Harrison Butker…oy vey…what a commencement “speech”

[oldmanfan]

26 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:

The NFL didn't need to issue a statement regarding Butker's speech at all.

 

Doing so makes it seem like Butker speaks for the NFL, and that is not the case.

Yes they did.  They needed to make sure the public knew the player did not speak for the league.  Not everyone out there who read the story is an NFL fan

[Mark Vader]

22 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Yes they did.  They needed to make sure the public knew the player did not speak for the league.  Not everyone out there who read the story is an NFL fan

By that same logic, would that not also mean that everyone who is not an NFL fan would also not know who Harrison Butker is?

[ExiledInIllinois]

I wonder what the uber trad Hunt family thinks about this tone deaf commencement speech?  All the woman in the kitchen while their men are rolling in the dough.

 

Yeah... Great plan for the hoi polloi who need a second income to afford tickets to their games. 😆 

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ravenishak/kansas-city-chiefs-kicker-harrison-butker-instagram-comments

[oldmanfan]

14 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:

By that same logic, would that not also mean that everyone who is not an NFL fan would also not know who Harrison Butker is?

They read the stories one presumes which identified him as a member of the Chiefs.  Surely you realize that.

[Mark Vader]

24 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

They read the stories one presumes which identified him as a member of the Chiefs.  Surely you realize that.

Maybe.

 

It's amazing to think that people are incapable of differentiating that what a player is saying on their own isn't directly tied to the league that they play in.

 

Of course the NFL only did it to cover their butts, I highly doubt that they are that concerned with people's feelings. Just my opinion.

 

At the same time, I don't see the NFL apologizing for every player who may say something or do something controversial. That would be a lot of apologies throughout the year.

[Einstein]

2 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Yes they did.  They needed to make sure the public knew the player did not speak for the league.  Not everyone out there who read the story is an NFL fan

 

The idea that the ‘public’ would ever think that a place-kickers words spoken at an off-season, non-NFL related, non-NFL endorsed, non-NFL created event would in any way represent the NFL is a tad ludicrous.

[Beck Water]

3 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

Ok, I'll play.....

 

Of the people who fully supported the actions of Capernik and his right to free speech, how many of these folks are now butt hurt by the remarks of this other football player? I suspect almost all of them but that doesn't seem to bother you. It appears that you are only offended by those who do not adhere to your own specific credo which is imposing and unreasonable.

 

You lose. 

But it's not the question of who is "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant, just as it wasn't the question of who was "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant.  Both have the right to speak their minds.  Both don't have the right to expect freedom from consequences to accompany their freedom of speech. 

 

Kaepernick provided enough credible evidence that he'd been blackballed due to his protests to obtain a settlement from the NFL.  I don't expect Butker to suffer any actual consequences.

 

But the issue is the same for both: both have the right to freedom of speech, and in both cases people can support free speech AND object to what they said.

 

But I don't expect you to see that. 

 

I do expect you to not put words in my mouth or imagine you know what does or does not offend me.  (I don't think you understand it, but you do know it's imposing and unreasonable) 

 

3 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

I think that folks are allowed to have opinions and speak their minds, even if you morally object or even just plain disagree. This is why I don't care what this place kicker says as an invited guest of a religious school. I think that many who are not so demanding, self rightous, and dictatorial might agree.

 

Wait.....you? Dictatorial? Brings back memories. 😯😂

 

I wondered how long it would be before we'd get to the gratuitous personal insults.  You don't disappoint.  Well, actually, you do, but you don't surprise.

 

5 hours ago, boyst said:

I support his right to free speech at work but not his protesting for results unfavorable to himself. I work for a German company, so I walk in there every day and point at the scoreboard? No, I'm not a moron... Wait... Well I'm not that stupid ...how about that....

 

OK I don't understand the point you're making here - in fact, I couldn't parse it at all.  But that's OK.

Edited May 20 by Beck Water

[ImpactCorey]

10 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

The idea that the ‘public’ would ever think that a place-kickers words spoken at an off-season, non-NFL related, non-NFL endorsed, non-NFL created event would in any way represent the NFL is a tad ludicrous.

 

Sure they shouldn't have to, but they chose to do it anyway.  Just in case someone would think they condoned this promoted commencement speak where one of their decorated players was speaking.  They put out a brief message to make it clear they are not expressed views of the NFL.  Why would this upset anyone?

