(09-25-2017 10:12 PM)Wooglin157 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:11 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Football players kneeling for the anthem is NOT a public free speech issue.

You are NOT allowed or given free speech protections to protest during working hours of your employer.

Well that's up to the employer and it wouldn't be uniform across all businesses.

Which further proves the point, this is not a free speech issue.

(09-25-2017 10:15 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Which further proves the point, this is not a free speech issue.

Given you have government employees trying to direct private businesses what to do, that's arguable. I thought we wanted government out of business, btw?

(09-25-2017 06:29 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 05:56 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 05:09 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  What those overpaid, underbrained athletes are doing is unpatriotic in my opinion. You take football away from them and they'd be working at some menial job in their cities. It just torques me off to see them take a knee for all the poor underprivileged Blacks out there but in reality DO NOTHING FOR THEIR PEOPLE. Some have football camps and they think with that they are helping the Blacks plight but instead are using it as a tax write off. Spend your money you dips, as the saying goes: "put your money where your mouth is". They buy multi-million dollar houses and hire minorities and think they're doing them a service.

I would LOVE to know what I could do to show my displeasure over their stupid antics and it sure would be nice if all patriotic Americans would do the same. I'm sure that there are MANY Blacks that agree with me but there are many that don't but don't do anything to improve themselves but love to criticize because it was Trump who said it. Now, the thing that Trump did that was wrong was cuss in public. Sometimes even I cringe at his words but his message was right on...and screw Kaepernick. I'm glad that mediocre QB is out of work, he never was any good. What was good about it though is that he played for the Niners and they would lose with him.

Do they really not do anything for people or does that just sound good to you?

Kap is at around $1mm in charity right now. A pledge he made last year.

Trump was criticized by the left for doing the same thing. What's wrong with this picture? ...and how many have done what your hero Kap has done?

What he did is diss the flag that MANY gave their lives for and many who didn't still served under. I couldn't care less what YOU think about Kap or those others that are dissing my flag I'm also doing what you're not, defending it. There's a place for people that don't like the US and airplanes and boats go to them every day. So, I'd say to those crybabies that cry about injustices to try them out and see what it gets them.

My hero Kap? I don't even like what he did and I've said that before. But when that happened and we started to see some of the vitriol from your side and when some of your guys here started talking about this "mulatto ass", making up sh*t about his birth situation and why he was adopted, it went too far.

So it's a matter as simple as this: I had to pick a side while trying to keep understanding the other. It was either the protesters (whose approach I didn't like) or with your side (whose behavior I didn't like).

(09-25-2017 10:12 PM)Wooglin157 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:11 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Football players kneeling for the anthem is NOT a public free speech issue.

You are NOT allowed or given free speech protections to protest during working hours of your employer.

Well that's up to the employer and it wouldn't be uniform across all businesses.

Correct. It's up to the public to stop buying their product if they wish.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(09-25-2017 10:11 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:03 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 09:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-23-2017 08:15 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  How does he take such a hard stand on this, but wants us to have a nuanced understanding of the white supremacists in Charlottesville? There were good people on the white supremacists side, but the NFL players are "sons of *******".

It's inconsistent, it's petty, it's even more divisive than what was happening before.

You don't get many presidents publicly going against the first amendment saying that people should be fired for using it.

LOL, its not a first amendment issue. The NFL isn't the gov't. They're a Business who is making a poor decision.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

I never said that it was a matter of violating the first amendment. "Going against" does not mean violating. But I do think that a president going out of his way to criticize the citizen's use of free speech publicly. I think it's out of line.

Football players kneeling for the anthem is NOT a public free speech issue.

You are NOT allowed or given free speech protections to protest during working hours of your employer.

I'm not making myself clear. Again, it's not about him actually violating the amendment.

(09-25-2017 10:25 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Correct. It's up to the public to stop buying their product if they wish.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Yes, this is obvious. Who has forced anyone to buy anything?

In this game is Gruden stupid for arguing to kick the FG first?

(09-25-2017 10:19 PM)Wooglin157 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:15 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Which further proves the point, this is not a free speech issue.

Given you have government employees trying to direct private businesses what to do, that's arguable. I thought we wanted government out of business, btw?

That a pretty epic reach in this context, but I guess its all you really have

Getting upset because someone doesn't stand during or even before the National Anthem is like getting upset that someone on your flight is not paying attention to the pre-flight instructions.

(09-25-2017 10:56 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  That a pretty epic reach in this context, but I guess its all you really have

That's just fake news. So a government employee was not openly trying to direct how private employers should act? And conservatives don't want government out of private business?

News to me!

(09-25-2017 10:26 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:11 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:03 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 09:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-23-2017 08:15 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  How does he take such a hard stand on this, but wants us to have a nuanced understanding of the white supremacists in Charlottesville? There were good people on the white supremacists side, but the NFL players are "sons of *******".

It's inconsistent, it's petty, it's even more divisive than what was happening before.

You don't get many presidents publicly going against the first amendment saying that people should be fired for using it.

