Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm wondering if some of the righties commenting in this thread about how the NFL is a private enterprise whose employees are not protected by the First Amendment feel the same way about those social media sites that banned conservatives a few weeks ago. I seem to remember a few righties came in here and said that since Google and others who did the banning served the public, First Amendment protections should apply.
I see quite a few in here advocating for the termination of the players who are kneeling. My question is do they take the same stance on the NFL? The NFL serves the public. Why should First Amendment protections be given to conservatives on Google (a private company) but not to players in the NFL (another private company)?
I don't need to read or understand anything. I'm perfectly clear on the subject. I don't know a single person that is allowed to protest on the job period. End of story.
Fully agree. You get paid millions to play a game. You are Very lucky and blessed. Shut up and play the game. I don't care about your stand, about your political affiliations, nothing. I watch football, I sit through commercials, you are a paid "entertainer", now entertain.
Since you think I must be "made aware", I choose not to watch, any of you. I've already stopped going to the movies long ago. Again, same thing. You are a good looking by grace of god puppet reading cue cards and making millions, shut up and act.
I make a teachers salary. If I voiced my opinion during work, FIRED.
I'm wondering if some of the righties commenting in this thread about how the NFL is a private enterprise whose employees are not protected by the First Amendment feel the same way about those social media sites that banned conservatives a few weeks ago. I seem to remember a few righties came in here and said that since Google and others who did the banning served the public, First Amendment protections should apply.
I see quite a few in here advocating for the termination of the players who are kneeling. My question is do they take the same stance on the NFL? The NFL serves the public. Why should First Amendment protections be given to conservatives on Google (a private company) but not to players in the NFL (another private company)?
I honestly think the Google, Facebook, YouTube, & Twitter crowd should be allowed to censor their material. You sign a usage agreement with a private company to use their service.
NOW, that said, there should be equal opportunity to start businesses that can compete with those services. One of the things to consider is the Internet is not made up of unlimited resources. The large companies compete (or pay for) premium bandwidth and server space. Little companies may have trouble competing against the Google, Facebook, YouTube, & Twitter monsters for service providers (or get completely priced out due to pressure.) If the Trump administration wants everyone to have an equal voice on the Internet, they may have to subsidize independent companies under a specific size.
To this I say bull. While I don't agree with sitting during the anthem (which fans did for years and nobody batted an eye to LONG BEFORE players sat or even keeled during it) they have that RIGHT to do it. If the owner wants to suspend, fire or not resign a player for it, I might not fully agree to it (and honestly for Kaepernick it was just the straw that broke the camel's back because he was an OK system QB who chose to get an "elective" surgery during-the season when he got benched (which was the season before he knelt), but that is the owner's choice. Unlike hiring an alleged wife beater, there isn't and shouldn't be an outcry if a team dumps someone with differing views.
That said, the team and league has no right what so ever to force players into forced patriotism. Especially when the league and players have a collective bargaining agreement stating that the players have to be in on a rule change.
your issue isn't with me then. you can "bull" me all you want but nothing you said addresses what I said.
nowhere in my comments did I discuss "rights".
shoot I didn't even discuss what I think owners should do.
What I said was, these guys are claiming they are bringing attention to a serious problem in this country. The thing is, if that's real, then what they need are people like ME to side with them but instead of doing something that actually brings people like me on board they are peeing on my leg and telling me its raining.
I aint biting. im not going to support a pack of knucklehead intentionally insulting me. I am not going to take serous a group of guys who collectively put a hundred million bucks in the bank every year and cry "poor pitiful me"...
so again you can call bull and you can cry about rights but nothing you said deals with my post or thoughts on the matter.
I think the players next move is to kneel for the anthem in honor of our "vets" to demonstrate how ridiculous the "insulting the vets/flag/USA" actually is.
you pee on my leg and tell me its raining, I still know its pee.
I'm wondering if some of the righties commenting in this thread about how the NFL is a private enterprise whose employees are not protected by the First Amendment feel the same way about those social media sites that banned conservatives a few weeks ago. I seem to remember a few righties came in here and said that since Google and others who did the banning served the public, First Amendment protections should apply.
I see quite a few in here advocating for the termination of the players who are kneeling. My question is do they take the same stance on the NFL? The NFL serves the public. Why should First Amendment protections be given to conservatives on Google (a private company) but not to players in the NFL (another private company)?
With this logic, a company should also be 100% free to do business with anyone for any reason. Don't you agree?
The fact of the matter the NFL isn't a 100% private corporation. It benefits from billions of dollars of taxpayers subsidies in the form of free stadiums, laws to protect its monopoly and forced fees from cable/satellite subscriptions. Let's cut all of that out first, and then we can talk about the rest.
No doubt this is an issue that also seriously divides America, with Trump in the mix in typical embarrassing fashion, and no doubt there have been more than a few prior threads about this as a result, but rather than let this get buried in one of those many prior threads, I think Kareem's recent insights about all this sports protest business are particularly worthy of consideration...
"Sports is one of the few areas in which Americans of all races can talk to each other. Right now, it may be the country’s best hope for meaningful dialogue"
If only Trump and more Americans would/could consider what they are so badly missing. Purposely or unwittingly, I'm really not sure...
It is not trump vs the NFL, Trump reflects the attitude of most of the country.
He is the guy who says what we want to say to the NFL.
entertainers are paid to entertain, when they begin to offend the audience, the play closes down.
Simple.
The kneelers are showing disrespect for the flag and national anthem, two things that bind all of our differences. When we get slapped in the face, don't expect any sympathy for whatever they're trying to sell.
Since gang law is so well entrenched and embraced by the media and democrat politicians, look at it this way, we have been diss'd by the players and take offense.
With this logic, a company should also be 100% free to do business with anyone for any reason. Don't you agree?
The fact of the matter the NFL isn't a 100% private corporation. It benefits from billions of dollars of taxpayers subsidies in the form of free stadiums, laws to protect its monopoly and forced fees from cable/satellite subscriptions. Let's cut all of that out first, and then we can talk about the rest.
No one forced those communities to pay for those stadiums. San Diego didn't, and they lost the Chargers. Other cities have caved, but a plurality of people voted to subsidize the stadiums that got built with those funds.
Why do we need the national anthem to be played before domestic sporting events involving two private clubs? Its dumb.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