 

When Kaepernick took a knee and the NFL didn't say anything there were people saying they would boycott the NFL.  They didn't say "well, that's the player's views and not the NFL."

Edited May 20 by ImpactCorey

[oldmanfan]

10 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

The idea that the ‘public’ would ever think that a place-kickers words spoken at an off-season, non-NFL related, non-NFL endorsed, non-NFL created event would in any way represent the NFL is a tad ludicrous.

Yet that is what happens.  The NFL protects the shield like it or not.   The health care network I work for would do the same if I made remarks that ticked off a lot of folks.

[boyst]

20 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

You lose. 

But it's not the question of who is "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant, just as it wasn't the question of who was "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant.  Both have the right to speak their minds.  Both don't have the right to expect freedom from consequences to accompany their freedom of speech. 

 

Kaepernick provided enough credible evidence that he'd been blackballed due to his protests to obtain a settlement from the NFL.  I don't expect Butker to suffer any actual consequences.

 

But the issue is the same for both: both have the right to freedom of speech, and in both cases people can support free speech AND object to what they said.

 

But I don't expect you to see that. 

 

I do expect you to not put words in my mouth or imagine you know what does or does not offend me.  (I don't think you understand it, but you do know it's imposing and unreasonable) 

 

 

I wondered how long it would be before we'd get to the gratuitous personal insults.  You don't disappoint.  Well, actually, you do, but you don't surprise.

 

 

OK I don't understand the point you're making here - in fact, I couldn't parse it at all.  But that's OK.

Kaep can run his mouth all he wants at work but when he is punished for it or meets consequences his employer provides he has no right to be upset if he was given fair warning or reasonable ability to correct his behavior. He didn't, he reeped the consequences. I support any idiot showing themselves to the world. The problem is social media amplifies them to brings them together and we have chorus lines of idiots singing to us. 

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

 

You lose. 

But it's not the question of who is "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant, just as it wasn't the question of who was "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant.  Both have the right to speak their minds.  Both don't have the right to expect freedom from consequences to accompany their freedom of speech. 

 

Kaepernick provided enough credible evidence that he'd been blackballed due to his protests to obtain a settlement from the NFL.  I don't expect Butker to suffer any actual consequences.

 

But the issue is the same for both: both have the right to freedom of speech, and in both cases people can support free speech AND object to what they said.

 

But I don't expect you to see that. 

 

I do expect you to not put words in my mouth or imagine you know what does or does not offend me.  (I don't think you understand it, but you do know it's imposing and unreasonable) 

 

 

I wondered how long it would be before we'd get to the gratuitous personal insults.  You don't disappoint.  Well, actually, you do, but you don't surprise.

 

 

OK I don't understand the point you're making here - in fact, I couldn't parse it at all.  But that's OK.

What a load.  You put words in someone’s mouth by predicting they will put words in your mouth then get upset about it.  For Pete’s sake.

Edited May 20 by 4merper4mer

[ExiledInIllinois]

I think I attempted to throw it out there before... Will try again. 

 

In age of diminishing resources, high competition, etc... As a society as a whole to promote single income families.  Will resources go farther and to more individual families.

 

Does it matter who decides to be the homemaker?

[Bill from NYC]

14 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

You lose. 

But it's not the question of who is "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant, just as it wasn't the question of who was "butt hurt" or offended that's relevant.  Both have the right to speak their minds.  Both don't have the right to expect freedom from consequences to accompany their freedom of speech. 

 

Kaepernick provided enough credible evidence that he'd been blackballed due to his protests to obtain a settlement from the NFL.  I don't expect Butker to suffer any actual consequences.

 

But the issue is the same for both: both have the right to freedom of speech, and in both cases people can support free speech AND object to what they said.

 

But I don't expect you to see that. 

 

I do expect you to not put words in my mouth or imagine you know what does or does not offend me.  (I don't think you understand it, but you do know it's imposing and unreasonable) 

 

 

Why do I "lose?" Because you say I do? Still lording over conversations and dictating terms are we? How presumptuous and silly!!!

 

Hey, the police officer in Buffalo that you so vilified for pushing away an old nut for running up face to face with him and breathing all over him during the height of covid was found NOT GUILTY. Do you now side with the cop because he was vindicated in some way?

 

I don't care that Kapernick got a settlement. Do I think that he deserved one? No, for the reason you cited. Speech can have consequences. This kicker said some things; let's see what happens with him. 

