Fight the Disrespect from One by Disrespecting All?

JLSpinner wrote: Not, the tit for tat shouldn't be necessary. But for those involved, maybe they are running out of options. In a perfect world we could all talk rationally and find compromise. In this world sometimes you have to improvise.

The tactics on both sides just seem inadequate to actually produce any promising results. Both sides seem to have improvised on compulsion of the moment and allowed their emotions to take control...and as far as I can see, the knee-jerk feedback sentiments shows that both sides have effectively enlarged the divisive gap between the two sides, not narrowed it.

SamThift wrote: I appreciate the thoughts on the subject. I understand the underlying motives and issues as being valid and needing attention. I recognize the importance of the first amendment, and do not intend to suggest that my original post or others made in this thread, are directed at the actual policy questions, issues, or rights being exercised in the actions.

I personally do hold a higher affection for the United States Flag and the Star Spangled Banner, and do not view them as mere fabric and music. They are symbolic of something greater than an individual or single issue cause. I am aware that not everyone holds those symbols with the same regard, and to the extent that is their perceived "right" to express themselves in ways that seem unproductive to me, so be it. I am sure many of them would find my thoughts or actions to be unproductive too. Though it remains my right to be disgusted with their behavior.

To clarify/re-iterate: My primary point of contention, as suggested in the thread title, is more to question the appropriateness of the actual implied actions that they sought to fight disrespect by being disrespectful.

My mom would call that: Childish Response #4. "Well...Tommy was doing it too....!"


P.S. It was not the intent of my original post, or as far as I can tell,any of my follow-on responses, to discuss the merits of the underlying questions entirely. I have attempted to specifically keep the discussion geared towards how we handle our selves and whether the tit-for-tat actions were necessary, on either side for that matter. We could certainly discuss domestic policy and inequalities, as those are valid issues needing attention...but I feel those questions belong in a different thread.

The point is, some of us don't find kneeling during the national anthem to be disrespectful at all. (Unless I am alone in that, in which case, replace "some of us" with "I.")

Also, if you're going to look at it just from the "disrespect" angle then I'd argue it is actually those opposing this relatively simple protest movement who are being disrespectful, up to and including the president of this "great" nation.

EDIT: Also, I find great irony in the fact that you quote Theodore Roosevelt talking about action and doing something in your signature, but apparently oppose people doing something about institutionalized inequality.

I think at root of the issue is the idea of disrespect. Many people believe kneeling or sitting during the anthem is disrespectful, but that is an opinion, not a fact. For decades, football teams weren't even on the field during the anthem. Nobody complained then. It wasn't until the military asked them to be on the field and look patriotic during the anthem to encourage recruitment that they actually showed up. And not one player or coach has expressed a problem with the flag, the anthem, or the military. Not one. It isn't about disrespect. It's about being noticed, and it is working. Owners standing arm in arm with black and white players alike shows unity and a respect for each other as people. Teams staying in the locker room are making a unified front in the face of ignored grievances. What is disrespectful is that these types of protests have been going on for decades and yet the reasons for the protests still exist.

And one last point. If an ahole carrying a Nazi flag down public streets while wearing tactical gear and holding an assault rifle is respected as free speech, then we damn well better accept athletes peacefully kneeling, sitting, or even doing cartwheels whenever and for whatever reason. The double standard needs to stop.

Senan wrote: I think at root of the issue is the idea of disrespect. Many people believe kneeling or sitting during the anthem is disrespectful, but that is an opinion, not a fact. For decades, football teams weren't even on the field during the anthem. Nobody complained then. It wasn't until the military asked them to be on the field and look patriotic during the anthem to encourage recruitment that they actually showed up. And not one player or coach has expressed a problem with the flag, the anthem, or the military. Not one. It isn't about disrespect. It's about being noticed, and it is working. Owners standing arm in arm with black and white players alike shows unity and a respect for each other as people. Teams staying in the locker room are making a unified front in the face of ignored grievances. What is disrespectful is that these types of protests have been going on for decades and yet the reasons for the protests still exist.

And one last point. If an ahole carrying a Nazi flag down public streets while wearing tactical gear and holding an assault rifle is respected as free speech, then we damn well better accept athletes peacefully kneeling, sitting, or even doing cartwheels whenever and for whatever reason. The double standard needs to stop.

50 points to Gryffindor!

