greatest country in the history of the planet, and nobody else even comes close.

I'm sure many citizens of many different countries would say the same thing.

 

[BonesJones]

I don't give a fuck about the flag. I hate their cause because at its core it's racist and disingenuous. When you make police violence, incarceration, and sentencing solely a race issue when there is greater disparity correlated to gender and mental health then it becomes a racist movement. I've been downvoted to hell for making this argument elsewhere, but no one has given me a satisfactory explanation for why despite being more correlated with discrimination, mental health and gender aren't considered at least at the same level as race is. As far as I can tell, no one is protesting the 66% longer sentences that men get for the same crime as women. They protest because black men are being sentenced longer than white men, despite that gap not being nearly as big as the gender gap. The same thing happens with the mentally ill in police shootings, only this time, the mentally ill are shot and killed by police at a higher per capita rate than blacks are. It's only the race angle that plays, otherwise these spoiled athletes don't give a fuck about these problems.

Lmao. I think Dame cares about the mentally ill, and if you would bring it up he would be concerned about it. Many of these athletes work with Special Olympics.

The problem is, there isn't systemic prejudice towards these groups at the same level as there are towards minorities. Show me a comparable pattern bias towards a group (that's defined by something other than race) over as many systemic issues that colored people face. You're trying to use individual situations to argue a pattern...

 

[Natebishop3]

There are 2 kinds of countries in the world.

America, and the rest.

We're the greatest country in the history of the planet, and nobody else even comes close.

Obligatory

 

[MARIS61]

Burning your own flag is not a hate crime. And it's up to the NFL to punish their players. If the NFL agrees with the reasons, or chooses not to punish them, then that's up to league. It's not up to you, it's not up to me, and it's not up to the President. Your power is that you can choose not to spend your money. That's it.

Everyone can choose to either support the NFL, or don't.

Did our forefathers commit hate crimes against the crown?

Yes, and were hung for treason. Are you suggesting we hang the players for treason?

 

[dviss1]

Yes, and were hung for treason. Are you suggesting we hang the players for treason?

Kneeling during the anthem is now treason?

Jingoism at it's finest.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[dviss1]

 

[Natebishop3]

Yes, and were hung for treason. Are you suggesting we hang the players for treason?

What made this country great was the ability to speak out against the government as a given right, by law. And if you want to start calling this treason, you're going down a very dangerous path. The more the government tells our people they can't do something, the more they're going to do it.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Fuck her. Don't care about the guys protesting. Totally not a conservative.

Wait, social liberal fiscal conservative is what I think I am. People can fuck grapefruits for all I care. The two party system is broken

 

[dviss1]

Fuck her. Don't care about the guys protesting. Totally not a conservative.

Wait, social liberal fiscal conservative is what I think I am. People can fuck grapefruits for all I care. The two party system is broken

It's not about any of that. The meme is about the hypocrisy of the right wing. They say "don't protest at work" but ol' girl did and they loved her for it.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

It's not about any of that. The meme is about the hypocrisy of the right wing. They say "don't protest at work" but ol' girl did and they loved her for it.

That's why when HCP asked what we thought of old dude's commentary the part I agreed with most was the right's hypocrisy.

Obvious hypocrisy is obvious.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

It's not about any of that. The meme is about the hypocrisy of the right wing. They say "don't protest at work" but ol' girl did and they loved her for it.

Seems like a pretty clear false equivalency. I'd be willing to explain, if you're interested in hearing it.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

People can fuck grapefruits for all I care.

Cantaloupe?

 

[dviss1]

Seems like a pretty clear false equivalency. I'd be willing to explain, if you're interested in hearing it.

You are the most respectful debater in the forum and always have something to add from a conservative christian viewpoint.

I would always listen to you and be interested in what you have to say.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Cantaloupe?

Probably wouldn't burn da p hole

 

[PtldPlatypus]

You are the most respectful debater in the forum and always have something to add from a conservative christian viewpoint.

I would always listen to you and be interested in what you have to say.

To me, there are several clear differences, the most obvious of which is that Kim Davis' "protest" was simply a refusal to engage in the very act with which she took issue. It was a (recently changed) element of her job which she was protesting.

NFL players are using time on the job to protest something completely outside of their job requirements. This would be why some might say, "stop protesting and do your job." Their job and their protest are unrelated.

If (by contrast) they were actually protesting the fact that the anthem is played before games, or that they are expected to stand out on the field during it, then their protest would absolutely be analogous to Davis'.

 

[Natebishop3]

To me, there are several clear differences, the most obvious of which is that Kim Davis' "protest" was simply a refusal to engage in the very act with which she took issue. It was a (recently changed) element of her job which she was protesting.

NFL players are using time on the job to protest something completely outside of their job requirements. This would be why some might say, "stop protesting and do your job." Their job and their protest are unrelated.

