Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Is it Possible....? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Stinkin Ref
- Start date
NREC34
Footballguy
If I’d been watching that live, I would not have given it a second thought. There’s a huge number of people that feel exactly as he does. You just have to be careful what you say in this day and age.
JaxBill
Footballguy
Roger Goodell abruptly says No.
@NFL: We, the NFL, condemn racism and the systematic oppression of Black People. We, the NFL, admit we were wrong for not listening to NFL players earlier and encourage all to speak out and peacefully protest. We, the NFL, believe Black Lives Matter. #InspireChange https://twitter.com/NFL/status/1269034074552721408/video/1
@NFL: We, the NFL, condemn racism and the systematic oppression of Black People. We, the NFL, admit we were wrong for not listening to NFL players earlier and encourage all to speak out and peacefully protest. We, the NFL, believe Black Lives Matter. #InspireChange https://twitter.com/NFL/status/1269034074552721408/video/1
-fish-
Footballguy
-fish-
Footballguy
In answer to the original question, of course it's possible. It's also quite possible to be completely wrong, so if we're just talking about the realm of possibility the answer is yes. If you are asking are these morally consistent beliefs, the answer is no.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
My apologies to those upset about how “brutally I worded the question” or my grammar or my annoying misuse of ellipses...and how that is a reflection of my intelligence or whatever......uncharted territory here in a lot of ways .....but after the Brees thing I was just trying to get a temperature of the room so to speak.
I guess when all is said and done I’m just a regular guy who is on board with changes needing to be made, BLM etc. but it does kind of bug me when people don’t do what we normally do when the colors are presented or the NA is played....no matter what they are upset about. The NA etc is kind of a non negotiable so to speak for me.
The question was asked in a weird way, wasn’t exactly sure how to word it, but it was meant to have some different parts because the feelings behind it are confusing and have different parts. At least it maybe generated a little discussion.
I guess when all is said and done I’m just a regular guy who is on board with changes needing to be made, BLM etc. but it does kind of bug me when people don’t do what we normally do when the colors are presented or the NA is played....no matter what they are upset about. The NA etc is kind of a non negotiable so to speak for me.
The question was asked in a weird way, wasn’t exactly sure how to word it, but it was meant to have some different parts because the feelings behind it are confusing and have different parts. At least it maybe generated a little discussion.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I realize that kneelers have indicated that none of this was ever about disrespected the flag or the military . . . but maybe they should take a much closer look at the National Anthem as a point of contention. Is it possible that the Star Spangled Banner is an example of some of the things that have gone on for years that might be part of the problem or the system?
The Star Spangled Banner was written by Francis Scott Key in 1814 about a battle in the War of 1812. Key was a very successful lawyer that was there on a on a ship negotiating transfer of prisoners when a battle broke out. He later became the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and had appeared many times in front of the Supreme Court. At the time, he would fall into the category of having what we today would call "white privilege," as he was a wealthy slave owner and lived an upper class lifestyle.
We all know the first stanza of the National Anthem, but there are others that few people know about or remember. In one of them, Key writes that "No refuge could save the hireling and slave from the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave." Basically, the implication was that slaves without a say in the matter were thrown into battle and could either face death or make a run for it (and where would they go as they were slaves). At the time, from what I can decipher, slaves were enlisted by both the American and British armies, and Britain was said to have promised freedom to the slaves for their efforts in the war.
Key later changed his views on slavery, and 20 years later set his own slaves free and tried to help others gain their freedom. But the bottom line is, the NA was written by a slave owner, brings up slavery in the lyrics, and implies a white person of power watching a battle of black soldiers from afar . . . while shouting "Hurray America!" Even then, detractors criticized the song and noted that it really stood for the Land of the Free and the Home of the Oppressed.
Key's brother-in-law was Roger Taney, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, that wrote the Dred Scott decision that denied even the possibility of citizenship to African Americans and stated that they "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect".
The Navy adapted the song for military events in 1899. It became a preferred song to be played at military events and large gatherings in 1916. It started getting played at the World Series in 1918. It finally became the National Anthem in 1931.
