Teens Sue Baseball Team Over 'God Bless America' Ejection

[PubliusInfinitum]

A lot of stadiums play both, the national anthem before the first pitch, GBA during the 7th inning stretch. Apparently in New York since 9/11 it is almost always that way.

Well there ya go... perhaps that is the case... I don't know and I don't know because there is no mention of such in the 'reports'... It's entirely possible that this is what happened...

It then serves reason that such is, as noted above, a period of reflection for the fallen of 9-11... Where such would reasonably be noted; where the attendees are asked to stand in recognition and respect for those lost and where the individuals failed to demonstrate such respect. And which provides a reasonable basis for the management of the stadium to kick their collected asses to the curb.

Not the failure to stand to the simple playing of some patriotic medly of which GBA was part and parcel... through the stadium PA system... as is being implied..

From the link in the original post :

'"God Bless America," written by Irving Berlin in 1918, was played at big league ballparks throughout the country when baseball resumed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and has remained a fixture at New York Yankees games.'

This at least hints at the idea of playing GBA during baseball games.

Yes... and that is it's purpose... to plant a seed for the SUIT'S RATIONALE.

Also from the link in the OP :

'The boys are being represented by Bryce Gadye's father, Ross, who said the boys weren't protesting the song and no one asked them to stand.

"The boys weren't trying to make any political statements, they just didn't get up," he said. "No one gave them an ultimatum. The song was sung, it was finished, then they were thrown out."'

At least according to the suit, they were not asked to stand.

Of course all of this is alleged, and no proof is provided in the article. It may well be that these are merely people trying to use the system to make a buck. Taking anything as fact based on the lack of information here is pretty silly. However, assuming that the suit is a lie because people aren't expected to stand during GBA is also silly, unless you are personally familiar with this team/stadium. It could be a minor league tradition, it could be something like the NY Yankees who apparently have been doing it since after 9/11, it could be something that the owner has done for many years, there's just not enough to go on.

Either way it's pretty pathetic IMO. Making something like that up to try and get some money or kicking someone out because they sat during GBA, either is bad.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

True, but EVERY SINGLE news story about this incident says it was "God Bless America." The stories even go into explaining how the tradition started after 9/11 and who wrote the song.


Isn't it telling how the Clerk is avoiding my offer?

ROFLMNAO...

First, the reports, 'report' that the LAWSUIT alleges that the individuals were removed for not standing at the playing of GBA; and this is because THAT IS WHAT IS ALLEGED IN THE FILING PLEA OF THE LAWSUIT.

Second, ANY NEWS REPORT WHICH STATES OTHERWISE, IS LYING THEIR REPORTING ASS OFF... BECAUSE: the ONLY PLACE WHICH EVEN SUGGESTS THAT SUCH OCCURED IS... (and follow this closely Dumbass) IS IN THE PLEA REPRESENTED IN THE LAWSUIT, WHERE SUCH IS ALLEGED!

There are no witness statements; there is NOTHING, NADA, ZIP... anywhere on the record wherein there is evidence which sustains that allegation...

What's MORE... representatives of the Stadium flatly deny it...

Then why did the owners, except for the one who acted like an ass and kicked them out...call the families in TO APOLOGIZE? This is in the OP story, you know.

My guess is the angry phone calls... or letter wherein the law suit was threatened...

Where one is presented with such; the path of least resistance is to offer an apology... and given the circumstances, such seems reasonable. There's no evidence that such took place; no means to gather the facts, thus it is reasonable to simply say: "IF things happened as you assert; we, having no means to prove otherwise, apologize."

Where upon, the reasonable contestant would accept such, accept the contrition which did not contest the facts as one presented them... and move on...

However, where one is not reasonable; where one seeks to use the threat of the hassle and expense common to judicial review towards personal gain... one would advance towards that end.

Nothing particularly complex here... it's all common sense stuff.

This is AT WORST, a contest between private parties... over what amounts to $18 the typical amount charged for seats to a minor league baseball game. There is no government policy at play... no one at the Park has taken the position that 'the LAW REQUIRED THEM to act in such a way... .'

Their is no right to sit on private property to do anything, where the owners of that property have concluded that your presence is no longer welcomed.

Want to sit on private property? Oblige the traditions and customs recognized by that property owner.

Now friends...

What ya have here is yet another example of the Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressive, Liberal... respecting the American way... defending property rights and standing to DEFEND the Constitution of the United States; through the misuse of the judicial process.

The representing attorney here is attacking his neighbor in the premise that THEY have a right to come onto his property and promote behavior which stands contrary to that which is acceptable to the man who owns that property.

Understand what is at stake here...

Where the Suit prevails... anyone can LAWFULLY disregard, overtly reject and otherwise disrupt any measure which the OWNERS of private property have instituted to recognize and respect the traditions and customs to which they adhere.

