NYC politician wants Bills+Giants to adopt Jets Anthem policy

[Lfod]

25 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

You lost me on this last part. I don't see how the message is lost. It's only lost on those who choose to ignore it and get mad about kneeling protesters. The kneeling is symbolic. It's not a gimmick.

Well just from my observation the subject being discussed is about kneeling and not about police brutality. The focus in the news is on the kneeling and not the police brutality.

 

The focus of the very statement that spawned this post was about the kneeling and not on the police brutality. I don't see how you can think the message wasn't lost. Has the guy who made the statement about the Bills being like the Jets done anything about police brutality? Has he mad a peep or caused a single reform?  No it's about effecting the kneeling process.

 

I would think the focus should be about creating policy to effect the police brutality. I mean if that's what mattered to me. Kneeling seems more important now. So yea the message has been scrambled up in my opinion. 

 

I think the solution is that you have police do the same thing as Starbucks and everyone agrees to chill out. At least Starbucks is trying to do something about thier screw up. 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/650316002&ved=2ahUKEwjNxqz4mLTbAhWDk1kKHQffDQYQFjAOegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0up8gXoYv0JkxeNtnQkioK&ampcf=1

 

In fact I should probably bow out now because I'm going off topic because this is absolutely just a subject about players kneeling in the NFL. I don't want to get a warning. 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2018 by Lfod

[LeGOATski]

43 minutes ago, Lfod said:

Well just from my observation the subject being discussed is about kneeling and not about police brutality. The focus in the news is on the kneeling and not the police brutality.

 

The focus of the very statement that spawned this post was about the kneeling and not on the police brutality. I don't see how you can think the message wasn't lost. Has the guy who made the statement about the Bills being like the Jets done anything about police brutality? Has he mad a peep or caused a single reform?  No it's about effecting the kneeling process.

 

I would think the focus should be about creating policy to effect the police brutality. I mean if that's what mattered to me. Kneeling seems more important now. So yea the message has been scrambled up in my opinion. 

 

I think the solution is that you have police do the same thing as Starbucks and everyone agrees to chill out. At least Starbucks is trying to do something about thier screw up. 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/650316002&ved=2ahUKEwjNxqz4mLTbAhWDk1kKHQffDQYQFjAOegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0up8gXoYv0JkxeNtnQkioK&ampcf=1

 

In fact I should probably bow out now because I'm going off topic because this is absolutely just a subject about players kneeling in the NFL. I don't want to get a warning. 

 

 

The NFL's kneeling policy is separate from the issue that is being protested. They definitely shouldn't be lumped together. It's small-minded to say that the NFL's kneeling policy has overshadowed the societal issue being protested. It seems that's just what you choose to focus on. That's understandable if the issue doesn't affect you and you're just a fan of the NFL. I'm in that same boat.

[purple haze]

On 6/1/2018 at 8:40 PM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

You've got a lot going on here, but I'll give it a shot. 

 

I have no idea what you mean by suggesting that anyone believes that a flag or a song is more important than human beings. If you mean to say that honoring the flag and recognizing injustice occurs is incompatible, well again I can only disagree.  

 

The players are not partners.  If they were, Kaepernick would be playing for the team if his choice, Ray Rice would be in Baltimore and Richie Incognito never spends 2 years off the field.   Owners own team, players play, and so it goes. The players are replaceable, not because they are of less human value than owners, but simply as a function of the game. It has to be that way, think of guys like Jim Brown, and in the NBA guys like Bill Russell and Kareem Abdul Jabar.   It's not bad or good, it just is. 

 

The NFL is not the NBA anymore than it is Starbucks or a Dairy Queen.   The NFL isn't a petrie dish of great social causes and life lessons, it's about selling tickets, merchandise, PSL, ad revenue etc. The league inserts itself into the great social debate at its own peril. The league lives by emotion (and the irony of discussing the symbolism of the flag when considering tens of thousands of fans stream into a stadium every Sunday wearing their team's colors  is kinda funny to me), and dies by it as well. 

 

Youre probably right about complaints about about players who stay in the locker room. So? From the league perspective, far better for the police union & family to be angry or disappointed in PlayerX than the Philadelphia Eagles, Baltimore Ravens or whatever. Besides, while your disdain for the league is obvious, how come the $90m doesn't count for goodwill and knock back some of the complaints?  How much is the players union offering as a match?  10%, 25%, even 100%? How awesome is that??? 