Senan wrote: I think at root of the issue is the idea of disrespect. Many people believe kneeling or sitting during the anthem is disrespectful, but that is an opinion, not a fact. For decades, football teams weren't even on the field during the anthem. Nobody complained then. It wasn't until the military asked them to be on the field and look patriotic during the anthem to encourage recruitment that they actually showed up. And not one player or coach has expressed a problem with the flag, the anthem, or the military. Not one. It isn't about disrespect. It's about being noticed, and it is working. Owners standing arm in arm with black and white players alike shows unity and a respect for each other as people. Teams staying in the locker room are making a unified front in the face of ignored grievances. What is disrespectful is that these types of protests have been going on for decades and yet the reasons for the protests still exist.

And one last point. If an ahole carrying a Nazi flag down public streets while wearing tactical gear and holding an assault rifle is respected as free speech, then we damn well better accept athletes peacefully kneeling, sitting, or even doing cartwheels whenever and for whatever reason. The double standard needs to stop.

Thank you, Senan, for saying so elegantly what I wish I could have expressed. Also, say it again, louder, for the folks in the back row.

Do you mind if I quote this post on a "Jedi/Force realist" blog I recently started? If you do, that's fine, but it is just so well-written. Edit: feel free to respond via PM if you prefer.

Lykeios wrote: The point is, some of us don't find kneeling during the national anthem to be disrespectful at all. (Unless I am alone in that, in which case, replace "some of us" with "I.")

Also, if you're going to look at it just from the "disrespect" angle then I'd argue it is actually those opposing this relatively simple protest movement who are being disrespectful, up to an including the president of this "great" nation.

That is a fair enough assessment. I acknowledged previously that the perspectives of whether or not the kneeling question was widely interpretable as disrespect or not...so I will concede on that point.

I attempted to make it evident that I found the inciting actions to be a clear case of disrespect, and I have not seen anything yet to argue against that.

It remains to me, however, that whether or not we individually see a specific action as disrespectful or not, the prevailing sentiment of the larger social institution identifies that standing for the National Anthem is appropriate, and not doing so is disrespectful. So when one chooses not to do so, for whatever reason, it is reasonable to assume that they understand the perception of being disrespectful will immediately follow.

Consider a different set of circumstances. I have been known to have a rather foul mouth. I do not use what society terms as "profane" or "vulgar" language in derogatory or attacking ways, but when frustration reaches certain levels, I am apt to drop F-bombs and the like. Free speech suggests that I should be able to use such language in any way, shape, or form, as a constitutionally protected expression. However, there are innumerable social settings where such language is heavily frowned upon, and quite inappropriate. Schools and churches are one, most private businesses do not appreciate customers or clients using strong language in their establishments, and my workplace would certainly not appreciate my use of such language we handling our clientele base.

Though, if someone in an unrelated field or industry, or fragment of our society, were to come to me using strong language. Would it then be acceptable for me to return the use of such language to show my displeasure in them using it? If I were fired for a profane tirade at work, would I have valid standings upon which to sue for wrongful termination under my First Amendment rights?

Do you see where I am trying to go with this?

SamThift wrote:

Lykeios wrote: The point is, some of us don't find kneeling during the national anthem to be disrespectful at all. (Unless I am alone in that, in which case, replace "some of us" with "I.")

Also, if you're going to look at it just from the "disrespect" angle then I'd argue it is actually those opposing this relatively simple protest movement who are being disrespectful, up to an including the president of this "great" nation.

That is a fair enough assessment. I acknowledged previously that the perspectives of whether or not the kneeling question was widely interpretable as disrespect or not...so I will concede on that point.

I attempted to make it evident that I found the inciting actions to be a clear case of disrespect, and I have not seen anything yet to argue against that.

It remains to me, however, that whether or not we individually see a specific action as disrespectful or not, the prevailing sentiment of the larger social institution identifies that standing for the National Anthem is appropriate, and not doing so is disrespectful. So when one chooses not to do so, for whatever reason, it is reasonable to assume that they understand the perception of being disrespectful will immediately follow.

Consider a different set of circumstances. I have been known to have a rather foul mouth. I do not use what society terms as "profane" or "vulgar" language in derogatory or attacking ways, but when frustration reaches certain levels, I am apt to drop F-bombs and the like. Free speech suggests that I should be able to use such language in any way, shape, or form, as a constitutionally protected expression. However, there are innumerable social settings where such language is heavily frowned upon, and quite inappropriate. Schools and churches are one, most private businesses do not appreciate customers or clients using strong language in their establishments, and my workplace would certainly not appreciate my use of such language we handling our clientele base.

