Saints WR Michael Thomas is very sensitive

[staylor26]

All Parker did was answer the question

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

But you said that protest is what they fought and died for. By your exact reasoning, a protest at a funeral is the ultimate patriotic act.

It's not obtuse, it's applying your reasoning, . . unless you concede your reasoning is obtuse.

I mean, all Brees is saying that his family is hurt by people kneeling during the anthem, given their service. So he personally wouldn't do it. But the caveat of personal direct harm doesn't appear in your initial proclamation.

No, my reasoning is solid. And I explained the difference between the two acts. Phelps was directly, and purposely causing pain and anguish to the family members of the fallen soldiers, as he organized the protests to take place during the funerals or burials. He acted with malice and stirred up hatred.

But, I also said his protests are also protected by the 1st Amendment.

The difference is that kneeling athletes did not purposely cause pain and anguish to the family of fallen soldiers, they kneeled at their own place of work, and they did so silently. Their act of kneeling was in defense of the rights of others. Why would any soldier be offended by that?

Saying that Kap, and other athletes are the same as Phelps, is just semantics and playing word games.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

Wow talk about an epic, dumbshit projection. JFC

Yeah, cause that's what I was doing, projecting. If you don't think that racists will point to the statements by Brees to bolster their argument or beliefs, you are just being willfully ignorant of the situation.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

No issues are set back by Brees' comments.
And people's empathy isn't feigned just because the world is imperfect.
You think you are empathetic because you advocate for a single narrative. But you miss all the empathy you are rejecting by insisting on the soveriegnty of that single narrative.

Year and years the complaints have continued, and the message has overwhelmingly been 'I'm mad, fix it, or I'm going to get more mad.'

That is an expression of sentiment. It's an expression of intentions. But it's not a plan, or even a roadmap to satisfaction.

Are you sure no issues were set back? Here we are arguing about kneeling again and the main issue at hand is obscured. I think that's setback for the narrative, no?

How do you think change happens exactly? Let's take an extreme. The BLM movement protests in silence and no one knows about it. Is that a roadmap to satisfaction? Obviously not. Let's move down the spectrum and say players kneel between the 3rd and 4th quarters of every game. It gets some press brief press coverage, but does anyone really care? Do people notice? No. And then let's go to a scenario where players kneel for the anthem. Suddenly there's discussion and debate. Suddenly there's focus.

That absolutely seems like a much more reasonable roadmap to potential satisfaction than just sitting there in silence. I'm not saying it's some foolproof plan and it absolutely might not work, but it inspires discussion. The very fact that the debate there has been hijacked by Kaepernick's stupidity in wearing a Castro shirt or his mediocre ability on the field or his PR stunt a few months ago doesn't diminish the movement that's sprung from it. And I would hope that most of you might agree after the last few weeks that it's a worthy conversation to have, in the least.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic

No, my reasoning is solid. And I explained the difference between the two acts. Phelps was directly, and purposely causing pain and anguish to the family members of the fallen soldiers, as he organized the protests to take place during the funerals or burials. He acted with malice and stirred up hatred.

But, I also said his protests are also protected by the 1st Amendment.

The difference is that kneeling athletes did not purposely cause pain and anguish to the family of fallen soldiers, they kneeled at their own place of work, and they did so silently. Their act of kneeling was in defense of the rights of others. Why would any soldier be offended by that?

Saying that Kap, and other athletes are the same as Phelps, is just semantics and playing word games.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Brees' entire point was about respecting the pain soldiers experienced seeing the flag and anthem presentation being disregarded. Your position is that the soldiers shouldn't be pained and should be gratified instead because protest is occurring. First off, that is policing the emotions of the soldiers in a manner your seem loathe to do to . . . other aggrieved entities. Second, if protest at solemn occasions is patriotism, then the purposes of the protest or the nature of the solemn occasion should not matter, . . . again according to your logic.

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Are you sure no issues were set back? Here we are arguing about kneeling again and the main issue at hand is obscured. I think that's setback for the narrative, no?



How do you think change happens exactly? Let's take an extreme. The BLM movement protests in silence and no one knows about it. Is that a roadmap to satisfaction? Obviously not. Let's move down the spectrum and say players kneel between the 3rd and 4th quarters of every game. It gets some press brief press coverage, but does anyone really care? Do people notice? No. And then let's go to a scenario where players kneel for the anthem. Suddenly there's discussion and debate. Suddenly there's focus.



That absolutely seems like a much more reasonable roadmap to potential satisfaction than just sitting there in silence. I'm not saying it's some foolproof plan and it absolutely might not work, but it inspires discussion. The very fact that the debate there has been hijacked by Kaepernick's stupidity in wearing a Castro shirt or his mediocre ability on the field or his PR stunt a few months ago doesn't diminish the movement that's sprung from it. And I would hope that most of you might agree after the last few weeks that it's a worthy conversation to have, in the least.

Yes. I don't know why these people are saying that oh, I'm sorry the police needlessly killed another black person, but this rioting and looting has to stop, but they should be saying I'm sorry that there is rioting and looting, but the police needlessly killing black people has to stop.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[Setsuna]

Football players aren't exactly the smartest people in the world. And some of the smartest people in the world are the dumbest. People are amazing aren't they?