If (by contrast) they were actually protesting the fact that the anthem is played before games, or that they are expected to stand out on the field during it, then their protest would absolutely be analogous to Davis'.

When the NFL includes "flag decorum" in their contracts, it becomes part of their job. If standing for the flag was optional, that would be a different story, but it's not. Maris spoke about this in one of his posts.

So if it's part of their contract, and they have to do it or they're in breach of contract and can be fined/suspended, then I think it's exactly like what that other woman did.

HOWEVER, I would say that what she did was worse because that was a huge part of what her job description was, but NFL players are paid to play football. So forcing players to do something that's against their personal beliefs and has nothing to do with their job description is, in my opinion, worse.

Edit - also I'll add that Kim Davis was elected. She works for the people. That's not a private organization.

 

[MARIS61]

What made this country great was the ability to speak out against the government as a given right, by law. And if you want to start calling this treason, you're going down a very dangerous path. The more the government tells our people they can't do something, the more they're going to do it.

You're the one who compared it to treason, which is what our forefathers committed (according to Britain) when they spoke against British rule.

If done on their own time away from the job, I see it as free speech, with no actual defined message other than negativity and entitled whininess, directed at who knows?

An ineffectually targeted, non-defined message put forth in a rude and insulting manner. Seems like something an idiot would do.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

To me, there are several clear differences, the most obvious of which is that Kim Davis' "protest" was simply a refusal to engage in the very act with which she took issue. It was a (recently changed) element of her job which she was protesting.

NFL players are using time on the job to protest something completely outside of their job requirements. This would be why some might say, "stop protesting and do your job." Their job and their protest are unrelated.

If (by contrast) they were actually protesting the fact that the anthem is played before games, or that they are expected to stand out on the field during it, then their protest would absolutely be analogous to Davis'.

So she was refusing to do her job, whereas they were not refusing to do their job? Her job is to sign marriage certificates (no part of which had changed) whereas their job is to play football (which they have continued to do).

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Take it from me, when you're his age, taking a knee takes courage. (a) it's agony, and (b) you may not get up again.

(Love his old man slippers.)

 

[Driew]

I'm cool with us not even singing the national anthem at sporting events. Save us 3 minutes of our lives that we can't get back and it gets us to the game faster. I don't like that my tax dollars go to the military's marketing campaign (which includes paying the NFL/NBA etc to allow the military to attend these events.)

 

[MarAzul]

That little Obama skit you have running seems like he is speaking about my healthcare retirement benefits.

 

[barfo]

Fuck her.

Pass.

People can fuck grapefruits for all I care.

That would be preferable to the previous option.

barfo

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

I don't give a shit what the players decide to do as far as kneeling or whatever. As long as the game starts on time I'll be OK.

 

[barfo]

An ineffectually targeted, non-defined message put forth in a rude and insulting manner. Seems like something an idiot would do.

Whoa, a self-referential post.

barfo

 

[crandc]

To me, there are several clear differences, the most obvious of which is that Kim Davis' "protest" was simply a refusal to engage in the very act with which she took issue. It was a (recently changed) element of her job which she was protesting.

NFL players are using time on the job to protest something completely outside of their job requirements. This would be why some might say, "stop protesting and do your job." Their job and their protest are unrelated.

If (by contrast) they were actually protesting the fact that the anthem is played before games, or that they are expected to stand out on the field during it, then their protest would absolutely be analogous to Davis'.

Disagree. Kim Davis' job did not change. Her job was to issue marriage licenses, among other duties, and she was paid $80K (very high for that area) to do so. She decided some people were unworthy and refused to do her job.

Part of the players' jobs are to participate in team activities. Including the anthem ceremony, although it's become rite. A player can't say "I don't feel like it" or even "I'm Canadian" and stay in locker room. True, not the main part of their job but still within the scope of job duties.

The point of that graphic is the idea that for a gay-hating white Christian taking a stand was a good thing, but for black Christian athletes it is not.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Disagree. Kim Davis' job did not change. Her job was to issue marriage licenses, among other duties, and she was paid $80K (very high for that area) to do so. She decided some people were unworthy and refused to do her job.

Part of the players' jobs are to participate in team activities. Including the anthem ceremony, although it's become rite. A player can't say "I don't feel like it" or even "I'm Canadian" and stay in locker room. True, not the main part of their job but still within the scope of job duties.

The point of that graphic is the idea that for a gay-hating white Christian taking a stand was a good thing, but for black Christian athletes it is not.

The words of the graphic were that one was considered acceptable at the workplace, and the other wasn't. I've explained why one was relevant to the workplace, and the other wasn't.

I'm not debating the merits of either "protest"--simply the appropriateness of the location of each.

 

[Natebishop3]

The words of the graphic were that one was considered acceptable at the workplace, and the other wasn't. I've explained why one was relevant to the workplace, and the other wasn't.

I'm not debating the merits of either "protest"--simply the appropriateness of the location of each.

You did not reply to my post though.