frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Please explain kneeling to the flag during NFL games.

Debate Information

This is one of those things that's SO loaded with baggage it is nearly impossible to talk with someone about it.  Please, explain your position on this issue if you are in support of it.  Remember, I have had little success talking with people who support it.  Pretend you are talking to your friendly local Martian ambassador.

What is the symbolism of kneeling before the flag?
What outcome are you hoping for?
What outcome are you expecting?
What do you think people who oppose doing this are are thinking?

If you oppose the kneeling, please wait until the first 5 responses from supporters are in.  I want them to have a clear hearing so they can be certain I understand.
joecavalrynorthsouthkorea
  1. Live Poll

    Do you support kneeling for the anthem/flag?

    22 votes
    1. I support it.
      27.27%
    2. I oppose it.
      50.00%
    3. I don't care.
      22.73%
«1



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • joecavalryjoecavalry 430 Pts   -  
    I oppose the kneeling during the national anthem and it downs those patriotism.
    harrison_duncanFascism
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • It is brignding down patriotism and can lead to a less audience for the NFL and other sports if it spreads to other leagues and sports. The president is correct and some Americans agree with him as well.
  • WakeWake 124 Pts   -  
    I fought in a war for my country and having millionaires attack this country for things they know nothing about is twenty steps over the line. I will no longer have anything to do with the NFL, the NBA or any of their sponsors.
  • I personally oppose kneeling for the national anthem, but I recognize that they have the right to do so under the first amendment. If I want freedom of speech it needs to apply universally.
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Kneeling before a piece of dyed cloth is blasphemous. The flag should not require such reverence. Of course I oppose it, as I also support burning it.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • RodinonRodinon 67 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat

    I don't think we're talking about the same thing.  But that IS interesting.  Do you support burning it in principle, or do you actively support it being burned?
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    I burn them. I dont think the act of burning a piece of cloth should be frowned upon. Nor do I believe one should give it any reverence. It has become an idol.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • inc4tinc4t 186 Pts   -  
    It's highly disappointing that NFL being an American sport, is showing such disrespect to our Country. Trump is appealing to patriotism and is absolutely right.  Disgrace to NFL players who choose to dishonor the anthem. Let them move to another country if they are nit happy here. 
    CYDdharta
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -  
    Seems Trump's work is done.  The NFL bent over willingly.  The damage is done though, ticket sales are down, attendance numbers are down and the NFL has no one to blame but themselves for the actions of these selfish, spoiled, game-playing Children.

    The freedom of speech is ever preserved...and so is the right to completely destroy and demolish someone socially if they say or do something too far out of line.  Never forget that.


    WilliamSchulz
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Vaulk said:
    Seems Trump's work is done.  The NFL bent over willingly.  The damage is done though, ticket sales are down, attendance numbers are down and the NFL has no one to blame but themselves for the actions of these selfish, spoiled, game-playing Children.

    The freedom of speech is ever preserved...and so is the right to completely destroy and demolish someone socially if they say or do something too far out of line.  Never forget that.


    Sounds pretty Orwellian. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @Erfisflat,

    I'd say that exercising your freedom of speech against someone who you believe has foolishly exercised their freedom of speech is fairly American.  When people don't like other people's particular stupidity...they speak out against it...they call it out...hell there's entire television programs dedicated to making fun of and shaming people for saying and doing things.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat,

    I'd say that exercising your freedom of speech against someone who you believe has foolishly exercised their freedom of speech is fairly American.  When people don't like other people's particular stupidity...they speak out against it...they call it out...hell there's entire television programs dedicated to making fun of and shaming people for saying and doing things.
    It's a good thing I don't care what people think, especially for not "falling in line". I don't understand what "foolishly exercised their freedom of speech" means though.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Ran out of kindling, headed to Wal-Mart for some more dyed cloth
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • As the next best thing to a Martian Observer ( a European) I respect people's right not to be made demonstrate respect to something that they don't feel respect for. Respect should be earned rather than enforced, is my viewpoint. An athlete is employed because of his athletic ability rather than his political beliefs. My understanding is that the American Government paid taxpayer money to politicise sports by actively paying NFL teams to have athletes stand for the anthem. Well it looks like that has back-fired and instead they should make some effort to address the concerns of its citizens.
  • WakeWake 124 Pts   -  
    @hughesmachine - 660,000 white men died to give blacks their freedom. In every corner of life it was WHITE men who stood up to support the freedom of blacks. I am an old man now and I remember when blacks had to sit in the back of the bus. That wasn't because there was any white demand for it but because that's the way it had always been - I was there the day when an old black woman got on the bus with a large bag of groceries and just couldn't face walking to the back of the bus. It was a middle aged WHITE man who immediately jumped to his feet and offered the lady a seat. When the black driver was afraid to drive away because he might get in trouble it was the WHITE men who yelled at him to get going. They couldn't care less if blacks were sitting around them. In the movie "Hidden Figures" we had the same attempt at blaming the white man for doing nothing more than was always done - having separate toilet facilities. It was a WHITE man who stopped that. And the inference that a white manager was taking credit for the work of his black underlings seemed to skip over the point that ALL managers take credit for the work of all of their underlings - that it is unusual to give credit to someone working for a manager. I, as a manager, gave credit to all of my people who made advances for the company and it was frowned on not because anyone wanted to take credit for other's work but that people were HIRED to perform their jobs competently and managers simply oversaw this.