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Brees' entire point was about respecting the pain soldiers experienced seeing the flag and anthem presentation being disregarded. Your position is that the soldiers shouldn't be pained and should be gratified instead because protest is occurring. First off, that is policing the emotions of the soldiers in a manner your seem loathe to do to . . . other aggrieved entities. Second, if protest at solemn occasions is patriotism, then the purposes of the protest or the nature of the solemn occasion should not matter, . . . again according to your logic.

You are just playing with words and not understanding, or purposely ignoring, the point and the differences between protesting against LGBTQ+ rights at a soldier's funeral, and what the players were doing by peacefully kneeling during the Anthem.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Are you sure no issues were set back? Here we are arguing about kneeling again and the main issue at hand is obscured. I think that's setback for the narrative, no?

How do you think change happens exactly? Let's take an extreme. The BLM movement protests in silence and no one knows about it. Is that a roadmap to satisfaction? Obviously not. Let's move down the spectrum and say players kneel between the 3rd and 4th quarters of every game. It gets some press brief press coverage, but does anyone really care? Do people notice? No. And then let's go to a scenario where players kneel for the anthem. Suddenly there's discussion and debate. Suddenly there's focus.

That absolutely seems like a much more reasonable roadmap to potential satisfaction than just sitting there in silence. I'm not saying it's some foolproof plan and it absolutely might not work, but it inspires discussion. The very fact that the debate there has been hijacked by Kaepernick's stupidity in wearing a Castro shirt or his mediocre ability on the field or his PR stunt a few months ago doesn't diminish the movement that's sprung from it. And I would hope that most of you might agree after the last few weeks that it's a worthy conversation to have, in the least.

I think we miscommunicated. When I'm talking about a roadmap to satisfaction, I'm talking about 'what exactly will make you go from mad to not mad.' I'm not talking about a roadmap to attention.

I've said since the issue first came up, Kaep's activities are productive for attention, but are useless for productive progress. This is because he muddied the message by casting aspersions on the most general, universal and unifying of our national symbols. This is also because he didn't have anything with metrics, except that things that have already happened should not have happened.

People largely agree that a lot of these things should not have happened, but no one has a time machine.

Further there are thorny and ominous subtexts to the things that get talked about, but never really advocated, around this issue. Do we end law enforcement? Do we end laws? Do we end individual autonomy? HOW do we make sure nothing ever goes wrong again? Is that even possible? How do we improve? Will improvement even be appreciated, particularly if it falls short of perfection.

None of this is easy, . . . except turning your back on the national symbols and letting the rest of society do your advocating for you.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic

You are just playing with words and not understanding, or purposely ignoring, the point and the differences between protesting against LGBTQ+ rights at a soldier's funeral, and what the players were doing by peacefully kneeling during the Anthem.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

So it's not protesting itself, but what specifically you protest and whether or not ChiefsFanatic is on board?

[Al Bundy]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

That should make the Westboro Baptists protesting at military funerals the MOST PATRIOTIC EVER!!

Talk about making a huge stretch.......

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Al Bundy

Talk about making a huge stretch.......

I'm not advocating that, ChiefsFanatic is.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Did he offer an alternative?

Is this really the message that needs to be sent right now? Why pick this battle, now of all times?

Your poor feelings!

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

I think we miscommunicated. When I'm talking about a roadmap to satisfaction, I'm talking about 'what exactly will make you go from mad to not mad.' I'm not talking about a roadmap to attention.

I've said since the issue first came up, Kaep's activities are productive for attention, but are useless for productive progress. This is because he muddied the message by casting aspersions on the most general, universal and unifying of our national symbols. This is also because he didn't have anything with metrics, except that things that have already happened should not have happened.

People largely agree that a lot of these things should not have happened, but no one has a time machine.

Further there are thorny and ominous subtexts to the things that get talked about, but never really advocated, around this issue. Do we end law enforcement? Do we end laws? Do we end individual autonomy? HOW do we make sure nothing ever goes wrong again? Is that even possible? How do we improve? Will improvement even be appreciated, particularly if it falls short of perfection.

None of this is easy, . . . except turning your back on the national symbols and letting the rest of society do your advocating for you.

I was with you until the last sentence. He tried to effect change in an imperfect way. He started a national dialogue.

We can both agree that none of it is easy. Drew Brees is asked how the NFL is going to respond to all of this and the first thing he brings up is his views on kneeling. That seems tone deaf and a view cast in stone. There were more diplomatic answers, and I think he deserves a lot of the blowback he's getting right now.

Just wait until Mahomes kneels next year and y'all have to make some imaginary choice in your minds between your golden boy and your country.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Sure, but his view doesn't change. And for a lot of people, that's the problem. It's like his view is frozen in ice regardless of the evolution of the situation.

I thought the Malcolm Jenkins response was very powerful. Maybe it's not how some of you feel, but are you saying he's just too sensitive? Or is it more likely it's just difficult to empathize with what black people experience?

What’s powerful about “agree with my terms of how to protest or I will label you as part of the problem?”

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

What’s powerful about “agree with my terms of how to protest or I will label you as part of the problem?”

Because it’s a black person who has every reason - both personally and professionally - to respect Drew Brees responding in an honest, reasoned, and thoughtful way?