 

in the end, whether you think enough people will stop watching or not is largely irrelevant.  The league saw the potential for loss as a big enough threat to change the rules to accommodate players who want to protest, honor the fans who respect the flag and anthem, ponied up a hundred mill for the cause...so it's obvious to the ownership group that the issue needed to be addressed.  

 

 

My point is some people are more concerned with appearances than realities.  The reality of what the players were protesting was clearly stated.  Many chose to, and still choose to, ignore it based on a lie put forth by the president and his enablers to muddy the waters as is their M.O. in general.  

 

No player was protesting the flag or the military.  Ever.  Kaepernick knelt because a player with military background suggested he do that as opposed to sitting down during the anthem as he originally did.   Many people seem more concerned with the appearances of showing respect than if many others are treated with respect in a real, living and breathing sense.  Maybe because some are not treated and have not been traditionally treated with respect is why the anthem and flag symbols are not sacred cows to some of those people.  The hypocrisy is too evident.  But I don't begrudge those who want to stand, get teary eyed or whatever else.  I have no desire to control what they feel they need to do.  Why do they need to control what the players do?

 

The players are more partners than the league wants to acknowledge and the player's union demands.  There is a difference between NFL caliber players and the players who would replace them if they weren't on the field.  No network  is paying the owners 3.3 billion for TV rights to see Kraft or Jones or the Pegula's or backup level players.  Once the players act in that understanding and get better leadership from the NFLPA there would be more favorable term in general for the players.   

 

Kudos to the league for kicking in money.  But money is one part.  Participation is the other.  NBA does that well.  I have no idea what the players union is or isn't doing in terms of donating money.  

 

 

Edited June 3, 2018 by purple haze

[ThunderGun]

3 hours ago, El Guapo said:

And the poor white folks have it so easy...

Pretty sure "poor white folks" have had civil rights in this country since way before 1964 (only 54 years ago)...

"Poor white folks" also didn't build this country for free, only to be given zero reparations...

Never mind the fact that this nation was stolen through the mass genocide of it's indigenous people.  

Let's just keep ignoring how this country came to be and keep acting like it's the greatest thing ever because we are told it is so.

 

Their ancestors built this country, quite literally.  They had no choice in the matter, it happened, it was real, and it's a disgusting blemish, amongst many others, against this nation... let's keep silencing them, that seems like a great idea... "I know your ancestors were worked to death and were treated inhumanely, your grandparents didn't even have basic civil liberties, and social injustices continue to plague the majority of African Americans, but would you mind not using this platform in which you have the entire nation's attention to voice your opinion,  and instead show some damn respect for the country that has done it's darndest to make sure you as a people will never truly amount to anything??? Thanks, that'd be super..."

Edited June 2, 2018 by ThunderGun

[Buffaloflash]

7 hours ago, purple haze said:

Men and women died for the rights of citizens as expressed by our constitution.  There are ways to honor them that don't include the anthem or the flag or the faux nationalism.  The greatest honor to them, it would seem, is actually using the rights and living up to the ideals they represented on behalf of the United States, otherwise what did they die for?    Not a symbolic piece of fabric; not a song.  It's about the actual rights and the actual ideals the country represents or that is what we are told.

No professional theatre production is stopping in the middle of a show to make a point either.  The Hamilton occurrence came after the show itself was over.  

And this too,was disrespectful!

[Lfod]

9 minutes ago, purple haze said:

My point is some people are more concerned with appearances than realities.  The reality of what the players were protesting was clearly stated.  Many chose to, and still choose to, ignore it based on a lie put forth by the president and his enablers to muddy the waters as is their M.O. in general.  

 

No player was protesting the flag or the military.  Ever.  Karpernick knelt because a player with military background suggested he do that as opposed to sitting down during the anthem as he originally did.   Many people seem more concerned with the appearances of showing respect than if many others are treated with respect in a real, living and breathing sense.  Maybe because some are not treated and have not been traditionally treated with respect is why the anthem and flag symbols are not sacred cows to some of those people.  The hypocrisy is too evident.  But I don't begrudge those who want to stand, get ready eyed or whatever.  I have no desire to control what they feel they need to do.  Why do they need to control what the players do?