Like ROE-v-Wade such a ruling; and by default, such a plea, serves to undermine justice and the cultural standards on which America rests.

But it DOES serve to demonstrate the folly of tolerating the forces of tolerance and compassion for the differing ideas of others; or those who can't quire bring themselves to adhere to such a representation; and weasel out of that tepid responsibility, through the flaccid labels of 'Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressives...'

FURTHER: COMMON SENSE suggests that the the tradtion and custom of standing to recognize and respect the fallen, who have sustained the nation; was the violating behavior that triggered their removal... and thus it is SOUND REASONING which stands at the foundation of the conclusion that the Management of the Stadium tossed those individuals to the curb, because they demonstrated disrespect during the customary period where the National Anthem is played.

Now it occurs to me, that for whatever reason, its entirely possible that the Stadium may have substituted GBA FOR the NATIONAL ANTHEM... who knows?

The bottom line is that during the period of momentary reflection; which customarily, the National Anthem is played in recognition of the American Standard and all she represents... attendees are required to stand and face the flag where visible and the Music where such is not visible.

The bottom line is that such is a reasonable tribute of respect for those who gave all they had in defense of their nation; and that failure to recognize their sacrifice at such moments is an indisputable disrespect for such.

Now, clearly the idiot will run to claim that my position is shifting; which it is not...

This issue rests on an abyss of ignorance... and given the tradition of the ideological left to lie their collective asses off to misrepresent the facts, so as to undermine what ever cultural standard is at issue... it is a certainty, that what is being represented: that stadium management isolated and summarily removed these individuals for failing to stand during the period where the Public address system of that stadium 'just happened to be playing GBA...'

All I have done and continue to do, is to apply common sense to solve this elementary equation; where the anti-American Left has once again come to imply that there is some run-away patriotic zealotry which resulted in the violation of the human rights of the innocent; the notion that the Stadium owner... would just toss someone out, because the music rotation on the PA system just happened to run through GBA... and everyone else int he stadium rose to their feet but THESE PEOPLE... who he ejected out of his stadium; which is what is being implied... Is bullshit...

Third... When and where I am proven wrong, I readily admit it; always have, always will... the dumbass implying that I might not... is just more ad populum drivel...

Fourth... we can be sure, that I have little interests in this issue... thus once this thread dries on the vine, unless someone else brings it up... what finally comes of it will likely go unnoticed by me..

The highest probability is that it will be dismissed by the federal court; that such will go unnoticed.. and that whatever comes of it; that where proven wrong, the dumbass will ignore it and if such should come up; she will use the same obtuse ruse to deny it, as she has consistantly used here and that she always uses.

So, it appears that the answer is 'no'...the Clerk will NOT apologize if he is proven wrong about this being a National Anthem issue. In fact, he is already spinning the facts to slink away. Not much else to be expected from someone who BEATS someone who isn't doing what he wants them to do during the National Anthem.

And again the addle-mind is incapable of comprehending what she reads...

And I beat his ass for being an ass... Most people recognize that such represents common rudeness... and when made aware of their poor behavior, summarily apologize.... where one takes a stand that it is their right to disrespect that which left them free to disrespect such... need their ass beat.

And FTR: it's a policy of mine which remains in effect today and will remain in effect until my passing. The good news here is that I pass that policy along to my progeny; who enforce the same policy, in the same way; and for the same sound, immutable reasons.

We don't accept that civility is a means unto itself... and that the burden of being accussed of individual intolerance for anti-American attitude, is a greater burden than being subjected to being governed by a popular consensus of that attitude. So we take keeping such in check very seriously.

And a couple of days in Jail and a few grand in fines, doesn't even begin to overcome the duty to do so.

And we're not talking about a softly spoken comment... we're talking about the outright boisterous, overt belittling of the process... open, vociferous denigration of those standing with their hands were over their hearts, listening or singing along with the National Anthem; just as they had done through the moment of prayer...

It won't be tolerated... as to tolerate it, applies such as the standard.

 

[bodecea]

ROFLMNAO...

First, the reports, 'report' that the LAWSUIT alleges that the individuals were removed for not standing at the playing of GBA; and this is because THAT IS WHAT IS ALLEGED IN THE FILING PLEA OF THE LAWSUIT.

Second, ANY NEWS REPORT WHICH STATES OTHERWISE, IS LYING THEIR REPORTING ASS OFF... BECAUSE: the ONLY PLACE WHICH EVEN SUGGESTS THAT SUCH OCCURED IS... (and follow this closely Dumbass) IS IN THE PLEA REPRESENTED IN THE LAWSUIT, WHERE SUCH IS ALLEGED!

There are no witness statements; there is NOTHING, NADA, ZIP... anywhere on the record wherein there is evidence which sustains that allegation...

