Again., irrelevant. The players are not being prevented by federal, state, or local government from protesting, so there is no Constitutional question. They are not even being prevented from protesting by the League, or punished if they do so.
No more Kneeling for NFL
- Thread starter Evmetro
- Start date
Again., irrelevant. The players are not being prevented by federal, state, or local government from protesting, so there is no Constitutional question. They are not even being prevented from protesting by the League, or punished if they do so.
That's correct.
That's correct. There is no Constitutional question. They possess that First Amendment right. That was never under question, was it?
I'd love to see the entire team, coaches, assistants, etc. kneel in defiance.... but not if it's forced on those who are unwilling.
cawacko
Well-known member
I'm sure you asked the question for a reason but I'm missing the big picture of why
You do know that the First Amendment applies to Congress, don't you?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Loser.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Legion,
He only denounced hate groups after he was severely denounced for not doing so, sort of an after-the-fact pseudo denouncement is what he made.
The president is a racist. That's why he tried to turn kneeling into something else instead of the stated reason.
And there are no 'good' white supremacists. White supremacy is wrong. Equality is right.
He only denounced hate groups after he was severely denounced for not doing so, sort of an after-the-fact pseudo denouncement is what he made.
The president is a racist. That's why he tried to turn kneeling into something else instead of the stated reason.
And there are no 'good' white supremacists. White supremacy is wrong. Equality is right.
christiefan915
Catalyst
You mean when he claimed that British intelligence wiretapped Trump Tower in 2016 at the request of President Obama without providing a source?
Possibly.
cawacko
Well-known member
The term risk tolerance popped into my head. (random but TTQ64 told me that was a racist white man term before, haha). Essentially are you willing to risk your job to kneel if it were to come to that? If enough people were then they could do it.
Edit: I'm not saying they would lose their jobs I'm just saying if they were willing to go that far to do it
You seem quite prepared to utilize quotations from people you've derided as "idiots" and "toadies" when convenient. I like that about you.
There's no risk involved for any individual protester. Any fines will be levied against the franchise, not the players.
christiefan915
Catalyst
The owners are in a hard place on that one. You can't just put an ad out and hire new players. You can call up 2nd-stringers, yeah, but there's a reason they are 2nd-stringers. So you fire all your first choice players who took a knee, and replace them with the 2nd-tier guys. Then you lose all your games, you don't get revenue from being in the play-offs, and your ticket sales fall. Networks decline to show your games because who wants to watch losers? Revenues are falling, and all because you wanted to make a stupid point and show them who's the boss.
That's your interpretation. He was generally well-regarded and treated with respect by civil rights leaders until he announced his candidacy, as far as I know.
Is that so? If he'd singled out black players, you might have a point. Since he didn't, you don't.
From my perspective, his political opponents made this about him because he was affronted that people should behave in a manner he believes is disrespectful to our military and first responders.
Who said there were "good white supremacists"? There were a lot of diverse groups in Charlottesville. Some were protesting the removal of monuments. Some wanted the monuments removed. Some were violent leftists. Some were neo-Nazis. To assume that "both sides" is an endorsement of white supremacy is disingenuous. It wasn't a binary gathering as afar as I know.[/QUOTE]
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I don't understand the idea that kneeling during the anthem outrages you, but a President trashing vital American institutions like the FBI and 4th Estate does not.
It's truly weird.
It's truly weird.
No zinger. It's a trait I myself have developed. The difference is that I switch sides before I display it.
I am glad I have you, Owl, BAC, Kudzu, Althea, Phantasmal, Domer, and Jarod on my side. It makes me feel like I can slack off and rely on your intellectual firepower to reduce the slack-jawed rightwing hillbillies here to heaps of quivering jello.
I don't recall expressing any "outrage", little Thingy.
I happen to think that public servants and journalists should be as impartial as humanly possible and held to account when they aren't, regardless of the identity of the occupant of the White House.
That strikes me as being 'American'.
christiefan915
Catalyst
No zinger. It's a trait I myself have developed. the difference is that I switch sides before I display it.
Well, I was going to say I learned from the master but then came back to my senses.