 

And btw, Kapernick did what he did on National TV. It offended and alienated more viewers/fans than some place kicker making a speech as an invited guest at a school. But I don't expect you to see that.

Edited May 21 by Bill from NYC

[boyst]

1 minute ago, Bill from NYC said:

Whay do I "lose?" Because you say I do. Still lording over conversations and dictating terms are we? How presumptuous and silly!!!

 

Hey, the police officer in Buffalo that you so vilified for pushing away an old nut for runnig up face to face with him and breathing all over him during the height of covid was found NOT GUILTY. Do you now side with the cop because he was vindicated in some way?

 

I don't care that Kapernik got a settlement. Do I think that he deserved one? No, for the reason you cited. Speech can have consequences. This kicker said some things; let's see what happens with him. 

 

And btw, Kapernik did what he did on National TV. It offended and alienated more viewers/fans than some place kicker making a speech as an invited guest at a school. But I don't expect you to see that.

Kaep polarized people.

Butker is being shoved in people faces because the same people who cheered for Kaep want us to be upset about Butker having an opinion which is ironic because it's not different than Kaep having one.

 

Kaeps polarization was entirely different. He wanted to be a little B word victim as a well paid millionaire athlete who lost his starting position. If he was still the starter or going to be he would have never done it. If at the height of his career he chose to speak out it'd be entirely different. But he's not LeBron or Gretzky. He is a footnote to a decades worth of football not because of his play.

[Bill from NYC]

2 minutes ago, boyst said:

Kaep polarized people.

Butker is being shoved in people faces because the same people who cheered for Kaep want us to be upset about Butker having an opinion which is ironic because it's not different than Kaep having one.

 

Kaeps polarization was entirely different. He wanted to be a little B word victim as a well paid millionaire athlete who lost his starting position. If he was still the starter or going to be he would have never done it. If at the height of his career he chose to speak out it'd be entirely different. But he's not LeBron or Gretzky. He is a footnote to a decades worth of football not because of his play.

The thing is, I don't care about either one of them. I'm not going to shed a tear for Kapernick who received millions of dollars, nor do I care about the kicker. They will both be fine. The difference is that the kicker still has to work. 

[Jauronimo]

1 minute ago, boyst said:

Kaep polarized people.

Butker is being shoved in people faces because the same people who cheered for Kaep want us to be upset about Butker having an opinion which is ironic because it's not different than Kaep having one.

 

Kaeps polarization was entirely different. He wanted to be a little B word victim as a well paid millionaire athlete who lost his starting position. If he was still the starter or going to be he would have never done it. If at the height of his career he chose to speak out it'd be entirely different. But he's not LeBron or Gretzky. He is a footnote to a decades worth of football not because of his play.

The same people who boycotted the NFL over Kaepernick are now buying Butker jerseys. Both sides agree, freedom of speech is paramount so long as we like the message. 

[4merper4mer]

10 hours ago, boyst said:

Kaep polarized people.

Butker is being shoved in people faces because the same people who cheered for Kaep want us to be upset about Butker having an opinion which is ironic because it's not different than Kaep having one.

 

Kaeps polarization was entirely different. He wanted to be a little B word victim as a well paid millionaire athlete who lost his starting position. If he was still the starter or going to be he would have never done it. If at the height of his career he chose to speak out it'd be entirely different. But he's not LeBron or Gretzky. He is a footnote to a decades worth of football not because of his play.

It’s a minor point but Kaep was also being directed by his commie girlfriend.  He’s not really all that bright on his own.  It’s also possible that Butker is being guided by his wife, a pastor or another.

[ExiledInIllinois]

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

It’s a minor point but Kaep was also being directed by his commie girlfriend.  He’s not really all that bright on his own.  It’s also possible that Butker is being guided by his wife, a pastor or another.

Jesus is Butker's copilot! Wasn't Jesus a revolutionary (a "commie" for it's day) too in the eyes of the Pharisees?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 21 by ExiledInIllinois

[Bob Jones]

 

 

https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/readers-opinion/guest-commentary/article288545627.html

[4merper4mer]

31 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

 

This opinion piece is not serious enough to be considered political. And thats a pretty low bar these days.  The topic is pretty broad at this point but this nonsense you have now shared twice is not in the same zip code of anything that can be considered the topic.  

It’s literally an article about the topic of the thread.  But you don’t think it’s on topic?  If someone posted a picture of grass in a “green things” thread would you lecture them too?