What's MORE... representatives of the Stadium flatly deny it...

Then why did the owners, except for the one who acted like an ass and kicked them out...call the families in TO APOLOGIZE? This is in the OP story, you know.

My guess is the angry phone calls... or letter wherein the law suit was threatened...

Where one is presented with such; the path of least resistance is to offer an apology... and given the circumstances, such seems reasonable. There's no evidence that such took place; no means to gather the facts, thus it is reasonable to simply say: "IF things happened as you assert; we, having no means to prove otherwise, apologize."

Where upon, the reasonable contestant would accept such, accept the contrition which did not contest the facts as one presented them... and move on...

However, where one is not reasonable; where one seeks to use the threat of the hassle and expense common to judicial review towards personal gain... one would advance towards that end.

Nothing particularly complex here... it's all common sense stuff.

This is AT WORST, a contest between private parties... over what amounts to $18 the typical amount charged for seats to a minor league baseball game. There is no government policy at play... no one at the Park has taken the position that 'the LAW REQUIRED THEM to act in such a way... .'

Their is no right to sit on private property to do anything, where the owners of that property have concluded that your presence is no longer welcomed.

Want to sit on private property? Oblige the traditions and customs recognized by that property owner.

Now friends...

What ya have here is yet another example of the Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressive, Liberal... respecting the American way... defending property rights and standing to DEFEND the Constitution of the United States; through the misuse of the judicial process.

The representing attorney here is attacking his neighbor in the premise that THEY have a right to come onto his property and promote behavior which stands contrary to that which is acceptable to the man who owns that property.

Understand what is at stake here...

Where the Suit prevails... anyone can LAWFULLY disregard, overtly reject and otherwise disrupt any measure which the OWNERS of private property have instituted to recognize and respect the traditions and customs to which they adhere.

Like ROE-v-Wade such a ruling; and by default, such a plea, serves to undermine justice and the cultural standards on which America rests.

But it DOES serve to demonstrate the folly of tolerating the forces of tolerance and compassion for the differing ideas of others; or those who can't quire bring themselves to adhere to such a representation; and weasel out of that tepid responsibility, through the flaccid labels of 'Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressives...'

FURTHER: COMMON SENSE suggests that the the tradtion and custom of standing to recognize and respect the fallen, who have sustained the nation; was the violating behavior that triggered their removal... and thus it is SOUND REASONING which stands at the foundation of the conclusion that the Management of the Stadium tossed those individuals to the curb, because they demonstrated disrespect during the customary period where the National Anthem is played.

Now it occurs to me, that for whatever reason, its entirely possible that the Stadium may have substituted GBA FOR the NATIONAL ANTHEM... who knows?

The bottom line is that during the period of momentary reflection; which customarily, the National Anthem is played in recognition of the American Standard and all she represents... attendees are required to stand and face the flag where visible and the Music where such is not visible.

The bottom line is that such is a reasonable tribute of respect for those who gave all they had in defense of their nation; and that failure to recognize their sacrifice at such moments is an indisputable disrespect for such.

Now, clearly the idiot will run to claim that my position is shifting; which it is not...

This issue rests on an abyss of ignorance... and given the tradition of the ideological left to lie their collective asses off to misrepresent the facts, so as to undermine what ever cultural standard is at issue... it is a certainty, that what is being represented: that stadium management isolated and summarily removed these individuals for failing to stand during the period where the Public address system of that stadium 'just happened to be playing GBA...'

All I have done and continue to do, is to apply common sense to solve this elementary equation; where the anti-American Left has once again come to imply that there is some run-away patriotic zealotry which resulted in the violation of the human rights of the innocent; the notion that the Stadium owner... would just toss someone out, because the music rotation on the PA system just happened to run through GBA... and everyone else int he stadium rose to their feet but THESE PEOPLE... who he ejected out of his stadium; which is what is being implied... Is bullshit...

Third... When and where I am proven wrong, I readily admit it; always have, always will... the dumbass implying that I might not... is just more ad populum drivel...

Fourth... we can be sure, that I have little interests in this issue... thus once this thread dries on the vine, unless someone else brings it up... what finally comes of it will likely go unnoticed by me..

The highest probability is that it will be dismissed by the federal court; that such will go unnoticed.. and that whatever comes of it; that where proven wrong, the dumbass will ignore it and if such should come up; she will use the same obtuse ruse to deny it, as she has consistantly used here and that she always uses.

So, it appears that the answer is 'no'...the Clerk will NOT apologize if he is proven wrong about this being a National Anthem issue. In fact, he is already spinning the facts to slink away. Not much else to be expected from someone who BEATS someone who isn't doing what he wants them to do during the National Anthem.

And again the addle-mind is incapable of comprehending what she reads...

