OT: NFL and the Anthem -

[jtbadge]

Man, if only America would get as riled up about the systemic racial discrimination and police brutality happening today as they do about someone sitting through 200 year old song.

[soulspinner]

Originally Posted by Climb01742

When Ali protested the Vietnam War by refusing induction, he was both right and made millions uncomfortable and mad. When John Carlos and Tommie Smith raised their fist in Mexico City, they made millions uncomfortable and mad. That is the nature of protests. It's a both a fallacy and unfair to ask protestors to, please, find a method of protest that doesn't upset anyone. What is fair to ask is, can your protest be peaceful and legal? Kneeling is both of those. Beyond that, it's constitutional. The majority asking that any protest not offend them somehow is, sadly, a further example of the privilege the majority is trying to maintain. The protested against simply don't have the right to define the terms of protest. Protest is, by definition, upsetting to someone. That's why it's constitutionally protected.

yes indeed.

[josephr]

Originally Posted by benb

We're all falling for it hook, line and sinker.

I don't respect Trump for much but he is playing this masterfully.

This has NOTHING to do with the NFL, or the protests, or anything.

He's manufacturing a controversy to keep us distracted from the things that he's doing that are more obnoxious/important.

For example, we are having a multi-page thread here about football players instead of about the issue that his staff has been abusing email just like Clinton did... which is just beyond belief after the amount of time the devoted to talking about Clinton's email. No one working for him has even an iota of an excuse.

Or that we're not talking about the ongoing Russian election controversy.

Incredibly well played by Trump. Of course he's manufacturing this instead of doing productive work but oh well.

perhaps the $68 billion dollar military spending increase on an already over-the-top budget???

[Davist]

Originally Posted by josephr

perhaps the $68 billion dollar military spending increase on an already over-the-top budget???

Agree on severely reducing spending on needless things, keep in mind, for scale, CA alone has asked for over $100B in infrastructure spending on a ~$3.5T budget so not a big number percentage wise...

[pjm]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

I'm not sure how you meant this, but it came off as very dismissive. Shouldn't your respect for the protests be determined by the merits of the issues they are protesting? That's like saying, "JFK had some good ideas about going to the moon, but I'd take them more seriously if not for the boozing and womanizing" Humans are complex multifaceted creatures, capable of existing in many (and sometimes contradictory) states of being.

That shouldn't stop you from examining whether an idea or philosophy has value.

Is this one of those complex, multifaceted creatures?

[fiamme red]

Originally Posted by pjm

Is this one of those complex, multifaceted creatures?

That urinating dog pose was after his first touchdown yesterday. Then after his second touchdown, Beckham stood still and raised his fist. When asked by a reporter if that gesture had any significance of protest, he said, "Did it look like it (meant something)? Then it might have meant something."

[jimcav]

Originally Posted by fiamme red

That urinating dog pose was after his first touchdown yesterday. Then after his second touchdown, Beckham stood still and raised his fist. When asked by a reporter if that gesture had any significance of protest, he said, "Did it look like it (meant something)? Then it might have meant something."

but , IF that was an original act, I find it clever if he meant he was marking the endzone as "his territory". If not, or a repetition of others, then it is meaningless to me

[pjm]

Originally Posted by jimcav

but , IF that was an original act, I find it clever if he meant he was marking the endzone as "his territory". If not, or a repetition of others, then it is meaningless to me

Randy Moss, another high class individual, did the same thing years ago.

[xnetter]

Originally Posted by DRZRM

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/s...s.html?mcubz=0

Activism Outside the Spotlight

‘You know what? This dude’s really a stand-up guy.’”

Great post. I knew some of this about Kaepernick but not all. The dude's the real deal, getting injured was probably the best thing to happen as far as his world view and inspiration to take action against social injustice.

I think he's going to end up the moral victor in this sub-plot, whether he plays in the NFL again or not.

KJ

[choke]

Originally Posted by Climb01742

When Ali protested the Vietnam War by refusing induction, he was both right and made millions uncomfortable and mad. When John Carlos and Tommie Smith raised their fist in Mexico City, they made millions uncomfortable and mad. That is the nature of protests. It's a both a fallacy and unfair to ask protestors to, please, find a method of protest that doesn't upset anyone. What is fair to ask is, can your protest be peaceful and legal? Kneeling is both of those. Beyond that, it's constitutional. The majority asking that any protest not offend them somehow is, sadly, a further example of the privilege the majority is trying to maintain. The protested against simply don't have the right to define the terms of protest. Protest is, by definition, upsetting to someone. That's why it's constitutionally protected.

It seems to me that if someone wants to get the most people behind a cause then it's best to protest in a way that the least people find offensive. Of course you can't please everyone but the less who view it in a negative way the better IMO. When people are put off by the way the message is being delivered then they're less likely to be supportive of the message itself.

As for the majority of your reply, it addresses things I never brought up or inferred.....

[MattTuck]

Listen, I'm not going to defend or excuse a crude gesture from anyone. My point stays the same, just because someone makes a crude gesture or celebrates in an immature way, doesn't mean you discount everything they say or believe.

Here's a picture of a sitting vice president giving someone the finger.




Someone pretending to be a dog peeing has no link on whether minorities get a fair shake from law enforcement in this country. The guy could be a complete idiot, while the thesis of mistreatment is true. The guy could be a certified genius and the thesis could be false. Whether the guy acts like a fool reflects on him, not on the issues at hand.

This is the literal definition of an ad hominum logical fallacy.

Argumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself.

[verticaldoug]

This is President Trump trying to create a wedge issue to rile the base. He is obviously trying to distract us from something but what?

In the same speech that he said players who kneel should be fired, he also said penalizing players for hard hits was ruining the game. Considering all the focus on CTE and concussion education at the younger levels, this comment is really irresponsible.

Instead of spending the weekend attacking sports athletes, he should have been focused on rebuilding Puerto Rico. It is a US territory and because of certain US laws, it is in a bad situation about to get worse.

I am beginning to think Erdogan is giving him pointers on being an autocrat.

[makoti]

Originally Posted by Cicli

I like the NASCAR owners takes.

Be respectful or you are fired.

I couldnt protest at work without the risk of being let go. Thats the bottom line.

Page two.

Because there are SO many African-American nascar drivers...

[bthornt]

This could be a metric of interest for this issue: http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/...or-anthem.html

[Climb01742]

Originally Posted by choke

It seems to me that if someone wants to get the most people behind a cause then it's best to protest in a way that the least people find offensive. Of course you can't please everyone but the less who view it in a negative way the better IMO. When people are put off by the way the message is being delivered then they're less likely to be supportive of the message itself.

As for the majority of your reply, it addresses things I never brought up or inferred.....

Off the top, I'd like to make one thing clear: I don't mean my responses to be personal. I try to respond to ideas. If I misunderstood parts of your post, or if you meant them in a different context, I apologize. I saw your post in one light. As with much on the internet, I may have missed something.

Back to the topic: I see protests as having two purposes: to bring attention to an issue and then to rally people to a cause. With the NFL players' protests, I think we're still in phase 1, moving toward phase 2.