I think there's a lack of good concise words for describing how a private company limits your (or the players) freedom and people try to fill in with the words they know best. It's just that we have such well defined words for defining the limitations a government has in restricting your freedoms.
Is it illegal when social media sites or search engines censor your ability to post or view the information you want and restricts it to a narrow band of the agendas they support? No. Is it alarming and in need of attention to be aware of when they are limiting your freedom? Absolutely. I also think there's plenty of blurred lines and secret projects that are funded by the government (ie us) but executed by private entities so there's no government oversight, and all of a sudden we end up with mind control, Voice of God technology or the latest weapon to attack people across the world.
As we go forward, we're going to be more demanding of corporations that limit our freedom or use our money in ways we don't approve of, and we'll have to develop more efficient ways of describing that, and I wouldn't be surprised if the lexicon we use for governments is just carried over.
Quote: @Vanguard83 said:
Enough horseshit.
It's not about YOUR beliefs. Stand and honor the flag & your country.
Politics and sports DONT have to go hand in hand.
Honor those who put themselves in the line of fire for your opportunity to make millions.
anyone kneels on my team and your ass is cut. IDGAS.
Bunch of pouting children...
...and I consider myself a liberal.
You seem to be a reasonable person on most issues, Vanguard, so I want to ask you a question. What if the country were doing something that deeply offended YOU? Let's take it to the extreme. What if we were throwing all school teachers in jail, or Jews, or intellectuals, or liberals, whatever. Would you protest then? Is there a point at which you would say "enough" and do something about it? Maybe your form of protest would be different than kneeling during an anthem. Maybe it would even be more extreme.
But if there is a point at which you would protest, then isn't this just a matter of this particular issue not rising to the level you personally would deem protestable?
What's next, are owners going to demand each player has to have their hand on their heart and sing too? Protests are allowed in a "free" country, even if you don't agree with the cause. This "rage" thing against the kneelers is ridiculous, IMO.
It absolutely is not a first amendment right. It would only apply if the government was trying to make it illegal. Government only! And just because Trump commented on it doesnt change it a bit.
The idea that you have the right to do or say anything you want at any time is a childish notion which has zero legal merit. Seriously, where do you guys get this stuff?
Quote: @Poiple said:
It absolutely is not a first amendment right. It would only apply if the government was trying to make it illegal. Government only! And just because Trump commented on it doesnt change it a bit.
The idea that you have the right to do or say anything you want at any time is a childish notion which has zero legal merit. Seriously, where do you guys get this stuff?
![[Image: GrizzledForsakenHuia-max-1mb.gif]](https://thumbs.gfycat.com/GrizzledForsakenHuia-max-1mb.gif)
Personally, I do not have a problem with players kneeling to bring attention to the treatment of African Americans and other minorities by the police. I also agree this is not really a First Amendment issue since there is not government power exerted to prevent the "speech." (While I do not agree with Trump's statements re the kneeling, I think his statements, while political, do not rise to the level of government power.) And short of collusion, every NFL team is free to refuse to employ any player for kneeling, if it wants to do that.
Last year the NFL said the players had the right to kneel. Presumably, the NFL meant that it was not a violation of any NFL rule or CBA provision. Now the NFL is considering a 15-yard penalty to start the game? That seems heavy handed and awkward at best.
Was kneeling really a problem at the end of last year? How many players were still doing it? Seems like it was losing steam - point made, issue raised, let's move on. And look at what has happened to the two primary guys: Kaepernick and Reid. Both are out of jobs right now. How many players are interested in following in their footsteps? I'm guessing not many. But if you order the players not to kneel and threaten them with penalties, it might cause some to do it simply to show that they will not be silenced. (I would love to see Zeke Elliott and Zac Prescott call Jerry's bluff. I bet he would not cut them for kneeling.)
An aside: evidently, it was a former Green Beret from Texas who spoke with Kaepernick and suggested that, rather than sit during the anthem, which is disrespectful, he should kneel because kneeling is a sign of respect but would still signal his protest.
Quote: @dadevike said:
Personally, I do not have a problem with players kneeling to bring attention to the treatment of African Americans and other minorities by the police. I also agree this is not really a First Amendment issue since there is not government power exerted to prevent the "speech." (While I do not agree with Trump's statements re the kneeling, I think his statements, while political, do not rise to the level of government power.) And short of collusion, every NFL team is free to refuse to employ any player for kneeling, if it wants to do that.