 

The players are more partners than the league wants to acknowledge and the player's union demands.  There is a difference between NFL caliber players and the players who would replace them if they weren't on the field.  No network  is paying the owners 3.3 billion for TV rights to see Kraft or Jones or the Pegula's or backup level players.  Once the players act in that understanding and get better leadership from the NFLPA there would be more favorable term in general for the players.   

 

Kudos to the league for kicking in money.  But money is one part.  Participation is the other.  NBA does that well.  I have no idea what the players union is or isn't doing in terms of donating money.  

 

 

Was it possible to promote a message and support a cause without causing a controversy and division that still exist today? If there was a way that should of been the action taken. 

[LeGOATski]

18 minutes ago, ThunderGun said:

Their ancestors built this country, quite literally.  

It would help if you didn't use the term "literally" so liberally.

[Buffaloflash]

7 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

To remind you that black folks get a rough ride in this country.

 

 

Some Black folks,as do Some Hispanics,Some Native Americans,Some Poor Whites etc,etc,etc!

[Lfod]

1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:

The NFL's kneeling policy is separate from the issue that is being protested. They definitely shouldn't be lumped together. It's small-minded to say that the NFL's kneeling policy has overshadowed the societal issue being protested. It seems that's just what you choose to focus on. That's understandable if the issue doesn't affect you and you're just a fan of the NFL. I'm in that same boat.

No I think the societal issue exist. I mean I linked an article about Starbucks. I could mention the recent Roseanne Barr incident.  I've been paying attention. I don't think it's overshadowed the real issue. 

 

I was just hoping we could be intellectually honest with each other for a moment and step away from personal biases. The kneeling doesn't represent the same message for everyone. I really wish it could. 

 

I hope you understand I'm trying to put myself in other people's shoes. See it from both sides. The very essence of equality and fairness is respecting or at least understanding all points of view. 

 

If you really knew me you would definitely understand I take no sides and hold no allegiance. I couldn't tell you I know what it's like to be discriminated against. I couldn't tell you I know what it's like to feel patriotic either. 

 

I can only tell you I'm scared for humanity. I don't see it being resolved in compromise. 

Edited June 2, 2018 by Lfod

[Buffaloflash]

4 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

Congratulations. Ostriches everywhere are proud of your capacity to keep social justice separate from violent sports entertainment. This country provides certain populations with considerable privilege. 

You mean like a Football player can play for a few years and with sound money management, never having to work for the rest of his life?

Yeah,that's considerable privilege like a Mother!

[Doc Brown]

3 hours ago, Buffaloflash said:

You mean like a Football player can play for a few years and with sound money management, never having to work for the rest of his life?

Yeah,that's considerable privilege like a Mother!

What idiots for risking their jobs to use their pulpit to bring awareness to an issue that impacts those less fortunate than them.  They could be set money wise for the rest of their lives for Christ's sake.

[joevan]

An argument could be made that no christian, jew or muslim should stand at attention for the flag or the anthem.

 

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My Commandments.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

4 hours ago, Lfod said:

I mean I linked an article about Starbucks.

 

Starbucks

 

 

1 hour ago, joevan said:

An argument could be made that no christian, jew or muslim should stand at attention for the flag or the anthem.

 

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My Commandments.

 

No one's WORSHIPPING the flag.

 

 

[Saxum]

16 hours ago, Mickey said:

Mandating certain conduct during the national anthem, it could be argued, is compelling speech.

 

Any can be "argued". does not make it correct legally.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

34 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

Any can be "argued". does not make it correct legally.

 

True, but in this case Mickey is probably correct that mandating certain conduct (standing) during the national anthem could be legally argued as compelling speech, and can likely bring forward more applicable legal precedents than I.  I would think WVa State Board v Barnette would represent legal thought on the topic (a 1943 decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment protects students from being forced to salute the American flag or say the Pledge of Allegiance in public school).   The background to the case is that a number of religions preclude standing to salute the flag - Jehovah's witnesses, any originating from the Anabaptist movement (Mennonite, Amish etc) - and their children were being expelled from school for following their religious beliefs and refusing to stand to salute the flag due to their literal interpretation of Exodus 20:4-5

 

I'm pretty sure Mickey is correct that's why the "may remain in the locker room" part was written in.