Though, if someone in an unrelated field or industry, or fragment of our society, were to come to me using strong language. Would it then be acceptable for me to return the use of such language to show my displeasure in them using it? If I were fired for a profane tirade at work, would I have valid standings upon which to sue for wrongful termination under my First Amendment rights?

"The larger social institution" is not the government or the Constitution. "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech..." Seems fairly simple to me. What is socially acceptable does not (or, at least, should not) define our legal system.

Do you see where I am trying to go with this?

Yes, I do. And it is, potentially, a very slippery slope.

Senan wrote: I think at root of the issue is the idea of disrespect. Many people believe kneeling or sitting during the anthem is disrespectful, but that is an opinion, not a fact. For decades, football teams weren't even on the field during the anthem. Nobody complained then. It wasn't until the military asked them to be on the field and look patriotic during the anthem to encourage recruitment that they actually showed up. And not one player or coach has expressed a problem with the flag, the anthem, or the military. Not one. It isn't about disrespect. It's about being noticed, and it is working. Owners standing arm in arm with black and white players alike shows unity and a respect for each other as people. Teams staying in the locker room are making a unified front in the face of ignored grievances. What is disrespectful is that these types of protests have been going on for decades and yet the reasons for the protests still exist.

And one last point. If an ahole carrying a Nazi flag down public streets while wearing tactical gear and holding an assault rifle is respected as free speech, then we damn well better accept athletes peacefully kneeling, sitting, or even doing cartwheels whenever and for whatever reason. The double standard needs to stop.

Senan...as always...you do certainly present valid points and great illustration. It may seem like back-pedaling on my part at this point, but your latest example in the second paragraph here does offer a bit of perspective to where we assign issue and where we reserve it.

I hope we have found the discussion here to be constructive. I have enjoyed it. I have tried to keep the questions on track to what I was attempting to discover.

In the interest of furthering my own development and hopefully providing opportunities for others to review some of the questions here for themselves, while gathering a collective analysis of the issue, I would deem the general point of the thread (whether I would have foretold the outcome to be such or not) as a relative success.

As an Eagle Scout myself, and a former Marine, I have always had an appreciation for the symbols of our nation, but also take pride in the personal efforts, sacrifice, and harms I put myself through to ensure the ability of my fellow Americans to enjoy the quality of life we have, and the full protections of our laws, even when their constitutional and inherent rights in various areas are disagreeable to me personally.

Where at the outset of my sentiments read through my original post appear to have been mostly construed as an attitude of me attacking what I found to be blatant disrespect...I was not attempting to convey any notion that I felt the disrespect to be punishable, or criminal, or illegal, or anything of the sort...but merely posited whether it was an appropriate response to the comments which led to the most recent situation.

With your most recent illustration, I find the disrespect question to be relatively settled, and accept that while not the best method, or one I may have chosen to employ, it was clearly an effective method, and well within their bounds.

I never quite brought up the specifics of the "he said/she said" things, because I did not want this to devolve into an attack on either position...but in reality, given the specific comments made in the subject speech and subsequent "tweets"...I do not see any other actions the players COULD have taken, except to kneel during the Anthem. In the end, I suppose that sometimes our actions are results of circumstances we do not have control over, and while not always the BEST option at the moment, it may be the only option, whether we like it or not.

So I leave the thread in the hands of any other further thoughts, but consider these to be my closing sentiments. I truly appreciate the discussion from all involved. It was helpful to me personally.

Police are allowed to abuse and murder American citizens with impunity: I consider that to be much more disrespectful than kneeling during the anthem.

I understand where youre coming crom OP, but id say its a matter of picking the more important battle. Feeling that the anthem protest is disrespectful is a fair and understandable position, but id say if look at the bigger picture, its significantly less important than the issues behind the protests (well some are just dojng it to say FU to Trump)

And id also say that kneeling is a much better form of protest than looting and rioting. This is actually the kind of protest people can and maybe should respect, as opposed to breaking windows and setting things on fire. Its not destructive or really disruptive, and its coming from people we recognize as being important to our own lives (if youre watching football and youre a big fan of it then you might feel the players are important anyway).

Rather than taking this as a cue to feel insulted, maybe we should take it as a cue to say "huh, perhaps i need to be more willing to listen"?

Feel free to repost my stuff wherever, Lykeios. I'm an open book. Thank you for the compliment as well.