    What we have seen is pure racism from a segment of blacks that blame anything and everything on racism of the whites. As a Slav I have seen White men blamed for everything under the sun and I have recognized that it virtually ALL is to give advantage to someone else and not to stop any real racism of whites.

    I fought in a war for my country. And the flag and the national anthem represents my country. If you disrespect that you disrespect all that EVERYONE has received from the freedom of this country.

    When in history has there ever been a better one?
  • FascismFascism 344 Pts   -  
    They have their right to kneel, but I don't support it. It is anti-american, and they no reason to do this. 
  • @Wake I thank you for your service, however, you gave them the right to protest
    ErfisflatDrCereal
  • @Fascism It's freedom of speech. forcing people to stand for the anthem would be anti-american
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Fascism said:
    They have their right to kneel, but I don't support it. It is anti-american, and they no reason to do this. 

    Not everyone born in America supports their government. Nationalism is a horrible idea.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  

    Me during the national anthem 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @wake said "I fought in a war for my country. And the flag and the national anthem represents my country. If you disrespect that you disrespect all that EVERYONE has received from the freedom of this country."

    I'd like to thank you for fighting for my freedom to sit during the national anthem. If it weren't for you I'd not have the freedom to burn this here flag. I'd salute you, but I only pay reverence to my parents and God.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @Erfisflat,

    Everyone has the right to sit during the national anthem, kneel, bend over...whatever you'd like.  The right is solidly secured and no one has even attempted to deny that right.  What people seem to forget in this country is that this freedom works both ways.  You have the right to kneel......and the rest of the country has the right to ridicule you, shame you, speak out against you, say that it's unethical, say that it's wrong.  We have the right to kneel indeed, and we have the right to call you a despicable person for doing it.  Yes sir, our freedoms are still intact, but what confuses me are the supporters of the kneeling Football players screaming about freedom when no one's freedom has been infringed upon...

    People are making this out to be a case of denial of freedom when it's not.  This is a case of asinine people exercising their freedoms and being shamed for the method in which they're doing it.  Sounds like a bunch of people exercising freedom to me.  If you think that no one should be able to shame you for the way you exercise your freedom...you could always go live in a dictatorship that leans your way and would have the police beat down anyone who publicly disagreed with your protest.  But in America, we have the freedom to ridicule and shame other people for the way they exercise their freedoms.

    #freedom101
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat,

    Everyone has the right to sit during the national anthem, kneel, bend over...whatever you'd like.  The right is solidly secured and no one has even attempted to deny that right.  What people seem to forget in this country is that this freedom works both ways.  You have the right to kneel......and the rest of the country has the right to ridicule you, shame you, speak out against you, say that it's unethical, say that it's wrong.  We have the right to kneel indeed, and we have the right to call you a despicable person for doing it.  Yes sir, our freedoms are still intact, but what confuses me are the supporters of the kneeling Football players screaming about freedom when no one's freedom has been infringed upon...

    People are making this out to be a case of denial of freedom when it's not.  This is a case of asinine people exercising their freedoms and being shamed for the method in which they're doing it.  Sounds like a bunch of people exercising freedom to me.  If you think that no one should be able to shame you for the way you exercise your freedom...you could always go live in a dictatorship that leans your way and would have the police beat down anyone who publicly disagreed with your protest.  But in America, we have the freedom to ridicule and shame other people for the way they exercise their freedoms.

