Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Gatefan1976]

It doesn't matter a bit WHAT the players are protesting. The issue is that they do not have the right to protest for or against anything while "on the clock", wearing the uniforms provided by their employers, on the stage that their employer provides to present its product unless their employers agree to let them do so or support their efforts. If the NFL or by extension, the individual team that writes them their paycheck decides to either allow them to do so or actively supports them doing so, fine, then they have the right to do whatever their employer grants them the right to do while they're "on the clock". If their employer doesn't want them to do so, they can't. They are still perfectly within their rights to go stand on a streetcorner and protest to their hearts content, to whomever they can get to listen to them.

The NFL owners will be discussing this at their fall meeting this upcoming week, and they will make some sort of decision on the matter. I fully expect them to put a stop to it as it is beginning to negatively affect the one thing every business has as its first priority, their profits.

If I'm wrong, and the NFL or the owners of any specific team choose to allow it, or outright support it, then the protests will continue and it won't bother me a bit, as I rarely even watch football.

Didn't you fight a war of independence?

[Womble]

So what?
Honestly, I am surprised you did not go for the low hanging fruit of troops.

That's because you never learn.

Kaepernick made his "target" quite clear however.

If I stand on a street corner with a swastika flag and claim to narrowly focus my protest on the greed of the local shop owner, will you buy that too?

Well, you failed to find one, so...........?

Sorry, didn't think that was a serious question. Too off-the-scale stupid.

How about wearing something that symbolizes protest against police brutality? Obvious choice would be bullet hole-ridden hoodies a-la Luke Cage. Simple, on point, can't be misinterpreted.

What a load of bull****.
Raouf made it clear it was his Islamist beliefs that caused his sitting.

And "white rulership". Neither is symbolized by the USA anthem, but he went for it anyway. Fits.

The 1968 Games?
If you think that helps your argument, I don't know what you are reading as ALL THREE athletes involves made it quite clear that they were representing the black lives, African or Aboriginal that had been affected by "white rulership"

And that is different from the current protests how exactly?


You want to create a correlation-causation argument.[/quote]
No, I am pointing out ideological continuity

Fine.
It's only because of your book that Negro's were considered lesser beings to be enslaved by whites
It's only because of your book that Women were considered lesser beings to be enslaved by men
Therefore, you, as an adherent of your book, are a racist misogynist.
Isn't this fun??

The day I write a book, you'll be the comic relief.

[pookey]

He does.

Does that make it any different?
So, I guess you approve of discrimination based on political/religious views then. Good to know.

That was totally out of order to accuse me of that, I was simply comparing the situations, I do not care who you vote for or who you believe in, or who you choose to love, its none of my business.

[Gatefan1976]

That's because you never learn.

No, I just don't expect anything better

If I stand on a street corner with a swastika flag and claim to narrowly focus my protest on the greed of the local shop owner, will you buy that too?

Well, given I know the symbolism involved, no.
Nice dodge, but no points.

Sorry, didn't think that was a serious question. Too off-the-scale stupid.

I was responding "in kind"

How about wearing something that symbolizes protest against police brutality? Obvious choice would be bullet hole-ridden hoodies a-la Luke Cage. Simple, on point, can't be misinterpreted.

How about, no one will pay attention?
Or Kaepernick did it before Cage became a TV thing?
Still going for your Idols I see...........

And "white rulership". Neither is symbolized by the USA anthem, but he went for it anyway. Fits.

Sure man, take the blue pill.

And that is different from the current protests how exactly?

It's not, both were misunderstood by small minded little fools, and still are.

No, I am pointing out ideological continuity

So was I

The day I write a book, you'll be the comic relief.

You would not even be a footnote, just a sad, confused little man condemned to an eternity of torment, but nice attempt.

[pookey]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/man-sho...nstead-police/

Was reading this, I know he meant well, but maybe a little more training is necessary

[Annoyed]

Didn't you fight a war of independence?

Yes. What does that have to do with this discussion? It is not the government which may start restricting the players protests.

[Annoyed]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/man-sho...nstead-police/

Was reading this, I know he meant well, but maybe a little more training is necessary

Agreed. You should not be carrying or using any sort of tool or device without knowing exactly how to use it. For a firearm, that includes aim, and knowing when it's too risky to someone besides your intended target.

Interestingly enough, though, the article doesn't state the cause of death. Probably because its too soon to know.
While it's certainly possible that the gunshot was fatal, she might have actually died from the wounds inflicted by the pit bull

[garhkal]

Excuse me, but the NFL players are the ones distorting their own message. Their stunts are not against symbols of police brutality, they are against symbols of the country, as you helpfully observed. Aren't there other ways to make the same point that would be more precisely targeted and would not be so widely misinterpreted as a broadside against American state's existence?

