Myke Tavarres

[TerpEagle]

It strikes me that if one views Donald Trump's approach to Muslim immigration as an overly broad unfair lack of respect toward a large group of people for the actions of a few, they'd have the same issue with Kapernick's lack of respect for the national anthem.

What?

Lack of respect for a group of people vs lack of respect for a song? You're seriously trying to equate those things?

Trump's position is arguably a direct violation of the First Amendment and actually affects human beings and their rights and freedoms.

Kaepernick is exercising that very freedom provided by that amendment and is not infringing on the rights or lives of others - besides feelings of outrage.

Give me a fucking break.

[Loki]

There's a new response: America. Love it or leave it.

[slag]

Over broad is over fucking broad.

Your definitive assessment of how the constitution applies to immigration notwithstanding.

[TerpEagle]

Over broad is over fucking broad.

Your definitive assessment of how the constitution applies to immigration notwithstanding.

Kaepernick's actions, why seen by some in poor taste, really only negatively affect Kaepernick and are an exercise of the 1st Amendment.

Trump's stance, since that's your example, would directly affect thousands if not millions of people and at the very least violate the spirit of freedom of the 1st Amendment.

You comparison is shit.

[slag]

I can set my watch to your politically-driven bullshit.

Nice try, but an unfair over broad approach is not rendered narrow and fair by a difference in the impact.

I don't give a good fat fuck about how Kapernick exercises his freedom of expression ... but he's full of shit when he shoots all the dogs because a few have fleas.

Got it yet?

[TerpEagle]

I can set my watch to your politically-driven bullshit.

Nice try, but an unfair over broad approach is not rendered narrow and fair by a difference in the impact.

I don't give a good fat fuck about how Kapernick exercises his freedom of expression ... but he's full of shit when he shoots all the dogs because a few have fleas.

Got it yet?

So Trump's full of shit because he wants to shoot all of the dogs (Muslims) because a few have fleas? Fair enough.

I still don't see equating response to that (actual affect on actual people by an person who could actually wield significant power) to the response to an individual protesting in a fairly benign way.

Your argument is pretty much in line with the love it or leave it argument. Or the people that got shit for protesting the Iraq War and were called traitors and unpatriotic.

It's perfectly plausible to show disagreement over a specific aspect of society by making a statement with a broad American or government imagery.

[slag]

More horseshit.

My argument is pretty fucking simple ... you don't shoot all the dogs because some have fleas.

If you think Trump was wrong in doing it ... so was Kapernick.

That's it.

[art vandelay]

i don't think there's much of a comparison. what kaepernick did was aimed at systematical injustices. some people have interpreted it as disrespecting "the flag" and therefore veterans. and i'll agree with jcuz that people extending what kaepernick said about justice not being served for all to some broad disrespect of all those who have ever stood for the almighty flag reeks of jingoism. especially considering all the vets who said kaepernick had the right to do that.

we only bring up trump's approach to immigration because those who are bent out of shape over kaepernick's actions are likely to be trump supporters. and there is a huge contradiction between trump and his supporters saying "if you don't like america, get out" and trump's slogan which implies that america currently is not great. it's also interesting that trump supporters love the second amendment so deeply, yet have such a problem with kaepernick exercising his first amendment right.

but while we're on the subject, banning an entire group of people from entering the country is a lot different from not standing for the national anthem.

[McCarthy12]

I think you have to look at what he's protesting vs. the method he chose. Like I said, NBA players over the last few years have effectively brought attention to several issues either by speaking out on themy or using more narrowly tailored methods. The flag and the national anthem represent all Americans and mean many things to many different people. He kind of threw the bath water out with the baby (as opposed to the other way around, if that makes sense).

There is definitely hyperbole out there, but there are people who are also legitimately offended. That is the natural byproduct of free speech sometimes. To his credit, he seems to understand that and accepts it. Those writing all opposition to his actions off as jingoism need to accept it too, IMO. Like most things, it's not black and white.

[art vandelay]

all good points. i can understand a cop or a veteran feeling disrespected by the platform that kapernick chose.

ultimately, however, if someone admits that kaepernick is talking about relevant issues, they should be more concerned with those issues than the platform that kaepernick chose.

[slag]

With all due respect, you missed the point just like he did.

I am not referring to anything but Trump's strategy of excluding all prospective Muslim immigrants because some of them may be terrorists.

And the comparison is not about the subject to which an overly broad approach is applied (disrespect for the national anthem as a way to combat cops shooting black people vs. exclusion of an entire class of people to combat extremist Islamic terrorism) ... its the approach itself.

[art vandelay]

well then yeah, you're right, they're both examples of a large group being disrespected because of the action of a few bad apples.

but terpeagle and i are taking this argument beyond the approach itself because of its implications. banning muslims from entering the country has much stronger implications than not standing for the anthem. but that's just for the record. i understand that has nothing to do with what you're saying.

[TerpEagle]

well then yeah, you're right, they're both examples of a large group being disrespected because of the action of a few bad apples.

but terpeagle and i are taking this argument beyond the approach itself because of its implications. banning muslims from entering the country has much stronger implications than not standing for the anthem. but that's just for the record. i understand that has nothing to do with what you're saying.

Exactly. I know what slag is saying - they're both saying everything is bad because some things are bad.

Aside from disagreeing that Kaepernick has that position. That would mean that anyone who protests and uses something like the anthem, flag, or American symbolism as part of the protest is saying the entirety of the country is bad.

It's like saying that the people who questioned going into Iraq didn't love America because they didn't support the President. That's demonstrably false. It's even more false in the case of Kaepernick because it's an overuse of symbolism to mean America. The United States, let along the US military, is NOT the national anthem.

But, assuming I agree with slag's premise - it's still a poor comparison based on magnitude of implication. One stance has actual, tangible affects. The other is symbolic.