    #freedom101
    Oh I'm glad you're exercising your right to ridicule others, it's just that I could care less. As Eleanor Roosevelt said:
    “Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”

    In other words, there are better things to do with your time.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @Vaulk if I gave a steamy pile of goodness what idiots thought about me I wouldn't be here proving the earth is flat.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -  
    To those who somehow took the statement I made previously (Even the instances where I specifically used the word "You") as directed personally at them...well I'm sorry if it came off that way but it was more directed at the Nancies out there who are shedding buckets of tears over the people of our country shaming them for their actions.  To those who have the mind to disregard it, bravo and we need more thick skinned people like you.  To everyone else
     

    I keep a few of these handy for when people need help sucking it up.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @vaulk, do you believe that a 60 some thing year old man opened fire on innocents last week, and that over 50 people died and 200 were injured?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat,

    Now that's an interesting question.  I'm honestly not settling on a final answer on that one but I can say this: Coming from a heavy Military background with extensive training in firearms and Combat...I can say with a great deal of certainty that the evidence "So far" doesn't look to be in favor of the currently accepted narrative.  I'm not saying it was staged, it was fake or that it didn't happen the way they say it did...I'm saying that it only looks that way on the surface.  Even the slightest bit of detailed information begins to cast doubt...if I had 7 eyebrows then 6 would be cocked up like Spock.
    ErfisflatFascismSilverishGoldNova
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat,

    Now that's an interesting question.  I'm honestly not settling on a final answer on that one but I can say this: Coming from a heavy Military background with extensive training in firearms and Combat...I can say with a great deal of certainty that the evidence "So far" doesn't look to be in favor of the currently accepted narrative.  I'm not saying it was staged, it was fake or that it didn't happen the way they say it did...I'm saying that it only looks that way on the surface.  Even the slightest bit of detailed information begins to cast doubt...if I had 7 eyebrows then 6 would be cocked up like Spock.
    Firing an automatic weapon creates a large spray. It's likely that with 200 injured, 50 dead, he'd have to be one skilled marksman. The envy of even the most skilled marksmen even. This guy was not an avid gun man, as his brother claims, so I'd guess this amount of damage would've required thousands of rounds. Let alone a guy that is "not into guns" could possibly obtain automatic weapons, which require years of waiting time, thousands of dollars, etc. Agreed?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • FascismFascism 344 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat
    Nationalism isn't about supporting the government.

    Nationalism - loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially: a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups
         Intense nationalism was one of the causes of the war.
    Nation - a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.
         a North American Indian people or confederation of peoples.

    It is more about the people, country, land, and culture. 

    You can do whatever you want during the anthem. It's your right, but I don't support it. 
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @Fascism

    But what is A nation without it's government, who basically makes all the international decisions, etc.?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    Take this for example. Let's say my Wife and I decided to adopt a child and went through the rigorous adoption process that sometimes takes years and we finally adopted our very own special child.  After the initial observation phase was over and the child was 100% ours, we could put an add out on Craigslist to hand the kid off to anyone legally...just like that.  No background check, no legal fees, no courtroom procedure, no child protective services involvement.  You respond to the add, show up at the door, I hand the kid to you, we sign some documents, get them notarized and BAM, you got yourself a new kid.

    Now, this is legal.  We have a right as American citizens to do this.  No one can take away this right because it's set in law (It could change but currently it's legal).  This is your right...just as it's my right to be sick and disgusted with people who actually do this and to call them out, shame them and even tell them to their face that it's morally evil.  

    The point here is that while you have freedoms to do all sorts of things, people are still going to call you out for it and you'll have to get over it instead of making it out to be an attack on your rights when your rights are OBVIOUSLY preserved.

    This NFL kneeling junk was never about rights or whether someone has the right to do it...it's about the NFL players and their supporters being booboo hurt that they're being shamed for it...so they make it out to look like an attack on their right to protest when it never was.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Vaulk said:
    Take this for example. Let's say my Wife and I decided to adopt a child and went through the rigorous adoption process that sometimes takes years and we finally adopted our very own special child.  After the initial observation phase was over and the child was 100% ours, we could put an add out on Craigslist to hand the kid off to anyone legally...just like that.  No background check, no legal fees, no courtroom procedure, no child protective services involvement.  You respond to the add, show up at the door, I hand the kid to you, we sign some documents, get them notarized and BAM, you got yourself a new kid.

