spartan19 Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 The flag is a tribute. Not the Anthem Your opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nedboy7 Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 When did standing up for the anthem become a significant reflection of ones support for the country. You love this country? Go do something that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted September 1, 2017 Author Share Posted September 1, 2017 I am not with you, OP. In this country, there is no such thing as a mandatory "pledge of allegiance." Colin Kaepernick - and any player, black or white - is using his rights as an American to protest obvious racial inequality - as they see it. Whether or not we agree with what they do or how they do it is beside the point. They have a platform to be seen, and I absolutely love that there are some kids watching football games, seeing these players respectfully call attention to an injustice, and that these kids are then asking their parents or friends or going on the internet and finding out more about why the players are not standing up for the Anthem. As a proud American who served in the Armed Forces, I believe that THIS IS WHAT I SERVED FOR. Not blind allegiance. We speak out and point out injustices and problems with our country. That's what being an American means. When I see people protest - as is their right - I feel pride. Even if I don't agree with the reasons why someone may be protesting. Thank you for sharing your point of view. It is "enlightening". And thank you for your service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbosrrgood Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) The players definitely know. I don't see how this could even be up for debate. Every player who kneels or puts their fist up is putting a bulls eye on their back, that could jeopardize their continuing employment at the NFL level. You are giving NFL players way too much credit as some of these guys are really dumb, however my point was more aimed at the people here thinking he wasn't allowed to get fired because of it for some magical reason. Edited September 1, 2017 by Turbosrrgood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 I am not with you, OP. In this country, there is no such thing as a mandatory "pledge of allegiance." Colin Kaepernick - and any player, black or white - is using his rights as an American to protest obvious racial inequality - as they see it. Whether or not we agree with what they do or how they do it is beside the point. They have a platform to be seen, and I absolutely love that there are some kids watching football games, seeing these players respectfully call attention to an injustice, and that these kids are then asking their parents or friends or going on the internet and finding out more about why the players are not standing up for the Anthem. As a proud American who served in the Armed Forces, I believe that THIS IS WHAT I SERVED FOR. Not blind allegiance. We speak out and point out injustices and problems with our country. That's what being an American means. When I see people protest - as is their right - I feel pride. Even if I don't agree with the reasons why someone may be protesting. Thank you sir. Thank you for your service. And I agree with your take, thanks for sharing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 I read that story and maybe he didn't hear the story that Kaepernick admitted when he was demonstrating his legal right to do what he did, he stated in an interview he never heard a more aggressive negative response from Bills fans. I keep hearing this, but could it also be because that was the game where he was named the starter again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartan19 Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) I always found it interesting that the first game Kaepernick didnt standt coincided with the first game he was replaced as the starter. Edited September 1, 2017 by spartan19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 lol what's that? I'll trust Cornel law school and even WikiLeaks and mostly my own schooling and boy scouts actually there are, iirc Many laws regarding the flag https://en.m.wikiped...tates_Flag_Code And from Cornell https://www.law.corn...ode/text/36/301 Learned all this in boy scouts. Women can leave a hat in. Men are not permitted, the flag may not be left in the rain. Or out at night without a light I just re read that article. My God it's wrong in many parts talk about shifting goal posts. You brought up we need to discuss why he's unemployed eluding to the notion that it is because of his commotion on the state of the black Americans who came over on the ocion. He's unemployed because she quit I see the word "should" not "required." Everything that I've seen has said that it isn't "illegal." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 Undoubtedly, that tactic will be employed by some people. I just hope that you're not accusing me of doing so. No, I'm not accusing you of that. I don't know you nearly well enough to do so, and even if I did, this isn't the appropriate place. What I will say, however, is that even if this is not your intention, and I doubt very much that it is, functionally it's exactly the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 I always found it interesting Kaepernicks not standing coincided with the first game he was replaced as the starter. Equally interesting is the idea that no one wanted to hire him after the 49ers let him go. The 49ers never let him go. He opted out of the last year of his contract. So only one person is responsible for Kaepernick being unemployed this year. And only one person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 Found the link for ya. Which one of these guys is your uncle? That dude on the right looks deceptively smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 I always found it interesting that the first game Kaepernick didnt standt coincided with the first game he was replaced as the starter. He wasn't replaced as the starter in early 2016. He was recovering from surgery and not dressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 No, I'm not accusing you of that. I don't know you nearly well enough to do so, and even if I did, this isn't the appropriate place. What I will say, however, is that even if this is not your intention, and I doubt very much that it is, functionally it's exactly the same. If I'm following this conversation right (and correct me if I'm not)...did you call him a racist a few pages back? Because my dude, after some of the conversations we've had on PPP, that's hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 I see the word "should" not "required." Everything that I've seen has said that it isn't "illegal."should is legal obligation therefore it is law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 If I'm following this conversation right (and correct me if I'm not)...did you call him a racist a few pages back? Because my dude, after some of the conversations we've had on PPP, that's hilarious. No, you're not. So consider yourself corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 No, I'm not accusing you of that. I don't know you nearly well enough to do so, and even if I did, this isn't the appropriate place. What I will say, however, is that even if this is not your intention, and I doubt very much that it is, functionally it's exactly the same. That's all that I was worried about. I've seen sentiments similar to that mentioned about Brown on a few occasions, especially recently, and you're correct in calling it disgusting. My objections toward Brown are entirely about him as a person and not as some form of race traitor. Maybe I'm slightly naive to think that everyone will see my comments as I intend them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 No, you're not. So consider yourself corrected. It's absolutely a fallacy. In fact, it's the definition of a particular fallacy. The effort used to discredit Brown is a fairly disgusting tactic used to silence or discredit opposition, and in this case is being used to "keep Brown on the plantation". You see, Jim Brown has committed a thought crime. He holds an improper position for a black man, and therefor must be brought to heel. The problem is, that there is no logical critique of Browns position which would circumvent debate, and Browns opposition isn't interested in debate. They are interested only in crowning themselves from a position of moral superiority (which they lack), without having to go through the process of having their views vetted, and having to defend their positions from others. So instead they engage in personal attacks, and say that Brown shouldn't be listened to because of some bad things he's done in the past. Never mind his decades of activism, and level of expertise and person experience with the subject. He must be silenced. That's not how honest debate works. ...you sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 should is legal obligation therefore it is lawI'm not a lawyer but have never seen or heard that. I have not once seen anyone question the legality of the protest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartan19 Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) He wasn't replaced as the starter in early 2016. He was recovering from surgery and not dressed. Not dressed the 1st 2 preseason games, dressed and didn't start for the 3rd preseason game.http://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=400874788 Stand or sit for the anthem, Kaepernick used it as an alibi to mask his hurt ego and feelings. Now after leaving the Niners, his fight is over, coincidentally he also is looking for a job and may feel dropping his protest helps his chances of being signed. He is a phony at best. Edited September 1, 2017 by spartan19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts