Turn Off the NFL

The next football player who wants to protest while on the job should do so by playing without a helmet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleudog

The next football player who wants to protest on the job a perceived injustice should do so by playing without a helmet.

---

No, because then they will just blame CTE for their stupidity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

He's spoken since then...and even then, he says there is a real problem he hopes the protestors bring attention to. You think he would agree with your summary of the protestors' (there are many) gripe?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn...ump/index.html

---

FWIW, I don't think he spoke to any specific issues in the article, sans Charlottesville.

I fully agree with what Watson says, including his decision not to protest. The mode of protest is not his. I agree because it targets the wrong thing. America, its people, and values have brought prosperity in spite of racism, not because of it. The institutions and laws of the US have hindered racism. That is not to say that horrific racism does not exist today. I argue that the way to eliminate racism is to stamp it out when you see it.

It is telling that there is no one issue that sparked the kneeling protest, because there isn't one. It's a general belief that the country is systemically oppressing people of color. And the country is the founding principles, ideals, and its people. Do you think Kaep would disagree with that? That is what I originally summarized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

That's not how rights work.

The players have every right to take a knee. The league will do what it will do as it has to balance the relationship between the talent and the fans. If enough fans turn off the TV, you'll see change.

It's the beauty of the free market!

You can't mandate respectful compliance. Our founders thought that kind of thing was terrible.

These protests are quintessentially American. The free market response is too. I don't understand why everybody's dander is up! This is who we are! And, it's great!

---

To add, we completely agree here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LATechBanjo

The stated message is that the entire country, its founding principles, and populace, is racist. Nebulous, insidious, unspoken, systemic racism.

---

The entire country? The populace?

Come on...you were editorializing.

I don't know whether Kaep would agree with your softened statement.

Do you believe that inequality exists? Is it a "tougher row to hoe" in this country if you're a minority?

That's what the protests are about. You can answer no to my questions and still understand that something more is being said than, "all you white people are racists."

Like I said, you've over-simplified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleudog

http://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-36...-sect-301.html

---

Merely advisory. The prescription of a custom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LATechBanjo

FWIW, I don't think he spoke to any specific issues in the article, sans Charlottesville.

I fully agree with what Watson says, including his decision not to protest. The mode of protest is not his. I agree because it targets the wrong thing. America, its people, and values have brought prosperity in spite of racism, not because of it. The institutions and laws of the US have hindered racism. That is not to say that horrific racism does not exist today. I argue that the way to eliminate racism is to stamp it out when you see it.

It is telling that there is no one issue that sparked the kneeling protest, because there isn't one. It's a general belief that the country is systemically oppressing people of color. And the country is the founding principles, ideals, and its people. Do you think Kaep would disagree with that? That is what I originally summarized.

---

I think it's much deeper than that and that the shame felt by those who can't deny a cultural decline that continues to grow must be blame that on anything other than their culture. The problem is not racial, but those who are touched by it seem have no other response.

I've heard Watson and other black men say many times the problems are based on lack of family unit and or lack of father figures. This problem is now spreading to other races in a big way and has become the norm rather than the exception. We are in deep trouble as a nation unless we stop looking back and begin to face the real problems of breakdown of the family unit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Merely advisory. The prescription of a custom.

---

Where are you? The Isla de Muerta? Are we talking about the pirates code or something? At the very least it should be seen as disrespectful. Why right the advisory language at all if you don't expect it to be adhered to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleudog

http://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-36...-sect-301.html

---

I see your federal statute and raise you the first amendment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

How do you know that the protesters are upset by those that are offended? They are protesting unequal treatment - not offense.

---

So they are protesting unequal treatment of what? whom? I am hearing all kinds of stuff, I would bet many don't know why they are kneeling.. They do not have a consistent message...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

The entire country? The populace?

Come on...you were editorializing.

I don't know whether Kaep would agree with your softened statement.

Do you believe that inequality exists? Is it a "tougher row to hoe" in this country if you're a minority?

That's what the protests are about. You can answer no to my questions and still understand that something more is being said than, "all you white people are racists."

Like I said, you've over-simplified.

---

Allow me to rephrase:

The stated message is that the country, its founding principles, and majority population, is racist.

If you haven't yet, look into implicit bias testing. The assertion is essentially that all white people are subconsciously racist. The tests are interesting. Harvard has a few available online.

Of course inequality exists. Inequality of outcomes will always exist in a free state. Inequality of opportunity is appropriately limited and in the realm of the state.

What more is being said in the protests than "we are oppressed by racism generally?". As I said before, point me to the offenders and we'll see justice done. I believe Americans have little tolerance for overt racism when identified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

I think it's much deeper than that and that the shame felt by those who can't deny a cultural decline that continues to grow must be blame that on anything other than their culture. The problem is not racial, but those who are touched by it seem have no other response.

I've heard Watson and other black men say many times the problems are based on lack of family unit and or lack of father figures. This problem is now spreading to other races in a big way and has become the norm rather than the exception. We are in deep trouble as a nation unless we stop looking back and begin to face the real problems of breakdown of the family unit.

---

I agree. Racism exists, but it likely isn't the problem to the ills that affect us. In order to believe that, we must also believe that race relations have regressed since 1960

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LATechBanjo

I agree. Racism exists, but it likely isn't the problem to the ills that affect us. In order to believe that, we must also believe that race relations have regressed since 1960

---

I have no doubt they regressed for 8 years under Obama. He continues to stir the pot, but has NEVER offered a solution to the problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

I see your federal statute and raise you the first amendment.

---

I think the football players have every right to exercise their first amendment rights. Just don't do it on their employer's time.

I agree with the others in this thread that most real world employers don't encourage employee activity that the employer's customer base could find offensive. If I started wearing political t-shirts or handing out political flyers (candidates or causes) at work, I'd be asked to stop. If I failed to stop, I'd be asked to leave. And me dancing around singing first amendment wouldn't come into play.

Let the players buy advertising, march in demonstrations, hold press conferences, promote concerts, etc. But when in uniform a football player is on the clock and an employee. Unless they are protesting against their employer, take it somewhere else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techman05

Where are you? The Isla de Muerta? Are we talking about the pirates code or something? At the very least it should be seen as disrespectful. Why right the advisory language at all if you don't expect it to be adhered to?

---

https://www.senate.gov/reference/res...df/RL30243.pdf

Look at CSR-9 "Nature of Codification of Customs and Rules."