    Now, this is legal.  We have a right as American citizens to do this.  No one can take away this right because it's set in law (It could change but currently it's legal).  This is your right...just as it's my right to be sick and disgusted with people who actually do this and to call them out, shame them and even tell them to their face that it's morally evil.  

    The point here is that while you have freedoms to do all sorts of things, people are still going to call you out for it and you'll have to get over it instead of making it out to be an attack on your rights when your rights are OBVIOUSLY preserved.

    This NFL kneeling junk was never about rights or whether someone has the right to do it...it's about the NFL players and their supporters being booboo hurt that they're being shamed for it...so they make it out to look like an attack on their right to protest when it never was.
    I don't think that's a valid analogy, but I get your point. You don't consider ridicule a personal attack?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat

    I suppose it depends on the specific circumstances of the ridicule.  It certainly could be a personal attack, a verbal one but personal none-the-less.  Again this isn't an attempt to strip someone's freedom or suppress their rights as an American Citizen.  No one came onto the field and forcibly picked these guys up, slapped them in the face and held them at gunpoint until they showed respect...they were all allowed to do it.  No one's rights have been stifled, no one's freedoms have been suppressed.  They made their protest and we made ours.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    I mean what sort of shame and ridicule are we talking about?
    Like this?
    "Those people exercising their rights are unpatriotic!"???
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat

    "I suppose it depends on the specific circumstances of the ridicule.  It certainly could be a personal attack, a verbal one but personal none-the-less.  Again this isn't an attempt to strip someone's freedom or suppress their rights as an American Citizen.  No one came onto the field and forcibly picked these guys up, slapped them in the face and held them at gunpoint until they showed respect...they were all allowed to do it.  No one's rights have been stifled, no one's freedoms have been suppressed.  They made their protest and we made ours."

    Let's say you are exercising your right to open carry a firearm. Would you be happy if someone ridiculed you about it? I mean you have the freedom to do so without fear of punishment, would you consider that ridicule an infraction on your rights?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @Erfisflat

    The answer to your question Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat
    Would you be happy if someone ridiculed you about it?
    No, I don't think I'd be happy about anyone ridiculing me for anything.  But in this case, no I wouldn't be happy about someone ridiculing me for exercising my right to carry a firearm.

    And Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat
     I mean you have the freedom to do so without fear of punishment, would you consider that ridicule an infraction on your rights?
    No, I wouldn't consider it an infraction on my rights for someone else to exercise their rights.  You see, that's how our freedoms are built, so that one cannot cause infringement upon another.  I'm sure there are people in our Country who "Think" that being ridiculed is an infraction on their rights but these people are mostly misinformed and some of them are just incapable of dealing with ridicule for one reason or another.  My right to ridicule your protest is no more of an infringement upon your rights than your right to protest is an infringement upon mine.  I don't particularly like the wording there but I think you get my point.  

    I would have to ask, how exactly would public ridicule be an infringement upon my rights?
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat

    The answer to your question Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat
    Would you be happy if someone ridiculed you about it?
    No, I don't think I'd be happy about anyone ridiculing me for anything.  But in this case, no I wouldn't be happy about someone ridiculing me for exercising my right to carry a firearm.

    And Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat
     I mean you have the freedom to do so without fear of punishment, would you consider that ridicule an infraction on your rights?
    No, I wouldn't consider it an infraction on my rights for someone else to exercise their rights.  You see, that's how our freedoms are built, so that one cannot cause infringement upon another.  I'm sure there are people in our Country who "Think" that being ridiculed is an infraction on their rights but these people are mostly misinformed and some of them are just incapable of dealing with ridicule for one reason or another.  My right to ridicule your protest is no more of an infringement upon your rights than your right to protest is an infringement upon mine.  I don't particularly like the wording there but I think you get my point.  

    I would have to ask, how exactly would public ridicule be an infringement upon my rights?
    Similar to what Rosa parks would have faced for sitting on the front seat of the bus. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat

    The answer to your question Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat
    Would you be happy if someone ridiculed you about it?
    No, I don't think I'd be happy about anyone ridiculing me for anything.  But in this case, no I wouldn't be happy about someone ridiculing me for exercising my right to carry a firearm.

    And Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat
     I mean you have the freedom to do so without fear of punishment, would you consider that ridicule an infraction on your rights?
    No, I wouldn't consider it an infraction on my rights for someone else to exercise their rights.  You see, that's how our freedoms are built, so that one cannot cause infringement upon another.  I'm sure there are people in our Country who "Think" that being ridiculed is an infraction on their rights but these people are mostly misinformed and some of them are just incapable of dealing with ridicule for one reason or another.  My right to ridicule your protest is no more of an infringement upon your rights than your right to protest is an infringement upon mine.  I don't particularly like the wording there but I think you get my point.  

