Dolphins players take a knee

[katsteve2012]

You in fact DID ask if I think that
patriotism should flourish.

Below I cut and pasted your
question exactly as it was asked:

"Do you think that Patriotism is flourishing in this nation?
Do you think it should flourish?"

I answered that it should. And included my reasons for thinking that it should,
and how it should.

But in the current environment, I do not think that it is

And instead of answering my question, based on the formal definition I provided, you instead offered your opinion on what you would like to see.



I asked a simple question. And you refused to answer it.


Now if I draw the obvious conclusion as to why, you will spend pages claiming that you did not do it, because of that, while not offering any alternative reason.


All part of the normal deflection and distraction bullshit that the Left is always using,


because you know that you are lying.



The kneelers kneel, thus expressing their anti-Americanism.


That is the truth, which is why you are playing word games. To hide from the truth.

It is obvious that you are not capable of comprehending what you read, and have some kind of childish agenda here to twist what I said in an attempt to yet again make this about your obsession with categorizing people according to your definition of what "left or right" looks like.



The only games going on here are those that you are playing.

I told you very clearly in my answer, that "I think patriotism should flourish", and because I DECIDED to, I also stated what I think it SHOULD look like.

Why?

Because YOU continue to define the NFL players as "Anti American".

And as Ive told you I do not believe that they are.

The fact that I will not engage in your attempt to make a point by asking a question then trying to manipulate my answer does not make me a liar. It makes you a dishonest sneak, with no integrity.

You are more anti American than the players are for labeling them because they are exercising their rights. They are all head and shoulders above the likes of you on their worst day.

You're a small minded, moralizing hypocrite.

I was not trying to manipulate your answer. I merely wanted you to use the actual definition of words.


I am not labeling the kneelers for "exercising their rights". I am labeling them based on their expressed disloyalty.

Peacefully protesting is not disloyalty.

Art Thiel: There’s a difference between dissent and disloyalty | HeraldNet.com

If someone asks you to wave your hands to show support for Trump, and you put your hands in your pockets,


are you showing support for Trump?

What does Trump have to do with this topic? Besides him being a dumbass and referring to the protestors as SOB'S and demanding that they be "fired"?

But that's a funny question. What is your ulterior motive for asking it?

 

[OldLady]

1. I'm not sure what you mean by "social relationship". It is a symbol of our nation as a whole. The government is really not relevant to the issue.

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

It is a distraction and a way to discredit their protest, all at the same time. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought it.

No, it is not.

These threads roll along all the time here. No one gets tired of talking about how anti-American and unpatriotic these protesters are. Ever.
How often do these threads actually talk about the REASON for the protests? Like never.

 

[Correll]

And instead of answering my question, based on the formal definition I provided, you instead offered your opinion on what you would like to see.



I asked a simple question. And you refused to answer it.


Now if I draw the obvious conclusion as to why, you will spend pages claiming that you did not do it, because of that, while not offering any alternative reason.


All part of the normal deflection and distraction bullshit that the Left is always using,


because you know that you are lying.



The kneelers kneel, thus expressing their anti-Americanism.


That is the truth, which is why you are playing word games. To hide from the truth.

It is obvious that you are not capable of comprehending what you read, and have some kind of childish agenda here to twist what I said in an attempt to yet again make this about your obsession with categorizing people according to your definition of what "left or right" looks like.



The only games going on here are those that you are playing.

I told you very clearly in my answer, that "I think patriotism should flourish", and because I DECIDED to, I also stated what I think it SHOULD look like.

Why?

Because YOU continue to define the NFL players as "Anti American".

And as Ive told you I do not believe that they are.

The fact that I will not engage in your attempt to make a point by asking a question then trying to manipulate my answer does not make me a liar. It makes you a dishonest sneak, with no integrity.

You are more anti American than the players are for labeling them because they are exercising their rights. They are all head and shoulders above the likes of you on their worst day.

You're a small minded, moralizing hypocrite.

I was not trying to manipulate your answer. I merely wanted you to use the actual definition of words.


