Anthem Protests

[LibertyTurns]

If the NFL had fired Tim Tebow for praying on the field, I wonder what the reactions of people in this thread would have been.

It's ok if you're bashing conservatives but whoa can't be offending the poor sensitive liberals. I must be the only one this kind of crap pisses off.

http://www.afa.net/the-stand/culture/2016/09/the-nfls-selective-freedom-of-expression-policy/

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Welp nice knowing ya. I hear that NASCAR races get pretty exciting the last 10 laps.

So we know each other? And NASCAR bores me. I have plenty of other avenues to pursue to utilize my time but thanks for your considerate effort to bring one possibility forward.

 

[kg01]

Legit question: Where and when is the least offensive time to protest?

Wherever no one's sensibilities are offended. Can't upset anyone by challenging the status quo, ya know.

All these *ahem* 'kids' need to know their place.

 

[jeffgt14]

It's ok if you're bashing conservatives but whoa can't be offending the poor sensitive liberals. I must be the only one this kind of crap pisses off.

http://www.afa.net/the-stand/culture/2016/09/the-nfls-selective-freedom-of-expression-policy/

Not particularly a fan of the way this article is written but yes I agree with the general premise of it.

 

[96Jacket]

I honestly wouldn't mind if we did away with anthems before sporting events altogether. There's no logical connection between the two. We don't play the anthem before any number of different types of public gatherings or events. My employer certainly doesn't play it here at my office every morning before my colleagues and I get to work. No other country I'm aware of (unless you count Canada's participation in our major leagues) engages in playing the anthem before club matches.

No anthem before games means no outlet for political protest for participants and no observers in the media or fanbase getting offended.

Problem solved?

 

[A Love Supreme]

So we know each other? And NASCAR bores me. I have plenty of other avenues to pursue to utilize my time but thanks for your considerate effort to bring one possibility forward.

Only know you through the post on this site of course. But maybe not for long because in my opinion GT will not reprehend the young lady's action or any other student athlete that decides to exercise his or her 1st amendment rights on campus. You said you left the NFL for this. I could be wrong though.

 

[northgajacket]

I honestly wouldn't mind if we did away with anthems before sporting events altogether. There's no logical connection between the two. We don't play the anthem before any number of different types of public gatherings or events. My employer certainly doesn't play it here at my office every morning before my colleagues and I get to work. No other country I'm aware of (unless you count Canada's participation in our major leagues) engages in playing the anthem before club matches.

No anthem before games means no outlet for political protest for participants and no observers in the media or fanbase getting offended.

Problem solved?

Thank You.

 

[RonJohn]

You must not have been paying attention for the last year. This began as a protest against police in particular and national racism / oppression in general. It hasn't evolved since, it has simply grown.

This began with Kaepernick's explanation of why he sat during the anthem.(Seated not kneeling) Two days after he was asked to provide an explanation by the press, he said it was for racial injustice. I wasn't convinced at the time that that was the real reason. He was apparently not the starter on the team anymore and was in danger of being cut in the preseason. He had displayed indications that he was ticked off about his status on the team. I don't know for sure why he sat, but I don't put a lot of stock into his statements. If he had said before doing it that he was protesting something, then I would have more reason to believe him.

After his statements, the protests began to gain a life of their own. At this point, I'm not sure anybody knows why they are protesting. I'm not sure many of the protesters know why some people find the protests offensive. I'm not sure that all of the people who are offended by the protests understand motivation of the protesters or even why they are offended. It seems like at this point you are either a "protester" or a "patriot". What either of those groups stands for or is trying to achieve appears to be irrelevant. They are two groups that must oppose each other for some reason that I don't understand.

 

[RonJohn]

Only know you through the post on this site of course. But maybe not for long because in my opinion GT will not reprehend the young lady's action or any other student athlete that decides to exercise his or her 1st amendment rights on campus. You said you left the NFL for this. I could be wrong though.

I don't know what they might do about this, but I remember when V Lee put things on his arms or sweatbands supporting a player union, CPJ said that he talked with the players who did that. If I remember correctly, he told them that when in uniform and representing the team that IF they want to support/protest something, they should discuss it with the team and vote. If the vote of the team was unanimous that they could do what they wanted to do. If not, it wasn't fair to anyone who didn't agree to bring them into the middle of it. The way I took those statements is that if the entire team wanted to support/protest something they could. If only individual team members wanted to support/protest something, they could, but should do it as individuals and not as the team.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

@RonJohn

It's pretty simple. Protesters think the legal justice system is biased / racist as is the government / nation as a whole (both historically and currently to a large degree). Thus they are protesting these perceived injustices by protesting / denouncing the symbols of our country, our flag and national anthem.