And when asked, a # of NFL players could not vocalise WHY they are doing the taking a knee.. Some said it was to protest oppression. Some said to protest police bullying. Some said it was to protest the declaration of constitution? (Uea that last one got me too)..

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/man-sho...nstead-police/

Was reading this, I know he meant well, but maybe a little more training is necessary

Man that's gotta suck.. Tried to help out only to kill the woman he was trying to protect.

[aretood2]

Umm............. Who do the police -work- for?
The State/The people
In other words, the -country-
Seems like a perfectly reasonable target to me.

What would you suggest?
As for it being "widely misinterpreted", I think you will find that the divide falls pretty squarely along party lines, so is it really the "American state's existence" being targeted?

Let's say you want to "Protest" pedophilia in the Catholic Clergy. So you walk into a church, find the statue of the virgin Mary and smash it on the floor. Sure, most parishioners there would agree with your opion, but those same parishioners would also now hate you. They won't hate you because you are protesting a horrible thing, they will hate you because you smashed their idol. This situation is very much the same. If you feel it's too aggressive an act to compare it to, fine. Instead of smashing the idol, you mocked it. The results will still be the same.

I am willing to bet that a lot of people don't care about the protest, but they care about how it is an act of disrespect in their eyes. Conservatives tend to idolize national symbols a lot more than liberals (thus my use of an idol for the analogy) which is why you see conservatives throwing a bigger fit. Those players are basically mocking their idol. The NFL is the church. So the issue gets ignored. Sure, some of them do hate it because of the protest and not the manner in which they are protesting, not much you can do about that. And some can see the protest for what it is, congratulations.

However, the point of a protest is to draw attention to the issue being protested, not to make the protest itself a different issue altogether. It is poorly executed on every level. I can't necessarily blame the "Idiots" for getting upset anymore than I can blame the parishioners for getting mad at you for mocking their idol.

But here's something that Annoyed and Garkhal and others who are like minded are also missing. Ignore whether or not police brutality is an issue as they claim. Ignore whether or not the flag et al is being mocked. Ignore the "legal" rights the players have or don't have. There is something fundamentally wrong with the fact that an American doesn't feel patriotic enough to stand for the pledge. That there are people here in the US who feel that their voice and who they are does not matter to the government for which that flag stands. And that is the discussion that should be had, not this tertiary issue.

Yes. What does that have to do with this discussion? It is not the government which may start restricting the players protests.

You keep going around in circles. The NFL is allowing it, or was at first. That said, why is it a problem if the NFL allowed it?

[Annoyed]

But here's something that Annoyed and Garkhal and others who are like minded are also missing. Ignore whether or not police brutality is an issue as they claim. Ignore whether or not the flag et al is being mocked. Ignore the "legal" rights the players have or don't have. There is something fundamentally wrong with the fact that an American doesn't feel patriotic enough to stand for the pledge. That there are people here in the US who feel that their voice and who they are does not matter to the government for which that flag stands. And that is the discussion that should be had, not this tertiary issue.

I'm not saying they can't protest. If they feel the need, they are perfectly free to do just that. Many Bothans have died to protect that right. But they have to choose the proper venue. While on TV in their employer's uniform, representing their employer on the field on on the clock, they have no right to express any opinion not sanctioned by their employers.

(See Below)

You keep going around in circles. The NFL is allowing it, or was at first. That said, why is it a problem if the NFL allowed it?

It's not a problem if the NFL or the team owners allow it.

But they aren't going to.

The NFL is a business. Like any other, it exists to make a profit for its owners. Viewership is falling, and there is a great deal of indications that the audience is not happy about the protests. So, like any business, I expect that they are going to put a stop to something that may be hurting their bottom line.
The fall owners meeting is this week. That's when they're gonna put their foot down.

The Sunday after that is when the excrement will hit the rotary oscillator. 'Cause sure as I'm sitting here, one or more players will defy the word of the bosses. That usually doesn't end well in any company.

[Gatefan1976]

Yes. What does that have to do with this discussion? It is not the government which may start restricting the players protests.

You did not just fight "the government", you fought against a -monarchy-, a system of inherited dictatorship and while indeed the FF were diligent in trying to prevent such rulership from the government, you are instead giving that dictatorial power to corporations.

[jelgate]

I'm not saying they can't protest. If they feel the need, they are perfectly free to do just that. Many Bothans have died to protect that right. But they have to choose the proper venue. While on TV in their employer's uniform, representing their employer on the field on on the clock, they have no right to express any opinion not sanctioned by their employers.

(See Below)


It's not a problem if the NFL or the team owners allow it.

But they aren't going to.

The NFL is a business. Like any other, it exists to make a profit for its owners. Viewership is falling, and there is a great deal of indications that the audience is not happy about the protests. So, like any business, I expect that they are going to put a stop to something that may be hurting their bottom line.
The fall owners meeting is this week. That's when they're gonna put their foot down.