LOL, its not a first amendment issue. The NFL isn't the gov't. They're a Business who is making a poor decision.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

I never said that it was a matter of violating the first amendment. "Going against" does not mean violating. But I do think that a president going out of his way to criticize the citizen's use of free speech publicly. I think it's out of line.

Football players kneeling for the anthem is NOT a public free speech issue.

You are NOT allowed or given free speech protections to protest during working hours of your employer.

I'm not making myself clear. Again, it's not about him actually violating the amendment.

You said word for word he was criticizing a persons use of free speech.

They players are paid employees, its not a free speech issue in any shape, form or fashion.

I think you are struggling bad to make your point, because its not a good one.

(09-25-2017 10:57 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  Getting upset because someone doesn't stand during or even before the National Anthem is like getting upset that someone on your flight is not paying attention to the pre-flight instructions.

I can understand why it would upset some people, but the way people react nowadays is just dumb.

It's not helped by a president being purposefully petty and setting up his own protest.

(09-25-2017 10:58 PM)Wooglin157 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:56 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  That a pretty epic reach in this context, but I guess its all you really have

That's just fake news. So a government employee was not openly trying to direct how private employers should act? And conservatives don't want government out of private business?

News to me!

No, there is no mention or hint of legislation or law here, He gave his personal view on the matter.

Whether you like it or not, he is allowed to do that.

Don't call me a conservative and don't assume my views just so you feel justified.

(09-25-2017 10:59 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  You said word for word he was criticizing a persons use of free speech.

They players are paid employees, its not a free speech issue in any shape, form or fashion.

I think you are struggling bad to make your point, because its not a good one.

I think a government employee trying to use his influence to direct a private employer to do something over speech makes it in part, a free speech issue.

(09-25-2017 11:02 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  No, there is no mention or hint of legislation or law here, He gave his personal view on the matter.

Whether you like it or not, he is allowed to do that.

Don't call me a conservative and don't assume my views just so you feel justified.

More fake news. I never called you a conservative.

Also, the WH has said that Tweets from him are to be considered official WH statements. They're not just personal views. He is subject to preservation laws when he uses the platform - that is not something a simple view is normally subject to. So yeah, he is trying to use his influence, as POTUS, to direct private employers to act. We'll see how things are further interpreted should one of those private entities succumbs to the pressure and decides to act.

(09-25-2017 11:03 PM)Wooglin157 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 10:59 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  You said word for word he was criticizing a persons use of free speech.

They players are paid employees, its not a free speech issue in any shape, form or fashion.

I think you are struggling bad to make your point, because its not a good one.

I think a government employee trying to use his influence to direct a private employer to do something over speech makes it in part, a free speech issue.

See the above, post. You are trying to argue a POTUS giving his opinion is wrong because it forces private business to do something.

Its a fake, straw man argument.

Furthermore this is not a speech issue concerning the players. They are free to say whatever they want on their own time or on social media.

I've never liked the NFL. It's a shiteshow regardless of what side you are on and I'm lmao.

Thing about Trump's approach. He pulled players who had nothing to do with the protest into it. Le'veon Bell not only disagreed with Kap, but kept inviting police officers to games. Cyrus Kouandjio stated how proud he was to finally become a US citizen last year and wasn't in on the protest. The Patriots weren't in on the protest. Probably upwards of 90% of the people who protested yesterday never involved themselves in kneeling.

He succeeded in getting them to protest him, which to his supporters could be worse than protesting the flag.

(09-25-2017 11:07 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  See the above, post. You are trying to argue a POTUS giving his opinion is wrong because it forces private business to do something.

Its a fake, straw man argument.

Furthermore this is not a speech issue concerning the players. They are free to say whatever they want on their own time or on social media.

Well they're free to say whatever they want whenever they want. You don't have the ability to dictate when and on what platform. Beyond that, their employer will determine if they want to handle it internally or not.

I simply said that a part of this becomes a 1st issue because government employees are weighing in. You think these players can do this some other time and I certainly think the POTUS could be better focused on other things too. Like PR going through a humanitarian crisis right now.

I already said that as of now since no real action or "harm" has occurred, there is nothing to challenge on 1st grounds. But if an employer is compelled to act due to the president's words, then it would get interesting I think.

(09-25-2017 11:19 PM)Wooglin157 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 11:07 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  See the above, post. You are trying to argue a POTUS giving his opinion is wrong because it forces private business to do something.

Its a fake, straw man argument.

Furthermore this is not a speech issue concerning the players. They are free to say whatever they want on their own time or on social media.

Well they're free to say whatever they want whenever they want. You don't have the ability to dictate when and on what platform. Beyond that, their employer will determine if they want to handle it internally or not.

I simply said that a part of this becomes a 1st issue because government employees are weighing in. You think these players can do this some other time and I certainly think the POTUS could be better focused on other things too. Like PR going through a humanitarian crisis right now.

I already said that as of now since no real action or "harm" has occurred, there is nothing to challenge on 1st grounds. But if an employer is compelled to act due to the president's words, then it would get interesting I think.

I disagree. I think government employees can weigh in, but that it goes against the spirit of the amendment rather than violating it.

As far as if employers can dictate the rules, they can, but Trump knows that the league isn't in the position to.