I am not labeling the kneelers for "exercising their rights". I am labeling them based on their expressed disloyalty.

Peacefully protesting is not disloyalty.

Art Thiel: There’s a difference between dissent and disloyalty | HeraldNet.com

If someone asks you to wave your hands to show support for Trump, and you put your hands in your pockets,


are you showing support for Trump?

What does Trump have to do with this topic? Besides him being a dumbass and referring to the protestors as SOB'S and demanding that they be "fired"?

But that's a funny question. What is your ulterior motive for asking it?

It is clearly a hypothetical question to get you to face the point I am making that you are pretending to be too stupid to understand. As you well know, liar.


I repeat my question.




If someone asks you to wave your hands to show support for Trump, and you put your hands in your pockets,


are you showing support for Trump?

 

[Correll]

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

It is a distraction and a way to discredit their protest, all at the same time. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought it.

No, it is not.

These threads roll along all the time here. No one gets tired of talking about how anti-American and unpatriotic these protesters are. Ever.
How often do these threads actually talk about the REASON for the protests? Like never.

Their stated reasons do not excuse their anti-American actions.

 

[OldLady]

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

It is a distraction and a way to discredit their protest, all at the same time. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought it.

No, it is not.

These threads roll along all the time here. No one gets tired of talking about how anti-American and unpatriotic these protesters are. Ever.
How often do these threads actually talk about the REASON for the protests? Like never.

Their stated reasons do not excuse their anti-American actions.

You prove my point.

 

[katsteve2012]

It is obvious that you are not capable of comprehending what you read, and have some kind of childish agenda here to twist what I said in an attempt to yet again make this about your obsession with categorizing people according to your definition of what "left or right" looks like.



The only games going on here are those that you are playing.

I told you very clearly in my answer, that "I think patriotism should flourish", and because I DECIDED to, I also stated what I think it SHOULD look like.

Why?

Because YOU continue to define the NFL players as "Anti American".

And as Ive told you I do not believe that they are.

The fact that I will not engage in your attempt to make a point by asking a question then trying to manipulate my answer does not make me a liar. It makes you a dishonest sneak, with no integrity.

You are more anti American than the players are for labeling them because they are exercising their rights. They are all head and shoulders above the likes of you on their worst day.

You're a small minded, moralizing hypocrite.

I was not trying to manipulate your answer. I merely wanted you to use the actual definition of words.


I am not labeling the kneelers for "exercising their rights". I am labeling them based on their expressed disloyalty.

Peacefully protesting is not disloyalty.

Art Thiel: There’s a difference between dissent and disloyalty | HeraldNet.com

If someone asks you to wave your hands to show support for Trump, and you put your hands in your pockets,


are you showing support for Trump?

What does Trump have to do with this topic? Besides him being a dumbass and referring to the protestors as SOB'S and demanding that they be "fired"?

But that's a funny question. What is your ulterior motive for asking it?

It is clearly a hypothetical question to get you to face the point I am making that you are pretending to be too stupid to understand. As you well know, liar.


I repeat my question.




If someone asks you to wave your hands to show support for Trump, and you put your hands in your pockets,
are you showing support for Trump?

It's a hypothetical question that has nothing to do with this thread. And you pretending to be stupid enough to think it serves a point is the most humorous statement that you've made all morning.

On the other hand, here is a challenge for you. Point out how I am "lying" about anything.

Besides you repeating ad nauseam that the protestors are ""anti American", you have not made a lucid point, nor cited any law, or posted any link to support that accusation.

And while you're figuring that out, it's obvious that you follow a pattern in everything that you post.

You use the same words repeatedly, and when someone disagrees with you, your first response is to say they are a "lib or leftie", next you try to bait them with questions that do not pertain to the subject matter, next, when they don't fall for it, then you resort to claiming that their argument is a lie. Then last you resort to name calling.

I have a 5 year old niece who coverses in a similar manner, when she does not get her way.

 

[Tehon]

1. I'm not sure what you mean by "social relationship". It is a symbol of our nation as a whole. The government is really not relevant to the issue.

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

NOt at all.


NOthing in my argument, is based on their stated reason at all.


My point is about the meanings of their actual actions.



THink of it this way,


this could be seen as an ad for beer.

But some girl complained it was sexist, would you respond that they have a right to advertise beer?

Yes, they have a right to advertise beer.

 

[Tehon]

1. I'm not sure what you mean by "social relationship". It is a symbol of our nation as a whole. The government is really not relevant to the issue.

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

It is a distraction and a way to discredit their protest, all at the same time. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought it.

They have to ignore the preconditions, it is the only way they can keep up the delusion of standing on solid ground. Even at that they are discrediting the very ideals this nation was founded on.

 

[OldLady]

1. I'm not sure what you mean by "social relationship". It is a symbol of our nation as a whole. The government is really not relevant to the issue.

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

It is a distraction and a way to discredit their protest, all at the same time. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought it.

They have to ignore the preconditions, it is the only way they can keep up the delusion of standing on solid ground. Even at that they are discrediting the very ideals this nation was founded on.

I wish the protesters would find another outlet for their activism, because this one has backfired, imo. It brought attention to the topic, yes, but it also raised a huge amount of opposition to the "cause" from people who were otherwise not on one side of the fence or the other before then. There are people who are not overtly racist who very much object to not showing obesiance to the flag and our anthem. It is a knee jerk reaction without a lot of sense behind it, but it is what it is.

 

[Tehon]

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

It is a distraction and a way to discredit their protest, all at the same time. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought it.

They have to ignore the preconditions, it is the only way they can keep up the delusion of standing on solid ground. Even at that they are discrediting the very ideals this nation was founded on.

I wish the protesters would find another outlet for their activism, because this one has backfired, imo. It brought attention to the topic, yes, but it also raised a huge amount of opposition to the "cause" from people who were otherwise not on one side of the fence or the other before then. There are people who are not overtly racist who very much object to not showing obesiance to the flag and our anthem. It is a knee jerk reaction without a lot of sense behind it, but it is what it is.

I understand that thought, I don't exactly agree with it. I'm glad they did it, whether it had the effects they were looking for or not. It provided insight into the mentality of this nation that is generally suppressed.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Un

Henry David Thoreau, was he an anti-American piece of shit? Clearly you think anyone who sympathizes with a person's right to refuse allegiance to the government is.

1. The flag is not a symbol of the government but the nation as a whole, and all of it's citizens.

2.The kneelers are refusing allegiance to their fellow citizens, while still benefiting from being citizens. They are thus disloyal elements without our nation. That is a problem.

2b If they renounced their citizens ship, to a nation they obviously deplore, that would be fine.


3. But thank you for admitting that this is about refusing allegiance. So many of your fellow libs are lying about that.

So you're a "master of the obvious"? Anyone who posts here knows that it is a discussion forum, Einstein.

I did not "dismiss" your posting your opinion(no matter how absurd), about anything.

It's part of the right to free speech, just like the NFL players are exercising.

Rather than continue a futile attempt to make sense to the likes of you, the following is a statement by the court, regarding a case where draconian thinking individuals like you were unfortunately responsible for the administration of a school district, These school officials actually threatened students who did not salute the flag with expulsion and other punitive actions. And the students knew their rights.

"True patriots welcome dissent and protest, even when it touches the flag. To the Court, true patriots recognize that the U.S. is strong enough to appeal to people on its own, without mandates from above: “To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous, instead of a compulsory routine, is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds.”


So based on that observation by legal professionals, this has nothing to do with one leaning left or right, as you often foolishly attempt to illustrate.

The glaring fact here is that YOU are sure as hell no "patriot" and are far more "Anti American" than those who choose not to stand and salute the flag.

Do you think that Patriotism is flourishing in this nation?

Do you think it should flourish?

A live and let live society that obeys the laws of the land and repects the rights of others, IS patriotic in my opinion.

Rituals do not necessarily define patriotism.

But mutual respect and actions that support the rights that come with being a citizen in this country,does

Ok. Using the normal definition of the word,


Patriotism - Wikipedia


"Patriotism or national pride is the ideology of love and devotion to a homeland, and a sense of alliance with other citizens who share the same values. This attachment can be a combination of many different features relating to one's own homeland, including ethnic, cultural, political or historical aspects. "




do you think that Patriotism is flourishing in this nation?


Do you think it should flourish?

The kneelers qualify as patriotic on all of those counts.

Bullshit.

This attachment can be a combination of many different features relating to one's own homeland, including ethnic, cultural, political or historical aspects. "
Its your definition mate.
I think it also shows other positive traits such as support for the downtrodden and evidence of a social conscience by people who could easily look the other way.

 

[Mike Dwight]

This kneeling stuff is stupider than black lives matter, see I run on the field, kneeling guy, hand on shoulder, O I wish I was in the land of cotton, then I lead him back to my place, I'm right there with the movement.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

NFL: Colin Kaepernick thanks Miami Dolphins duo for kneeling during anthem

Colin Kaepernick has thanked Miami Dolphins duo Kenny Stills and Albert Wilson after they kneeled during the US national anthem on Sunday.

It comes after Nike decided to use Kaepernick as the face of a new campaign.

Kaepernick was the first NFL player to kneel during the national anthem to highlight racial injustice.


It seems to be impossible to discuss this protest in a rational way on this board.Clearly there are deep issues here that should be addressed but the reaction of the President and his attack dogs have made this impossible.

I dont know how representative the racist posters on the "race relations" forum are of America as a whole but it looks like the civil rights movement drove the racism underground and that hatred still exists.

Why cant the US leave the hatred in the past ?

People who post in this section of this site are not representative of most of America. They are on the extreme of either end of the spectrum for the most part. Believe that.

I see two groups. One group is racist trash. The other group are people reacting to the racism. There is only one group of extremists.

 

[SweetSue92]

NFL: Colin Kaepernick thanks Miami Dolphins duo for kneeling during anthem

Colin Kaepernick has thanked Miami Dolphins duo Kenny Stills and Albert Wilson after they kneeled during the US national anthem on Sunday.

It comes after Nike decided to use Kaepernick as the face of a new campaign.

Kaepernick was the first NFL player to kneel during the national anthem to highlight racial injustice.


It seems to be impossible to discuss this protest in a rational way on this board.Clearly there are deep issues here that should be addressed but the reaction of the President and his attack dogs have made this impossible.

I dont know how representative the racist posters on the "race relations" forum are of America as a whole but it looks like the civil rights movement drove the racism underground and that hatred still exists.

Why cant the US leave the hatred in the past ?

People who post in this section of this site are not representative of most of America. They are on the extreme of either end of the spectrum for the most part. Believe that.

I see two groups. One group is racist trash. The other group are people reacting to the racism. There is only one group of extremists.

False, there are racists on both ends. I have been called names on this forum for being white. Believe that.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

NFL: Colin Kaepernick thanks Miami Dolphins duo for kneeling during anthem

Colin Kaepernick has thanked Miami Dolphins duo Kenny Stills and Albert Wilson after they kneeled during the US national anthem on Sunday.

It comes after Nike decided to use Kaepernick as the face of a new campaign.

Kaepernick was the first NFL player to kneel during the national anthem to highlight racial injustice.


It seems to be impossible to discuss this protest in a rational way on this board.Clearly there are deep issues here that should be addressed but the reaction of the President and his attack dogs have made this impossible.

I dont know how representative the racist posters on the "race relations" forum are of America as a whole but it looks like the civil rights movement drove the racism underground and that hatred still exists.

Why cant the US leave the hatred in the past ?

People who post in this section of this site are not representative of most of America. They are on the extreme of either end of the spectrum for the most part. Believe that.

I see two groups. One group is racist trash. The other group are people reacting to the racism. There is only one group of extremists.

False, there are racists on both ends. I have been called names on this forum for being white. Believe that.

I have been called a lot of names for being a civilised,educated human being. Dont let it bother you.
But further to that I dont think you can blame an oppressed section of society for kicking back. It doesnt make them racist, it makes them sick of the way they are treated.

