• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Patriotism? What do you think?

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Patriotism is wanting to make your country be as good as possible. Nationalism is demanding people think your country is the best, no matter what.

Protesting against police brutality, and trying to stop people from protesting against police brutality fall pretty squarely in one of these categories, respectively. I'm sure most people here can work out which is which.

Protesting against police brutality? Fine. Do so. Do so loudly, in public, with signs and demonstrations.
Protest the protesters and put up actual facts debunking many of the claims the protesters make?

Now, for some reason, THAT is not considered to be a good thing. I wonder why?
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
You play a game for money. You want to take a knee when the National Anthem is being played...you can go live somewhere else.

I’ve heard one of the reasons is that one of the versus of the original “Star Spangled Banner” refers to slaves. Is that the only reason? How do you feet?
Patriotism is essential for a nation. It represents unity and solidarity. A commitment.

If people around you are not patriotic, do you feel safe that they have your back and the country's interests in mind should a crisis occur? It becomes the proverbial every man for himself and you probably won't have a country anymore.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
So you dont agree with the first amendment?

Out of curiosity, how does the first amendment apply?

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
Players can kneel (or not).
Teams can fire (or not).
Fans can approve (or not).
It's between them to sort it all out.
Let government shut it's trap about it.

In that statement, the only one who has no real say in the matter is government...because of the 1st amendment.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Out of curiosity, how does the first amendment apply?

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The right of the people peaceably to assemble covers it.

If people dont like it, that is not the fault of those taking the knee.

I suppose it could also come under freedom of speech if you count body language as speech
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
The right of the people peaceably to assemble covers it.

If people dont like it, that is not the fault of those taking the knee.

I suppose it could also come under freedom of speech if you count body language as speech

Not the fault of those taking a knee, how? what fault is there?

OK, How is there body language protected as freedom of speech by the 1st amendment and what are they protected and from?

And by that same "Freedom of speech" you are presenting those upset by it and complaining about it has just as much right to so so.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
The original reason for taking the knee during the National Anthem was to call attention to the number of people of color who were being shot under suspicious circumstances by police officers. With the increased aggressiveness and militarization of law enforcement, there have been recent fears that America is degenerating into a police state. This trend seems to go against the general principle of living in the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave." These cops are going around with fear and loathing of their own people in their own communities. Cops have such a profound hatred and contempt of the common people that they're the ones who come across as unpatriotic. They hate Americans. They're constantly afraid and go around thinking that every honest citizen could have a gun ready to shoot them down, so the cops are trained to fire first solely out of fear.
Absolute nonsense. "suspicious circumstances ?" The circumstances are only suspicious because people want it so.

The tenor of your post is pure bulls**t. I have known more Police Officers and interacted with more Police agencies than most Americans. I spent my years on the street doing the job, and your accusations are ludicrous.

Police are not "trained to shoot first", whatever that means. They are trained to recognize certain acts that result in an immediate threat to them or others. If I tell a subject 5 times to put his hands where I can see them and not move, and a hand suddenly comes down toward a pocket, the subject will be shot. I am not waiting to see what he pulls out of his pocket before I drop him, be it a pack of gum, or a gun.

I only personally know of one violent act of police violence fueled by race. That Officer was later shot by a WHITE guy on a domestic call.

The "increased aggressiveness and militarization" of the Police.

Blame the society for this, not the Police. The Police react as need be to crimes, violence, attitudes etc. The new attitude of disobedience and violence, which has turned into a law hating ad violent culture.

In my day a baton ad six shot revolver was adequate for protection. However, though guns were as available as today, armed suspects were few and far between. People generally obeyed instructions given.

Today in some areas you know that a high percentage of people are carrying guns, you know that most will refuse to co operate, and you know some want to kill you.

In my day we didn't NEED a semi auto pistol with 18 rounds, or an M-16 in the trunk, or protective vests. These came into use because of the actions of citizens.

I don't know what you mean by "increased aggressiveness". If you mean more violent incidents involving the Police, it is because they are responding to increased violence in the community.

Instead of pontificating about something you seem to know little about, your time would be much better served if you did a few police ride alongs on the 1600 - 0000 hrs. shift, in the worst areas of Tucson, and see for yourself what occurs.

The statistics express clearly the actual facts.

In NY for example, this "aggression" resulted in a vastly lowered murder rate. Today under a "benevolent" mayor, the murder rate is climbing, why I wonder ?
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
You play a game for money. You want to take a knee when the National Anthem is being played...you can go live somewhere else.

I’ve heard one of the reasons is that one of the versus of the original “Star Spangled Banner” refers to slaves. Is that the only reason? How do you feet?
Personally, I consider BLM quite racist.
Still, Kaepernik and Co. have every right(responsibility even) to express their opinions. Just not on the NFL's dime, unless being an ex-big leaguer is a price he's willing to pay. Kaep was totally free to express his opinions in his own yard, or rent a venue, or whatever. Just not use NFL cameras and venues, costing his employers a price he wasn't willing to pay.
Nobody owes him a zillion $ a year job.