Those that find this offensive do so for several reasons (differing to degrees but for the most part I believe in agreement overall). I'll speak to what many I've discussed this with are in agreement on. Most of us take pride in our country, focusing on the positives while not forgetting the shortcomings. Most recognize our flag and anthem to be symbols of our nation as a whole. Most recognize and appreciate the sacrifices our veterans have made to our nation. We hold with solemn regard the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who gave the ultimate sacrifice to protect our nation, citizens, and freedoms. Most regard the perceived denunciation of these symbols as a denunciation of our nation as a whole and a denunciation or dismissal of the sacrifices made by our veterans. Too many have lost loved ones in these endeavors. So it is quite personal for them. Most are thus offended by the "protests" for these reasons.

I've never respected anyone who failed to stand for or remove their hat during the national anthem. I don't respect it but I recognize their right to do so (or not do so).

I think any representative of Tech should understand their actions reflect upon the institute. And should thus be held to certain standards of decency while representing same. If Tech administration disagrees that is their decision. I will have my own to make.

 

[RonJohn]

It's pretty simple. Protesters think the legal justice system is biased / racist as is the government / nation as a whole (both historically and currently to a large degree. Thus they are protesting these perceived injustices by protesting / denouncing the symbols of our country, our flag and national anthem.

Really? I heard a lot of statements from NFL players regarding yesterday's arm locking. I didn't hear anything like that. I heard things similar to "standing together for unity". "Unity" in what I'm not sure because I never heard anyone give an actual description. The NFL players who have knelt before have vague statements about injustice. Kaepernick had a formal statement two days after an off the cuff statement of "racial inequality and police brutality". The formal statement was written better, but didn't describe anything about a result of the protest. I haven't heard anyone protesting describe what they would like to see as a result of the protests. Better primary education for poor minority children? More public accountability for police officers? What would satisfy the supposed need to protest? It appears to me that the large NFL protest yesterday was basically a multi-billion dollar company protesting against someone who was attempting to rally a boycott against them. It appears to me that many of the regular protesters are doing so because they feel a brotherhood with the protest, without having any clear idea of exactly what they are protesting or what they are attempting to achieve by the protest.

 

[AE 87]

@RonJohn

It's pretty simple. Protesters think the legal justice system is biased / racist as is the government / nation as a whole (both historically and currently to a large degree). Thus they are protesting these perceived injustices by protesting / denouncing the symbols of our country, our flag and national anthem.

Those that find this offensive do so for several reasons (differing to degrees but for the most part I believe in agreement overall). I'll speak to what many I've discussed this with are in agreement on. Most of us take pride in our country, focusing on the positives while not forgetting the shortcomings. Most recognize our flag and anthem to be symbols of our nation as a whole. Most recognize and appreciate the sacrifices our veterans have made to our nation. We hold with solemn regard the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who gave the ultimate sacrifice to protect our nation, citizens, and freedoms. Most regard the perceived denunciation of these symbols as a denunciation of our nation as a whole and a denunciation or dismissal of the sacrifices made by our veterans. Too many have lost loved ones in these endeavors. So it is quite personal for them. Most are thus offended by the "protests" for these reasons.

I've never respected anyone who failed to stand for or remove their hat during the national anthem. I don't respect it but I recognize their right to do so (or not do so).

I think any representative of Tech should understand their actions reflect upon the institute. And should thus be held to certain standards of decency while representing same. If Tech administration disagrees that is their decision. I will have my own to make.

I agree. Let me add two comments:
1) Generic people who don't stand or wear their hat because they couldn't be bothered are a completely different animal, in my opinion, than people who intend to make a show of protesting our national symbols.
2) This protest, like many we've been seeing lately, are not part of a conversation but in place of a conversation.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Would you be proud of your daughter if she did this? I think different people on this board would have different answers. I would be and think regardless of what happens in this situation, she will do fine in life since she will stand up (or kneel ) for her beliefs.

I would if the school said it was okay. I would not if the school said it was not okay - if that were the case, I would encourage her to do other things around campus.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

@RonJohn

This link sums it up pretty well and saves my tying finger from fatigue.