Last year the NFL said the players had the right to kneel. Presumably, the NFL meant that it was not a violation of any NFL rule or CBA provision. Now the NFL is considering a 15-yard penalty to start the game? That seems heavy handed and awkward at best.
Was kneeling really a problem at the end of last year? How many players were still doing it? Seems like it was losing steam - point made, issue raised, let's move on. And look at what has happened to the two primary guys: Kaepernick and Reid. Both are out of jobs right now. How many players are interested in following in their footsteps? I'm guessing not many. But if you order the players not to kneel and threaten them with penalties, it might cause some to do it simply to show that they will not be silenced. (I would love to see Zeke Elliott and Zac Prescott call Jerry's bluff. I bet he would not cut them for kneeling.)
An aside: evidently, it was a former Green Beret from Texas who spoke with Kaepernick and suggested that, rather than sit during the anthem, which is disrespectful, he should kneel because kneeling is a sign of respect but would still signal his protest.
Individual military guys have their individual ideas. Green Berets dont carry any special consideration especially because they are army guys. Anyone who digs a hole and sleeps in it while people shoot at them isn’t necessarily the brightest and the best. :p  .
And as I tell my my retired Marine son in law, The only good marine is a SUBMARINE.
I think it is too hard to compare sporting events to private industry. While it's true I believe freedom of speach is protection from the government. I'm not sure it applies to the work place. I could be wrong however that's not my point here. Yes NFL teams are privately owned franchises. They play in private/publicly funded stadiums. Comparing sports teams to private industry is not apples to apples. 65,000 people do not show up at 3M to watch them make Sticky Notes.
Quote: @suncoastvike said:
I think it is too hard to compare sporting events to private industry. While it's true I believe freedom of speach is protection from the government. I'm not sure it applies to the work place. I could be wrong however that's not my point here. Yes NFL teams are privately owned franchises. They play in private/publicly funded stadiums. Comparing sports teams to private industry is not apples to apples. 65,000 people do not show up at 3M to watch them make Sticky Notes.
All this is true, but I think you are making the wrong comparison. For First Amendment protection purposes, the question is not whether a sports team is equivalent to a private industry (although I would argue that it is), the question is whether the sports team is equivalent to the government. And I would argue that it is not.
Any employer can fire you, whether that is a sports team or a burger joint or a government job. And not having a job in a capitalist country like ours can be a very big deal. I am not minimizing that at all. But no private employer can take your freedom or your life. Only the government can (legally) do that. Only one has the force of the state behind it: the government.
Quote: @suncoastvike said:
I think it is too hard to compare sporting events to private industry. While it's true I believe freedom of speach is protection from the government. I'm not sure it applies to the work place. I could be wrong however that's not my point here. Yes NFL teams are privately owned franchises. They play in private/publicly funded stadiums. Comparing sports teams to private industry is not apples to apples. 65,000 people do not show up at 3M to watch them make Sticky Notes.
It is apples to apples. You just picked a bad example with 3M. How about actor making a movie. Its entertainment similar to football. Does his employer have the right to expect him to say his lines correctly? Is it ok to expect him to read fhem as written or can that actor make up his own lines and demand the employer respect it because its his first amendment right?
It only applies with the government. In fact the government has many laws and official policies protecting minorities. The constitution, the bill of rights and numerous laws. Some of the laws even give them special protections, almost a reverse discimination affording them increased protection under the law. There is absolutely zero case that this is a government sponsored program of discrimination. Thats not to say there isnt prejudice. Of course there is. But it isnt goverment sponsored or condoned. There are individual government persons who are prejudice and when it affects their job performance of their duties then people have every right to pursue legal actions against them including legsl demonstrations. That doesnt mean they can do it in their workplace and their employer is legally required to tolerate or condone it.
Its not like these football players do not have other recourse. Every time they open their mouths some media whore is right there with a microphone hoping they say something, anything contrversial.
They also control HUGE SUMS OF MONEY. Take the number of NFL players and multiply it by the average salary of an NFL player. How many humdreds of millions of dollars do the command? Or is it BILLIONS? With all of this at their disposal do they really have no other avenue or recourse than to do it at work in publicly funded stadiums?
Show some respect for the country who affords them so many special privledges and the appreciation to the people who pay to see the game. Keep their off field issues off the field and take care of their personal business in any of the many ways that are afforded them.
Rich spoiled unimaginative lazy.
|