    I would have to ask, how exactly would public ridicule be an infringement upon my rights?
    Similar to what Rosa parks would have faced for sitting on the front seat of the bus. 
    While the foundation of Rosa Park's protest may have been similar to the NFL Players' protest, the rest of the circumstances are not similar in any way.  Rosa Parks was arrested by law enforcement AND charged with a crime.  This is the huge differentiating element between the two cases and the underlying reason why they cannot be fairly compared as ALL of the NFL players who protest are legally allowed to do so, it's their right.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • FascismFascism 344 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat Yes it is true that a nation cannot function without a government, but the government isn't the nation itself. For example, I can be a Muslim nationalist, but that doesn't mean I support every Muslim government. I might believe that the governments are all bad, and we need a new government, but I'm still nationalistic because I feel pride in my culture, my people, my history, etc. This falls within the definition I provided. 

    I'm not actually a Muslim nationalist, if you were wondering. 
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @Vaulk

    I'm not necessarily talking about the arrest part of the analogy. The ridicule itself would have been horrible for a lady after a hard day at work, me a different story, but I don't lack empathy. Say after segregation ended, is it right that all those people faced ridicule? In the case of the jahovas witnesses, where they wouldn't salute the flag because their religion forbids it, was it right if they were ridiculed?
    I don't watch TV, so I don't know exactly what was said, but it sounds borderline slanderous. 
     
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Fascism said:
    @Erfisflat Yes it is true that a nation cannot function without a government, but the government isn't the nation itself. For example, I can be a Muslim nationalist, but that doesn't mean I support every Muslim government. I might believe that the governments are all bad, and we need a new government, but I'm still nationalistic because I feel pride in my culture, my people, my history, etc. This falls within the definition I provided. 

    I'm not actually a Muslim nationalist, if you were wondering. 
    In most cases, governments are not bad in or of themselves, it is just too easy to "buy" the government. There is too much power at stake. The word itself means to control the mind. Have you read 1984 or animal farm?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • FascismFascism 344 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat Yes I have read both. Words and language manipulation have much to do with it. But what does having pride in one's culture, people, and history have to do with it? 
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat,

    Yea I have to admit I'm not 100% positive about ALL that was said, I only pick up on the connotation and it seems to be negative ridicule with an undertone of patriot heresy. 

    So again, "Should Rosa Parks suffer ridicule"?  No.  But her Freedom doesn't exclude her from it.  That's what's so unique about America.  You can have your Freedom...but that doesn't mean you can say or do whatever you want and there's just ZERO consequences for it.  If you act like a fool on national television with over 100 million people watching...yea you might just get some lashback over that. 

    If you're LITERALLY standing up to racial inequality and racial injustice in every literal sense of the form...no, even if hundreds of billions of people were watching...you shouldn't be ridiculed.  The difference is NFL multi-million dollar game-playing superstars doing something that is considered disrespectful by the Majority of U.S. Citizens is NOT the same as one humble Black Woman refusing to be treated like a 2nd class citizen.  If Dr. Martin Luther King were standing here today, I have the strong frame of mind to say that he'd be ashamed to see Football players (In his time Football players were something bigger than they are today) doing something as disrespectful as refusing to stand for the national anthem.  I really wish he was here today so we could ask him.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat,

    Yea I have to admit I'm not 100% positive about ALL that was said, I only pick up on the connotation and it seems to be negative ridicule with an undertone of patriot heresy. 

    So again, "Should Rosa Parks suffer ridicule"?  No.  But her Freedom doesn't exclude her from it.  That's what's so unique about America.  You can have your Freedom...but that doesn't mean you can say or do whatever you want and there's just ZERO consequences for it.  If you act like a fool on national television with over 100 million people watching...yea you might just get some lashback over that. 