Tom
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
I propose that no one who is patriotic will become irritated over a fellow citizen peacefully exercising their rights. Our rights are a very major part of what molded America, and to not support the peaceful amd free exercise thereof is unpatriotic.
I didn't say it was. I said the reason for doing it is a myth. It was done as a cheap trick not based in fact.

The Constitution allows behavior with stupid motives.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Cops have such a profound hatred and contempt of the common people that they're the ones who come across as unpatriotic. They hate Americans. They're constantly afraid and go around thinking that every honest citizen could have a gun ready to shoot them down, so the cops are trained to fire first solely out of fear.
And black guys are all selling drugs to buy bling and hos.

Seriously?
Tom
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
You pay good money to attend a game between two teams.
On a loudspeaker, an announcer says: "Everybody within hearing distance of my voice, stop whatever you're doing wherever you are, stand at attention with your right or left hand over your heart, and no talking while Miss X sings the National Anthem, which she will begin to do in 60 seconds. Failure to comply will result in Immigration Police arresting you and taking you to the nearest deportation center."

And I wonder to myself: "Who passed that law? Why is the National Anthem being sung at games? What moron would pay good money to have to put up with that malarkey? What if someone is sitting on a toilet or is holding food and drinks? For that I served in the U.S. Navy for 3 years and 9 months? blah-blah-blah."

Then my idiot brother-in-law, who never goes to games, says: "That's a good law, don'cha think?"
Tradition, not the law.

If it worked like you said, it would be a great way to deport illegals. Alas, it does not.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Not the fault of those taking a knee, how? what fault is there?

OK, How is there body language protected as freedom of speech by the 1st amendment and what are they protected and from?

And by that same "Freedom of speech" you are presenting those upset by it and complaining about it has just as much right to so so.

I said if people dont like it being the fault.

Body language is part of speech, taking the knee is a powerful use of body language is it not? Their protection is the right to do it under law

Of course they have the right to complain. That does not detract from the right to take the knee
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Tradition, not the law.

If it worked like you said, it would be a great way to deport illegals. Alas, it does not.
If it was the law then illegal immigrants would likely be one of the most likely to adhere to the law to not draw attention to themselves.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
You pay good money to attend a game between two teams.
On a loudspeaker, an announcer says: "Everybody within hearing distance of my voice, stop whatever you're doing wherever you are, stand at attention with your right or left hand over your heart, and no talking while Miss X sings the National Anthem, which she will begin to do in 60 seconds. Failure to comply will result in Immigration Police arresting you and taking you to the nearest deportation center."

And I wonder to myself: "Who passed that law? Why is the National Anthem being sung at games? What moron would pay good money to have to put up with that malarkey? What if someone is sitting on a toilet or is holding food and drinks? For that I served in the U.S. Navy for 3 years and 9 months? blah-blah-blah."

Then my idiot brother-in-law, who never goes to games, says: "That's a good law, don'cha think?"

Its not a law.
36 U.S. Code § 301.National anthem
its etiquette
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
OK, How is there body language protected as freedom of speech by the 1st amendment and what are they protected and from?
Flag desecration has been specifically ruled as a constitutionally protected right by the Supreme Court. Peacefully protest is right in the Constitution. Body language I do not believe bas been specifically ruled on, but it's extremely unlikely the Supreme Court would rule against it. It is their right, just as it is the right of someone to complain about someone peacefully exercisimg their rights.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
I said if people dont like it being the fault.

Body language is part of speech, taking the knee is a powerful use of body language is it not? Their protection is the right to do it under law

Of course they have the right to complain. That does not detract from the right to take the knee

I will just get to the point. The 1st amendment is brought into all sorts of things it does not really apply to. And in this case it applies only in one instance. They are only protected by the 1st amendment if the government tries to pressure them or the league to take action against those taking a knee. However should the league itself decide to fire, or suspend, them they may not have any 1st amendment protection at all. The league is a private entity and what they can and cannot do depends solely on the contract the players signed with then joined the league. Private organizations are not subject to the 1st amendment as it applies to those hat work for them, that is all based on contract and things they agreed to as a function of the business. As for what any private individual, or other players think or say, they have as much right to say whatever they want as the players do to take a knee..

Also, as I mentioned in the previous post, there is no "Law" governing what "must be legally" done during the national anthem. Their are rules of etiquette, but not following those rules is not grounds for arrest
 
Last edited:

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
Flag desecration has been specifically ruled as a constitutionally protected right by the Supreme Court. Peacefully protest is right in the Constitution. Body language I do not believe bas been specifically ruled on, but it's extremely unlikely the Supreme Court would rule against it. It is their right, just as it is the right of someone to complain about someone peacefully exercisimg their rights.

See post #56 & #58
 
Top