Deception and Kneeling

[Evmetro]

As I read threads about the kneeling thing, I keep coming across posts where lefties are discussing the rights of the kneelers in a deceptive and inaccurate context. Discussion of exercising rights has absolutely no merit and will not stick if you take the situation out of the correct context. The correct context for the kneeling thing must include and address the fact that the situation is occurring at the workplace, and that the workers are in fact 100% free to find another place to work. It must also include and address the fact that it is not the government that is imposing the workplace conduct requirements that you are so against. If you must present the situation out of its correct context, then you are relying on deception in order to make your point. It won't work

I challenge the lefties here to come up with an argument about the Constitutional rights of the kneelers being violated in any way, but the catch is that you must disclose and address the full and correct context of the situation.

[Bourbon]

Kneeling(1).jpg

Pussy

[Bourbon]

A US veteran asks, 'what's worse, a kneeling millionaire or 300,000 vets neglected to death?'

[Bourbon]

As I read threads about the kneeling thing, I keep coming across posts where lefties are discussing the rights of the kneelers in a deceptive and inaccurate context. Discussion of exercising rights has absolutely no merit and will not stick if you take the situation out of the correct context. The correct context for the kneeling thing must include and address the fact that the situation is occurring at the workplace, and that the workers are in fact 100% free to find another place to work. It must also include and address the fact that it is not the government that is imposing the workplace conduct requirements that you are so against. If you must present the situation out of its correct context, then you are relying on deception in order to make your point. It won't work

I challenge the lefties here to come up with an argument about the Constitutional rights of the kneelers being violated in any way, but the catch is that you must disclose and address the full and correct context of the situation.

I CHALLENGE YOU TO ENFORCE ME TO NOT KNEEL ...

[Leonthecat]

As I read threads about the kneeling thing, I keep coming across posts where lefties are discussing the rights of the kneelers in a deceptive and inaccurate context. Discussion of exercising rights has absolutely no merit and will not stick if you take the situation out of the correct context. The correct context for the kneeling thing must include and address the fact that the situation is occurring at the workplace, and that the workers are in fact 100% free to find another place to work. It must also include and address the fact that it is not the government that is imposing the workplace conduct requirements that you are so against. If you must present the situation out of its correct context, then you are relying on deception in order to make your point. It won't work

I challenge the lefties here to come up with an argument about the Constitutional rights of the kneelers being violated in any way, but the catch is that you must disclose and address the full and correct context of the situation.

Employers can not force employees to participate in jingoistic displays of patriotism, by fining them financially if they don't comply, in any workplace. Why should the football field be any different.

[kudzu]

As I read threads about the kneeling thing, I keep coming across posts where lefties are discussing the rights of the kneelers in a deceptive and inaccurate context. Discussion of exercising rights has absolutely no merit and will not stick if you take the situation out of the correct context. The correct context for the kneeling thing must include and address the fact that the situation is occurring at the workplace, and that the workers are in fact 100% free to find another place to work. It must also include and address the fact that it is not the government that is imposing the workplace conduct requirements that you are so against. If you must present the situation out of its correct context, then you are relying on deception in order to make your point. It won't work

I challenge the lefties here to come up with an argument about the Constitutional rights of the kneelers being violated in any way, but the catch is that you must disclose and address the full and correct context of the situation.

Kneeling is a sign of reverence and loyalty.. Why shouldn't they kneel in protest of racism? What are you afraid of?

[Evmetro]

So far, no lefty has risen to the challenge described in the opening post.

[Evmetro]

Kneeling is a sign of reverence and loyalty.. Why shouldn't they kneel in protest of racism? What are you afraid of?

If you rise to the challenge presented in the opening post, I will humor you with an answer to the thread derailment questions that you asked.

[Evmetro]

Employers can not force employees to participate in jingoistic displays of patriotism, by fining them financially if they don't comply, in any workplace. Why should the football field be any different.

This lacks full and correct context, so it is an excellent example of the dishonesty and deception that the thread was about. Thank you for illustrating what I described in the opening post.

[Sirthinksalot]

I CHALLENGE YOU TO ENFORCE ME TO NOT KNEEL ...

Ok CFM. What else do you do while you kneel? A few bobs?

[Evmetro]

Ok CFM. What else do you do while you kneel? A few bobs?

Lol, this is another reason why it is important to include the correct context...

[Evmetro]

Getting a lefty to address the use of the correct context is like trying to shove a cat into a toilet. The unwillingness of lefties to discuss full and correct context shows that the only weapon they have in the discussion of kneelers is an inaccurate and alternative context.

[Leonthecat]

This lacks full and correct context, so it is an excellent example of the dishonesty and deception that the thread was about. Thank you for illustrating what I described in the opening post.

I put it in the context of the workplace and the employer / employee relationship, which is exactly what you requested.
It is clear who is being dishonest and misleading and it isn't me.
It might be salient to note that the team employers do not "own" the players, a phrase that is often thrown about and brings to mind slavery issues. Your history here as a racist is noted within this context.
Forced jingoism is not patriotism at all but is instead a perverted form of the concept, where pride of freedom is required by people not free to make the decision .
This entire issue of enforcing patriotism is insane and will not stand.

[Sirthinksalot]

Getting a lefty to address the use of the correct context is like trying to shove a cat into a toilet. The unwillingness of lefties to discuss full and correct context shows that the only weapon they have in the discussion of kneelers is an inaccurate and alternative context.

Do you have a particular cat in mind? I can think of one who would benefit from a good swirly.

[Nordberg]

Well then, just have each player burn a flag before the game. That like kneeling is legal and protected. http://www.businessinsider.com/justi...-trump-2016-11 Stopping the protests is defying their constitutional rights. i hope the owners get sued and Trump named in the case.