    If you're LITERALLY standing up to racial inequality and racial injustice in every literal sense of the form...no, even if hundreds of billions of people were watching...you shouldn't be ridiculed.  The difference is NFL multi-million dollar game-playing superstars doing something that is considered disrespectful by the Majority of U.S. Citizens is NOT the same as one humble Black Woman refusing to be treated like a 2nd class citizen.  If Dr. Martin Luther King were standing here today, I have the strong frame of mind to say that he'd be ashamed to see Football players (In his time Football players were something bigger than they are today) doing something as disrespectful as refusing to stand for the national anthem.  I really wish he was here today so we could ask him.
    I disagree, racial segregation, probably doused with hefty amounts of ridicule, was the norm. So if one black guy used a whites only water fountain on TV, this would have been considered foolish then, and the idiots would have been lined up with ridicule, as the idiots are ridiculing the NFL players today.


    While this ridicule wasn't necessarily an infraction on anyone's rights, it certainly was an inconvenience on their pursuit of happiness, a God given right. So it's not really "ZERO consequences". I really can't comprehend how kneeling during the anthem is being a fool, to me, it is the people that make a big deal about it that are the fool. If the NFL players are losing money for what the President, said it's slander.

    I believe MLK would have stood for the constitution and unalienable rights, such as freedom of speech. In his speech, I have a dream, he remarked:
    "In a sense we have come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @Erfisflat

    The photo of the people attacking this Man's personal property (Car) is not an example of ridicule.  This is assault and this is the difference between what we're talking about between Rosa Parks and NFL Players. 

    I'm going to try to be blunt here even with the looming possibility of finger pointing.  If you don't like being ridiculed...tough.  Get over it, suck it up, deal with it, you'll be fine, brush it off and carry on.  This goes for Rosa Parks, Dr. Martin Luther King, Gregor Mendel, Albert Einstein and every other prominent Mover and Shaker in History who was ever ridiculed.  You have the right to Life, the law supports it.  You have a right to Liberty, the law supports it.  You have a right to the Pursuit of Happiness, which means you can chase the dream without anyone legally stopping you...it doesn't mean that you'll catch your dream or that people won't make fun of you for chasing it. 

    Freedom of Speech is the exact same way, you have the right to say and express your thoughts...I have the right to say and express mine.  You can stand on one side of the street with a sign that says "I demand respect" and I can stand 20ft across from you on the other side of the street with a sign that says "Screw your respect" and guess what...we both have a right to be there.  We are not a Nation that panders to the hurt feelings of those who exercised their 2nd amendment right and were ridiculed for it.  

    Simply put to those who are being mocked...get over it.  Do you hear the President coming on TV complaining about how people are saying that he's dumb for having an opinion about the NFL?  No, people have a right to think he's dumb and they have a right to say it too.  Just as he has the right to say that the NFL should fire the SOBs that refused to stand for the National Anthem.  This is how the 2nd amendment works, always has worked this way, always will.  The 2nd amendment isn't about what's morally right...it's about your freedom to speak and express yourself without breaking the law.  There's people still stomping on the flag and burning it...guess what?  That's their right.  And there's still people calling them "Idiots", and guess what?  That's their right.  It's a two way street.

    And I agree that MLK would have stood for freedom of speech, and he was smart enough to know that the freedom of speech is a two way street.  He would have known better than to try to insinuate that any mockery of his position was an infringement on his freedoms.  Martin Luther King stood proud in the face of mockery, in the face of ridicule and he didn't stoop to belly-aching or whining when people called him a N%$$#@, he didn't cry to the government when people made fun of him.  Dr. King didn't try to tell people that they couldn't make contradictory statements to his position.  No Sir, Dr. King took it ALL in stride and was ABOVE it as he should have been.  Dr. King is a SHINING example of what people SHOULD be doing in the face of adversity and GOD only knows why they can't seem to summon up that strength anymore...seems today everyone's so hell bent on claiming that their rights are being trampled on whenever someone takes up an opposition with mockery or insults.  You wanna know how you can undermine a powerful movement to stop violence?  Let petty $%#@ get under your skin and start crying whenever someone mocks your endeavor...that's how you show how truly weak your movement is.
    Erfisflat
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat

    The photo of the people attacking this Man's personal property (Car) is not an example of ridicule.  This is assault and this is the difference between what we're talking about between Rosa Parks and NFL Players. 

    I'm going to try to be blunt here even with the looming possibility of finger pointing.  If you don't like being ridiculed...tough.  Get over it, suck it up, deal with it, you'll be fine, brush it off and carry on.  This goes for Rosa Parks, Dr. Martin Luther King, Gregor Mendel, Albert Einstein and every other prominent Mover and Shaker in History who was ever ridiculed.  You have the right to Life, the law supports it.  You have a right to Liberty, the law supports it.  You have a right to the Pursuit of Happiness, which means you can chase the dream without anyone legally stopping you...it doesn't mean that you'll catch your dream or that people won't make fun of you for chasing it. 