 

[RonJohn]

@RonJohn

This link sums it up pretty well and saves my tying finger from fatigue.

Well I started, but i stopped listening to people such as Shapiro a long time ago. It seems to be a belief of talk show hosts, liberal and conservative, that if you: Make the same bullet point over and over, use loosely fitting analogies, and speak forcefully enough, then you are obviously correct. Just beginning this clip, he makes statements about NFL fines. You get fined if: You violate the NFL uniform rules(although he states it much differently and derogatorily), you violate the unsportsmanlike rules after a touchdown. You don't get fined if you do something before a game that doesn't violate written NFL rules(although once again he states is much differently). He then quickly makes a glossing over statement that players who violated a written uniform rule(Which he just criticized the NFL for enforcing) had their penalties waived by the NFL. It seems to me that Shapiro is trying to win a debate club match, not actually discuss and dig into the issue. In fairness, I think that most liberal and most conservative talk show hosts that I have heard do the same thing.

 

[Squints]

This began with Kaepernick's explanation of why he sat during the anthem.(Seated not kneeling) Two days after he was asked to provide an explanation by the press, he said it was for racial injustice. I wasn't convinced at the time that that was the real reason. He was apparently not the starter on the team anymore and was in danger of being cut in the preseason. He had displayed indications that he was ticked off about his status on the team. I don't know for sure why he sat, but I don't put a lot of stock into his statements. If he had said before doing it that he was protesting something, then I would have more reason to believe him.

Whoa whoa whoa this is off. I'm an avid 49er fan and been following this story from the beginning. He sat for the national anthem for the first two pre-season games. He wasn't able to play so he wasn't in uniform those and no one noticed. (Which if this is such a big deal then why didn't anyone care then? But that's a whole other conversation to have.) He made his debut in that Packer game so he was in uniform. That's when all hell broke loose because people noticed. However, he was interviewed after the game by NFL media and explained his reasons then. He did not wait two days to provide an explanation.

It is true he was not the starter at the time. But this was due to him missing offseason workouts, mini camp, and most of training camp due to surgery on his throwing shoulder where he could get the necessary reps to learn a new offensive system brought in by a recently hired Chip Kelly. He was not in danger of being cut. That was just speculation. He was the most talented quarterback on the roster it wasn't going to happen. Especially with his contract before the restructuring that happened in October(This also has a role in all this but I doubt anyone one cares about the minutaie of the 49ers cap situation a year ago). It's not a coincidence he took over the starting job after about a month and a half of practice reps.

To not believe him seems a little odd though. Seems overly cynical imo. It's done nothing but cause him problems as far as his NFL career since he's done it, costing him millions, and he continues to remain active in advocating for why he kneeled/sat and others since this all went down while staying out of media spotlight. He didn't say he was protesting anything because I don't think he intended to start a protest movement. That just kind of happened when everyone freaked out over it.

 

[RonJohn]

Whoa whoa whoa this is off. I'm an avid 49er fan and been following this story from the beginning. He sat for the national anthem for the first two pre-season games. He wasn't able to play so he wasn't in uniform those and no one noticed. (Which if this is such a big deal then why didn't anyone care then? But that's a whole other conversation to have.) He made his debut in that Packer game so he was in uniform. That's when all hell broke loose because people noticed. However, he was interviewed after the game by NFL media and explained his reasons then. He did not wait two days to provide an explanation.

It is true he was not the starter at the time. But this was due to him missing offseason workouts, mini camp, and most of training camp due to surgery on his throwing shoulder where he could get the necessary reps to learn a new offensive system brought in by a recently hired Chip Kelly. He was not in danger of being cut. That was just speculation. He was the most talented quarterback on the roster it wasn't going to happen. Especially with his contract before the restructuring that happened in October(This also has a role in all this but I doubt anyone one cares about the minutaie of the 49ers cap situation a year ago). It's not a coincidence he took over the starting job after about a month and a half of practice reps.

To not believe him seems a little odd though. Seems overly cynical imo. It's done nothing but cause him problems as far as his NFL career since he's done it, costing him millions, and he continues to remain active in advocating for why he kneeled/sat and others since this all went down while staying out of media spotlight. He didn't say he was protesting anything because I don't think he intended to start a protest movement. That just kind of happened when everyone freaked out over it.