The Sunday after that is when the excrement will hit the rotary oscillator. 'Cause sure as I'm sitting here, one or more players will defy the word of the bosses. That usually doesn't end well in any company.

Correlation does not equal causation

[Gatefan1976]

Let's say you want to "Protest" pedophilia in the Catholic Clergy. So you walk into a church, find the statue of the virgin Mary and smash it on the floor. Sure, most parishioners there would agree with your opion, but those same parishioners would also now hate you. They won't hate you because you are protesting a horrible thing, they will hate you because you smashed their idol. This situation is very much the same. If you feel it's too aggressive an act to compare it to, fine. Instead of smashing the idol, you mocked it. The results will still be the same.

I find both your examples far too extreme.
They neither burned the flag (destruction of Mary), NOR mooned her (or the flag) in a display of derision.
If you want an example, how about not standing and bowing your head for the Lord's Prayer?

I am willing to bet that a lot of people don't care about the protest, but they care about how it is an act of disrespect in their eyes. Conservatives tend to idolize national symbols a lot more than liberals (thus my use of an idol for the analogy) which is why you see conservatives throwing a bigger fit. Those players are basically mocking their idol. The NFL is the church. So the issue gets ignored. Sure, some of them do hate it because of the protest and not the manner in which they are protesting, not much you can do about that. And some can see the protest for what it is, congratulations.

Isn't it a sad day when recognition of FACTS gets you an award? (or a vilification)?
As for idols, return to your religious roots and remind me what GOD thinks of worshipping idols.

However, the point of a protest is to draw attention to the issue being protested, not to make the protest itself a different issue altogether. It is poorly executed on every level. I can't necessarily blame the "Idiots" for getting upset anymore than I can blame the parishioners for getting mad at you for mocking their idol.

Kaepernick himself told people not to follow his lead, to NOT let his protest to become a sideshow freak-fest.
Have others hijacked his protest?
Sure.

But here's something that Annoyed and Garkhal and others who are like minded are also missing. Ignore whether or not police brutality is an issue as they claim. Ignore whether or not the flag et al is being mocked. Ignore the "legal" rights the players have or don't have. There is something fundamentally wrong with the fact that an American doesn't feel patriotic enough to stand for the pledge. That there are people here in the US who feel that their voice and who they are does not matter to the government for which that flag stands. And that is the discussion that should be had, not this tertiary issue.

The PLEDGE is not an issue here, I don't know WTF you are talking about. The flag, nor the anthem are the pledge of allegiance, that is a separate issue, and no, the "discussion need not be had" because no one threatened the pledge of allegiance. You ask a bunch of NFL players to stand for THAT, I doubt you will get many sitters, kneelers or raised fists, nor much further support for it.

[Annoyed]

You did not just fight "the government", you fought against a -monarchy-, a system of inherited dictatorship and while indeed the FF were diligent in trying to prevent such rulership from the government, you are instead giving that dictatorial power to corporations.

How are their rights taken away? They are free to protest to their heart's content. They just can't do it on their employer's time, dime and stage unless the employer agrees.

Are they not free to protest on their own?

[aretood2]

I find both your examples far too extreme.
They neither burned the flag (destruction of Mary), NOR mooned her (or the flag) in a display of derision.
If you want an example, how about not standing and bowing your head for the Lord's Prayer?

Analogies, it is my understanding at least, are supposed to exaggerate some things for effect. I get what you are saying, but perception is a crafty beast. "Nationalistic idolatry" doesn't work the same way "normal idol worship" works. Then again, in the old days, if you didn't stand to recite a hail mary you'd face the wrath of the community...and I don't mean the middle ages. Nationalism is more akin to the old days than today. But my analogy was meant to be a modern day act. Just dial back the clock to 1600 Mexico and change the defecation of the statue to not standing for a Hail Mary recitation.

Isn't it a sad day when recognition of FACTS gets you an award? (or a vilification)?
As for idols, return to your religious roots and remind me what GOD thinks of worshipping idols.

That's a bit irrelevant. I was talking about perception and effectiveness of the protest. It's perception is bad, and the effectiveness is really low.

Kaepernick himself told people not to follow his lead, to NOT let his protest to become a sideshow freak-fest.
Have others hijacked his protest?
Sure.

Often times the young don't do as they are told?

The PLEDGE is not an issue here, I don't know WTF you are talking about. The flag, nor the anthem are the pledge of allegiance, that is a separate issue, and no, the "discussion need not be had" because no one threatened the pledge of allegiance. You ask a bunch of NFL players to stand for THAT, I doubt you will get many sitters, kneelers or raised fists, nor much further support for it.

I "misspoke". That said, if you ask a bunch of NFL players to stand for that, what if you get religious objectors?