 

[Correll]

I was not trying to manipulate your answer. I merely wanted you to use the actual definition of words.


I am not labeling the kneelers for "exercising their rights". I am labeling them based on their expressed disloyalty.

Peacefully protesting is not disloyalty.

Art Thiel: There’s a difference between dissent and disloyalty | HeraldNet.com

If someone asks you to wave your hands to show support for Trump, and you put your hands in your pockets,


are you showing support for Trump?

What does Trump have to do with this topic? Besides him being a dumbass and referring to the protestors as SOB'S and demanding that they be "fired"?

But that's a funny question. What is your ulterior motive for asking it?

It is clearly a hypothetical question to get you to face the point I am making that you are pretending to be too stupid to understand. As you well know, liar.


I repeat my question.




If someone asks you to wave your hands to show support for Trump, and you put your hands in your pockets,
are you showing support for Trump?

It's a hypothetical question that has nothing to do with this thread. And you pretending to be stupid enough to think it serves a point is the most humorous statement that you've made all morning.

If you answered the question, you would demonstrate knowing that doing the opposite of what is asked to show a certain response, is to communicate the opposite response.


Thus, if I asked you to raise your hand if you support Trump and instead you shoved them deep into your pockets,


you are demonstrating that you do not support Trump or that you are "anti-Trump".


The same way if I asked you to stand to show support for America, and instead you knelt, you would be communicating that you do not support America, or that you are Anti-American.

Which was painfully obvious. YOur pretense that you did not get that, is a lie.

On the other hand, here is a challenge for you. Point out how I am "lying" about anything.

Just did. Right above. LIar.

Besides you repeating ad nauseam that the protestors are ""anti American", you have not made a lucid point, nor cited any law, or posted any link to support that accusation.

Totally have. And you know it. Liar.

And while you're figuring that out, it's obvious that you follow a pattern in everything that you post.

You use the same words repeatedly,

Because you libs are denying the obvious reality. I have simplified the argument down to the most concise and obvious words, to try make your ridiculous denials, obvious to the point that I get browbeat you libs into admitting the truth.

and when someone disagrees with you, your first response is to say they are a "lib or leftie",

Nope. My first response is to address their reason for disagreeing. If they are kind enough to share it, instead of just calling me names.

I often mention that they are libs or lefties, because it is generally relevant.

next you try to bait them with questions that do not pertain to the subject matter, next, when they don't fall for it, then you resort to claiming that their argument is a lie. Then last you resort to name calling.

My question about raising your hand to support Trump was obviously asked to make a relevant point about the topic. You are lying in pretending to be too stupid to understand that.


This is a common defense with libs, when presented with truths they don't like. See how that is relevant too?

And I called you a name, because you fucking deserve it for making a simple question into fucking torture.


Why are you such an asshole?

I have a 5 year old niece who coverses in a similar manner, when she does not get her way.

I believe that. I can believe that when she asks questions to get at the reason for your position, that you just stone wall further and ridicule her for asking questions.


I always try to answer such questions from my daughter, unless she is doing her delaying bedtime tactic.


I'm raising her to ask questions.

 

[Correll]

1. I'm not sure what you mean by "social relationship". It is a symbol of our nation as a whole. The government is really not relevant to the issue.

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

NOt at all.


NOthing in my argument, is based on their stated reason at all.


My point is about the meanings of their actual actions.



THink of it this way,


this could be seen as an ad for beer.

But some girl complained it was sexist, would you respond that they have a right to advertise beer?

Yes, they have a right to advertise beer.

Yep. You did not feel a need to pretend that a complaint about the sexism of the ad, was a complaint about advertising.

A complaint about the message, the underlying message, beyond the stated message, is not a denial of their right to free speech.



You listened to what the hypothetical feminists said, and did not just attack her based on moronic misrepresentations of her position, and then hold to your misrepresentation, despite her pointing out your stupidity over and over and over again.

 

[Correll]

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

It is a distraction and a way to discredit their protest, all at the same time. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought it.

They have to ignore the preconditions, it is the only way they can keep up the delusion of standing on solid ground. Even at that they are discrediting the very ideals this nation was founded on.