Blacks were not routinely involved in professional sports for many years. When a handful of them joined professional leagues, the NA was already embedded into the fabric of pregame festivities. I'm not black, but I could see where those that are would not be a fan of the song being used to trumpet America and the military, given that it was written by a white slave owner that made a point in the song to point out that the slaves were the ones forced into dying for this country.
I can't possibly speak for black society, but I am guessing at some point they were not a huge fan of the National Anthem. When they broke into sports leagues, they could not have spoken up about it for fear of reprisals. We all know they were not greeted with open arms by fans and they faced racist comments for decades. There are black athletes playing now that wanted to kneel to support Kaepernick but were so concerned they would be blacklisted and forced out of the league that they never did.
The point being, 200 years later, the National Anthem for many symbolizes honor and respect for the country and our servicemen and women. But given where we are these days (and where we were 150-200 years ago), maybe it's not the best choice to represent freedom, unity, social justice, and equal rights for all as a country. I am surprised that there has not been a campaign to eliminated the Star Spangled Banner as our country's National Anthem. I could see how people might find it offensive.
The Star Spangled Banner was written by Francis Scott Key in 1814 about a battle in the War of 1812. Key was a very successful lawyer that was there on a on a ship negotiating transfer of prisoners when a battle broke out. He later became the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and had appeared many times in front of the Supreme Court. At the time, he would fall into the category of having what we today would call "white privilege," as he was a wealthy slave owner and lived an upper class lifestyle.
We all know the first stanza of the National Anthem, but there are others that few people know about or remember. In one of them, Key writes that "No refuge could save the hireling and slave from the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave." Basically, the implication was that slaves without a say in the matter were thrown into battle and could either face death or make a run for it (and where would they go as they were slaves). At the time, from what I can decipher, slaves were enlisted by both the American and British armies, and Britain was said to have promised freedom to the slaves for their efforts in the war.
Key later changed his views on slavery, and 20 years later set his own slaves free and tried to help others gain their freedom. But the bottom line is, the NA was written by a slave owner, brings up slavery in the lyrics, and implies a white person of power watching a battle of black soldiers from afar . . . while shouting "Hurray America!" Even then, detractors criticized the song and noted that it really stood for the Land of the Free and the Home of the Oppressed.
Key's brother-in-law was Roger Taney, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, that wrote the Dred Scott decision that denied even the possibility of citizenship to African Americans and stated that they "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect".
The Navy adapted the song for military events in 1899. It became a preferred song to be played at military events and large gatherings in 1916. It started getting played at the World Series in 1918. It finally became the National Anthem in 1931.
Blacks were not routinely involved in professional sports for many years. When a handful of them joined professional leagues, the NA was already embedded into the fabric of pregame festivities. I'm not black, but I could see where those that are would not be a fan of the song being used to trumpet America and the military, given that it was written by a white slave owner that made a point in the song to point out that the slaves were the ones forced into dying for this country.
I can't possibly speak for black society, but I am guessing at some point they were not a huge fan of the National Anthem. When they broke into sports leagues, they could not have spoken up about it for fear of reprisals. We all know they were not greeted with open arms by fans and they faced racist comments for decades. There are black athletes playing now that wanted to kneel to support Kaepernick but were so concerned they would be blacklisted and forced out of the league that they never did.
The point being, 200 years later, the National Anthem for many symbolizes honor and respect for the country and our servicemen and women. But given where we are these days (and where we were 150-200 years ago), maybe it's not the best choice to represent freedom, unity, social justice, and equal rights for all as a country. I am surprised that there has not been a campaign to eliminated the Star Spangled Banner as our country's National Anthem. I could see how people might find it offensive.
RUSF18
Footballguy
That campaign needs to be started by white people like Tom Brady and Bob Kraft. Have them as the leaders of their respective groups of players and owners and maybe they can get it changed.
"The kneelers" already got destroyed by most of the public when they just kneeled and made it very obvious they weren't trying to disrespect the flag or the anthem. Now you want them to be the ones to try and campaign against it?
"The kneelers" already got destroyed by most of the public when they just kneeled and made it very obvious they weren't trying to disrespect the flag or the anthem. Now you want them to be the ones to try and campaign against it?