Here is a timeline of events: https://www.sbnation.com/2016/9/11/...-anthem-protest-seahawks-brandon-marshall-nfl

The incident that was noticed happened on August 26th. The statement referred to in the article you posted was given on August 28th. If my math is correct, that is two days later. So, I am correct in saying that he had an off the cuff response to questions the day of the event, and then released an official statement two days later. I said that I can't say for certain that he wasn't protesting, but I don't put a lot of faith in off the cuff remarks which could be an attempt to cover for perceived wrongdoing.

Also, read the last four paragraphs in the article that you linked to. Kaepernick had requested a trade. His relationship with 49er's management was soured. He wasn't happy. Kelly said that there had not been any talk about cutting him. However the media was speculating wildly that he would be cut.

As to his career: He does not fit the prototypical NFL QB model. When he was playing well, you could build an offense around him as SF did. However, he doesn't fit to roll into an offense as a backup in my opinion. The offense would have to be adjusted to fit his style. I think that is one negative that Vick had in Atlanta. When he broke his leg, the offense couldn't adjust well to the backup. Tebow wasn't the same style QB as Vick or Kaepernick, but he had the same issue. Most NFL positions are made for sit in the pocket passers. Vick, Tebow, nor Kaepernick fit that model. Vick was on another level of athleticism than the other guys, and that is why his career lasted longer. I don't believe that Kaepernick is out of a job because of his protests. I believe his career was ending before any of this began.

 

[TechTravis]

7 years ago when I was at my son's football game I noticed some young men who now are encouraged to display their displeasure for the USA refraining from removing their ballcaps at a game. I contact the principal and had the announce say "gentlemen please remove your hats while we pay respects to our country during the national anthem". It didn't take long before they realized they were being stared at for being disrespectful and started behaving like the young men they are supposed to be. This crap starts at home and is anti-American and we all know it. I also know that not veryhring in our country is perfect. Arrange a demonstration if you want to and protest. Become a political activist. I encourage that as it makes our country stronger. But if you burn my flag, spit on veterans, etc you have gone too far. These kids need to understand what's acceptable and what's not. The adults are on the sidelines and it's not ok. Maybe we should burn some more cop cars? You ok with that?

Really? You don't have bigger things to worry about than kids that aren't yours doing something that harms precisely no one?

 

[ATL1]

Well I definitely think Kap's protest plays a large part in his unemployment. Half the leagues qb's suck and Kap is definitely at least capable. Kap initially wasn't even recognized for protesting and he didn't make it known to the media what he was doing. A reporter noticed him and that's when everything started.

The whole NFL protest reasoning has been co-op'd by several groups. The NFL is protecting itself with their statements, they have less to do with criminal justice inequality and police murder and more to do with protecting the shield.

I support anyone's ability to protest peacefully and non violently. I'm still amazed at the vilification of doing something so non descriptive. Now what angers me is the value people are placing in a piece of cloth over actual living breathing human beings. I hope to God no one is actually fighting for a flag. The flag is a symbol and a symbol only. It symbolizes the United States and to my knowledge the United States is not just the military and the police.

 

[northgajacket]

This began with Kaepernick's explanation of why he sat during the anthem.(Seated not kneeling) Two days after he was asked to provide an explanation by the press, he said it was for racial injustice. I wasn't convinced at the time that that was the real reason. He was apparently not the starter on the team anymore and was in danger of being cut in the preseason. He had displayed indications that he was ticked off about his status on the team. I don't know for sure why he sat, but I don't put a lot of stock into his statements. If he had said before doing it that he was protesting something, then I would have more reason to believe him.

After his statements, the protests began to gain a life of their own. At this point, I'm not sure anybody knows why they are protesting. I'm not sure many of the protesters know why some people find the protests offensive. I'm not sure that all of the people who are offended by the protests understand motivation of the protesters or even why they are offended. It seems like at this point you are either a "protester" or a "patriot". What either of those groups stands for or is trying to achieve appears to be irrelevant. They are two groups that must oppose each other for some reason that I don't understand.

I have said the same thing. I believe this was concocted by his agent so there would be a better chance he would be on the 49ers. If he was cut then he could claim he was cut because of what he did. Similar to Craig Hodges from the 1991 Bulls team who made a political statement at the White House visit and then claimed the NBA blackballed him bc of his association with Farrakhan.