I wish the protesters would find another outlet for their activism, because this one has backfired, imo. It brought attention to the topic, yes, but it also raised a huge amount of opposition to the "cause" from people who were otherwise not on one side of the fence or the other before then. There are people who are not overtly racist who very much object to not showing obesiance to the flag and our anthem. It is a knee jerk reaction without a lot of sense behind it, but it is what it is.

There is plenty of sense to it. By their actions they show that they hold their fans and society in contempt.

 

[Correll]

Un

1. The flag is not a symbol of the government but the nation as a whole, and all of it's citizens.

2.The kneelers are refusing allegiance to their fellow citizens, while still benefiting from being citizens. They are thus disloyal elements without our nation. That is a problem.

2b If they renounced their citizens ship, to a nation they obviously deplore, that would be fine.


3. But thank you for admitting that this is about refusing allegiance. So many of your fellow libs are lying about that.

Do you think that Patriotism is flourishing in this nation?

Do you think it should flourish?

A live and let live society that obeys the laws of the land and repects the rights of others, IS patriotic in my opinion.

Rituals do not necessarily define patriotism.

But mutual respect and actions that support the rights that come with being a citizen in this country,does

Ok. Using the normal definition of the word,


Patriotism - Wikipedia


"Patriotism or national pride is the ideology of love and devotion to a homeland, and a sense of alliance with other citizens who share the same values. This attachment can be a combination of many different features relating to one's own homeland, including ethnic, cultural, political or historical aspects. "




do you think that Patriotism is flourishing in this nation?


Do you think it should flourish?

The kneelers qualify as patriotic on all of those counts.

Bullshit.

This attachment can be a combination of many different features relating to one's own homeland, including ethnic, cultural, political or historical aspects. "
Its your definition mate.
I think it also shows other positive traits such as support for the downtrodden and evidence of a social conscience by people who could easily look the other way.

Dude. you are jumping in and answering the wrong question, and doing it badly.

But I will address your point anyway.


By disrespecting the symbol of the nation as a whole, for not agreeing with them on a certain issue, they are stating that the nation has failed to live up to their standards, in their view,


AND THAT THUS, THEY DO NOT FEEL LOYALTY TO IT, OR THEIR FELLOW CITIZENS.



That is not patriotic.


To do what you are claiming they are doing, they would have to somehow express their position, WHILE SAYING THEY STILL FEEL LOYALTY TO THE NATION AND THEIR FELLOW CITIZENS.


That would be patriotic, but it is not what they did.



AND I think it is worth noting that you have admitted that you feel no patriotism to your nation, or your fellow citizens.

 

[Tehon]

If your intent is to make this an issue about our nation as a whole (a social relationship) you cannot separate government from the whole, it is entirely relevant. Especially in light of the fact that policing, a government function, is in large part a focus of the social injustice being protested.

It is not I that is making this about our nation as whole.


The flag have been the symbol of our nation, since it had thirteen stars.


Indeed, FLAGS have stood for NATIONS, for thousands of years. That is their POINT.


It is absurd that you libs pretend to not know this.

This entire argument is predicated on you pretending to not understand why the players are protesting.

NOt at all.


NOthing in my argument, is based on their stated reason at all.


My point is about the meanings of their actual actions.



THink of it this way,


this could be seen as an ad for beer.

But some girl complained it was sexist, would you respond that they have a right to advertise beer?

Yes, they have a right to advertise beer.

Yep. You did not feel a need to pretend that a complaint about the sexism of the ad, was a complaint about advertising.

A complaint about the message, the underlying message, beyond the stated message, is not a denial of their right to free speech.



You listened to what the hypothetical feminists said, and did not just attack her based on moronic misrepresentations of her position, and then hold to your misrepresentation, despite her pointing out your stupidity over and over and over again.

I didn't attack anyone. I recognized both her right and the right of the advertiser without taking a position.

Likewise, I do not deny you your position. But I do take exception to it.

I'm not sure what this exercise was supposed to prove. You are the one twisting yourself into contortions over this.