    Freedom of Speech is the exact same way, you have the right to say and express your thoughts...I have the right to say and express mine.  You can stand on one side of the street with a sign that says "I demand respect" and I can stand 20ft across from you on the other side of the street with a sign that says "Screw your respect" and guess what...we both have a right to be there.  We are not a Nation that panders to the hurt feelings of those who exercised their 2nd amendment right and were ridiculed for it.  

    Simply put to those who are being mocked...get over it.  Do you hear the President coming on TV complaining about how people are saying that he's dumb for having an opinion about the NFL?  No, people have a right to think he's dumb and they have a right to say it too.  Just as he has the right to say that the NFL should fire the SOBs that refused to stand for the National Anthem.  This is how the 2nd amendment works, always has worked this way, always will.  The 2nd amendment isn't about what's morally right...it's about your freedom to speak and express yourself without breaking the law.  There's people still stomping on the flag and burning it...guess what?  That's their right.  And there's still people calling them "Idiots", and guess what?  That's their right.  It's a two way street.

    And I agree that MLK would have stood for freedom of speech, and he was smart enough to know that the freedom of speech is a two way street.  He would have known better than to try to insinuate that any mockery of his position was an infringement on his freedoms.  Martin Luther King stood proud in the face of mockery, in the face of ridicule and he didn't stoop to belly-aching or whining when people called him a N%$$#@, he didn't cry to the government when people made fun of him.  Dr. King didn't try to tell people that they couldn't make contradictory statements to his position.  No Sir, Dr. King took it ALL in stride and was ABOVE it as he should have been.  Dr. King is a SHINING example of what people SHOULD be doing in the face of adversity and GOD only knows why they can't seem to summon up that strength anymore...seems today everyone's so hell bent on claiming that their rights are being trampled on whenever someone takes up an opposition with mockery or insults.  You wanna know how you can undermine a powerful movement to stop violence?  Let petty $%#@ get under your skin and start crying whenever someone mocks your endeavor...that's how you show how truly weak your movement is.
    That would be fine if Trump were just holding a sign or saying they were being disrespectful. The President holds a lot of clout, and for him to openly call for these protesters' jobs is not similar to a random person holding a sign on the opposite of the street. The NFL is a career that, given enough ability and hard work, anyone can make some good money from. Similar to how waitressing was a good career for a mother, in that they could make enough money in tips without much schooling. To insinuate that these people should lose their jobs for protesting is, in my opinion, slanderous and an infraction of their constitutional rights. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat ,

    So, if I understand this correctly, you're saying that the President should have his freedom of speech, so long as he doesn't use it to say certain things right?
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Vaulk said:
    @Erfisflat ,

    So, if I understand this correctly, you're saying that the President should have his freedom of speech, so long as he doesn't use it to say certain things right?
    I don't know if I'd word it like that. I'd say that our nation's so called leader should serve as a better example. Criticizing someone for exercising the constitutional rights is unpatriotic. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • realpetertdmrealpetertdm 3 Pts   -  
    Let's say that I don't stand during the anthem, I just sit down and face the other direction. Am I a unpatriotic person?
    Patriotism is subjective. Some acts can be considered patriotic by some, while others can analyze it completely differently.
    Kneeling during the anthem is the same. It can be considered patriotic by some, unpatriotic by some others. I find that we debating on this subject is and ignorant. It's a constitutional right to protest. The NFL players are protesting what they think that is wrong. There is nothing wrong with it, on a lawful point of view.
    Erfisflat
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    Let's say that I don't stand during the anthem, I just sit down and face the other direction. Am I a unpatriotic person?
    Patriotism is subjective. Some acts can be considered patriotic by some, while others can analyze it completely differently.
    Kneeling during the anthem is the same. It can be considered patriotic by some, unpatriotic by some others. I find that we debating on this subject is and ignorant. It's a constitutional right to protest. The NFL players are protesting what they think that is wrong. There is nothing wrong with it, on a lawful point of view.
    No one is suggesting putting players in jail for kneeling during the anthem.  But that is all that is protected by the constitution.  If they want to kneel, they are free to do so.  If others, many others, choose to voice their disgust at the players disrespect, they are also free to do so.  There is also nothing wrong with that.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch