(12-21-2022 09:55 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-20-2022 09:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It's two sides of the same coin -

Not remotely.

I don't see in the article where she said she was 'making a statement by standing'... maybe it is in another story... but the difference is... the statement she MAY be making is to her coach, who has tried to compel her acquiescence... and not to the 'nation'. I mean seriously... do you think that everyone who stands for the anthem is somehow making a statement AGAINST BLM? That sort of goes to OO's (I believe) initial comment that since few are still kneeling and are now standing, that the issue must have gone away... and/or to your perspective, that those same people must now be protesting BLM, whom they previously supported?? None of that makes any sense, so its most likely absolutely false. There is no evidence that she previously did something else during the anthem... so to argue that her doing the same thing she previously did, while others are doing something different is somehow HER delivering a different message (a protest) is just wrong.

Again, the 'statement' she is making (if any) is about compelled speech.... to which she is apparently saying 'no', since she disagrees with the mission of BLM, though she supports some of the more general tenants (that IS in the article).

If instead she decided to do gymnastics or sing a different song, THAT would likely be a protest against the perhaps compelled speech of the anthem... but it seems that it has long been decided that being asked to stand quietly (allowing for most necessary movements, including quiet talking) has not been held to be 'compelled speech'. I may be wrong about that, but THAT would be 'the other side' of the same coin.... say if you were required to sing.

For me, if you want to kneel, kneel. If you want to stand, stand. If you want to raise your fist as in the 72 Olympics, raise your fist. Yellow ribbon, blue ribbon, purple ribbon, red ribbon, rainbow... whatever... This is a great nation. We are far from perfect but nowhere else is better overall, imo... and some of the things that IMO keep us from being better are some of the things that others think MAKE us better.... and that is precisely what makes us great... while some others see it as a flaw. Some of the same people celebrating individuality are the ones who use that lack of conformity to devalue us relative to other places. This is precisely the same action being taken here... where on one hand we're asking to celebrate cultural differences etc, and on the other we're being told to conform 'or else'.

"Hening’s attorney, Cameron Norris, said Adair took four substantial actions against his client in retaliation for her refusal to kneel. Norris said she was berated during the halftime of the UVA game, benched during the second half, was criticized later during a team meeting, and had playing time cut during the next two games.

Hening contends she supports social justice initiatives but does not believe in the BLM organization's mission statement, which includes defunding police and criticizing the nuclear family framework, her lawsuit argues."

edit: I'm not sure how you read that and don't takeaway that she wasn't protesting. Yes, she was protesting something different than Kaepernick, which you do touch on. In both instances you have athletes protesting something during the national anthem, and both were punished for said protest. There's a difference in the private vs. public nature, but I feel that this is two sides of the same coin. I find it hard to not have an issue with how Kaepernick was treated and then take up an issue here, unless one's only concern is the implication of a state employee (the head coach).

I personally believe the retribution in both instances was wrong.