 

37 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

No one's WORSHIPPING the flag.

 

Except that joevan is entirely correct that a number of religions do interpret that biblical verse as precluding them from standing to the flag.  That was the whole background to the Barnette decision of 1943, that certain religious groups interpret that bible verse (Exodus 20:4-5) quite literally and feel it precludes them standing to salute the flag.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

True, but in this case Mickey is probably correct that mandating certain conduct (standing) during the national anthem could be legally argued as compelling speech, and can likely bring forward more applicable legal precedents than I.  I would think WVa State Board v Barnette would represent legal thought on the topic (a 1943 decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment protects students from being forced to salute the American flag or say the Pledge of Allegiance in public school).   The background to the case is that a number of religions preclude standing to salute the flag - Jehovah's witnesses, any originating from the Anabaptist movement (Mennonite, Amish etc) - and their children were being expelled from school for following their religious beliefs and refusing to stand to salute the flag due to their literal interpretation of Exodus 20:4-5

 

I'm pretty sure Mickey is correct that's why the "may remain in the locker room" part was written in.

 

 

Except that joevan is entirely correct that a number of religions do interpret that biblical verse as precluding them from standing to the flag.  That was the whole background to the Barnette decision of 1943, that certain religious groups interpret that bible verse (Exodus 20:4-5) quite literally and feel it precludes them standing to salute the flag.

 

Ah, religion. The bane of humanity.

 

[mannc]

15 hours ago, tumaro02 said:

After being a diehard Bills fan for many years--when the Bills players took a knee last year I immediately called Direct TV and cancelled my Sunday  Ticket and didn't attend or watch another Bills game last year. I have no interest in players (most of whom have done "nothing" in their life to earn the right to disrespect the flag and anthem provided by the blood shed for that freedom) use the stage to protest anything. I am one of those who hurt the NFL business in my disgust by stopping my payments for fan gear, tickets, etc. I am hoping the protests end so I can return to paying my hundreds of dollars this year to the Buffalo Bill coffers. If they adopt the Jets owner's lead they will save me a lot of money again this year. Whats next? So when 1500 players want to protest 1500 different social causes  you want the NFL ownership to support ALL of  those Player's causes too, and shove that down a $200.00 ticket payer 10 times? Provide them another venue if you wish but not one I am paying hundreds to watch.

And yet here you are, posting on an NFL team’s fan message board (and not just about the national anthem, by the way).  

 

I don’t believe you.

[formerlyofCtown]

8 hours ago, BillsfaninSB said:

 

But many of the stadiums are not private.  They are either owned by the government or heavily financed by the government. 

Then why do you have to pay to get in.  If they are not owned by the teams then they are leased and under the control of the team and hence become private property just like when you rent a home.

[BadLandsMeanie]

9 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

It's a good thought, but eliminating the anthem will just make a portion of fans who are offended by players kneeling will boycott the NFL until the anthem is reinstated.  A chance for a simple fix on this issue was lost when the president decided to pour gasoline on the fire.

I would say it was lost when the owners decided to react to it with statements of outrage and unity. Some taking it a bunch of levels up and making a big show of kneeling with their players. Talk about being trolled.   Trump just made troll remark they should have just totally ignored it, but they were too stupid.

[Kirby Jackson]

9 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

It's a good thought, but eliminating the anthem will just make a portion of fans who are offended by players kneeling will boycott the NFL until the anthem is reinstated.  A chance for a simple fix on this issue was lost when the president decided to pour gasoline on the fire.

It will certainly shine a spotlight on the situation. It will be a MASSIVE deal for a little while. Like anything though, it will blow over. People aren’t going to leave forever because teams stopped playing the anthem. They may say that they will but they won’t. There’s a guy in this thread talking about how he boycotted but here he is posting in a football forum. He clearly didn’t walk away like he said he did. The NFL would take their lumps and the move on. It’s ripping the band-aid off. 

 

If they do something like honor heroes in place of the anthem it holds especially true IMO. Anyone that walks away because they replaced the anthem with a story about a guy that rescued a pregnant mother from a burning car is an a-hole.