And I beat his ass for being an ass... Most people recognize that such represents common rudeness... and when made aware of their poor behavior, summarily apologize.... where one takes a stand that it is their right to disrespect that which left them free to disrespect such... need their ass beat.

And FTR: it's a policy of mine which remains in effect today and will remain in effect until my passing. The good news here is that I pass that policy along to my progeny; who enforce the same policy, in the same way; and for the same sound, immutable reasons.
We don't accept that civility is a means unto itself... and that the burden of being accussed of individual intolerance for anti-American attitude, is a greater burden than being subjected to being governed by a popular consensus of that attitude. So we take keeping such in check very seriously.

And a couple of days in Jail and a few grand in fines, doesn't even begin to overcome the duty to do so.

And we're not talking about a softly spoken comment... we're talking about the outright boisterous, overt belittling of the process... open, vociferous denigration of those standing with their hands were over their hearts, listening or singing along with the National Anthem; just as they had done through the moment of prayer...

It won't be tolerated... as to tolerate it, applies such as the standard.

So, you are passing on to your children that it's quite acceptable to beat someone up if they don't display the outer trappings of patriotism in just the way you want them to. Does that include gifting billy clubs and jack boots at Christmas?

(And if the mods think this is bringing in families, please note that I am not the first one talking about passing on bullying behavior to one's children)

 

[manifold]

When culture, society and private business infringes on individual freedom, it's not unconstitutional.

But does it sometimes go too far? And if so, can (and should) anything be done about it?

 

[bodecea]

When culture, society and private business infringes on individual freedom, it's not unconstitutional.

But does it sometimes go too far? And if so, can (and should) anything be done about it?

True, but it is very poor business policy....thus a civil suit. Hopefully, we can watch this play out. Keep in mind, Yankee stadium just lost a suit similar to this.

 

[manifold]

When culture, society and private business infringes on individual freedom, it's not unconstitutional.

But does it sometimes go too far? And if so, can (and should) anything be done about it?

True, but it is very poor business policy....thus a civil suit. Hopefully, we can watch this play out. Keep in mind, Yankee stadium just lost a suit similar to this.

What are they owed in a civil suit? I mean, I can agree with a refund for their tickets, maybe even for parking, but that hardly makes it worth the effort. And if the policy is either on the ticket or prominantly displayed, they're not even owed that.


As for poor business, that may or may not be the case. It's quite possible that the majority of their patrons fully endorse the policy and will patronize them even more upon seeing it getting enforced.

I thought the Yankees settled. Are you sure it actually went to trial and they lost?

 

[lawbuff]

I can't find the Original complaint online, and no entity has seemed to publish it and I don't have PACER account, but I did find this:


GADYE et al v. BASES LOADED GROUP, LLC et al - 2:2009cv04598 - Justia Federal District Court Filings and Dockets

It is a 1983 action, meaning a "color of law" action. It would appear this would be against the officers who ejected them at the request of the stadium/agent.

Other Civil rights are complained of also.

The 1st AM can bind a private entity as long as the venue is considered a "public forum", as one element, as in this case I have in my notes. This was a sports arena case.


383 F3d 449 United Church of Christ v. Gateway Economic Development Corporation of Greater Cleveland Inc | Open Jurist

However, since it was on the inside of the arena, it is not a public forum, so other issues come into play??

I did find the Original Yankee ejection suit online, it has the Causes of Actions listed at the end, 1983, Public Accomodation laws, and the NY State Constitution. It is a good bet the NJ lawsuit is similar in nature/cause of actions.

Now, in this suit, it also claims the non government entity violated the 1st AM also. Since it is not a public forum, that I don't understand, but I am not lawyer either! I need to read the complaint better.


http://www.nyclu.org/files/NYPD-Yankee Complaint 4-15-09.pdf

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Then why did the owners, except for the one who acted like an ass and kicked them out...call the families in TO APOLOGIZE? This is in the OP story, you know.

My guess is the angry phone calls... or letter wherein the law suit was threatened...

Where one is presented with such; the path of least resistance is to offer an apology... and given the circumstances, such seems reasonable. There's no evidence that such took place; no means to gather the facts, thus it is reasonable to simply say: "IF things happened as you assert; we, having no means to prove otherwise, apologize."

Where upon, the reasonable contestant would accept such, accept the contrition which did not contest the facts as one presented them... and move on...

However, where one is not reasonable; where one seeks to use the threat of the hassle and expense common to judicial review towards personal gain... one would advance towards that end.

Nothing particularly complex here... it's all common sense stuff.

This is AT WORST, a contest between private parties... over what amounts to $18 the typical amount charged for seats to a minor league baseball game. There is no government policy at play... no one at the Park has taken the position that 'the LAW REQUIRED THEM to act in such a way... .'

Their is no right to sit on private property to do anything, where the owners of that property have concluded that your presence is no longer welcomed.

Want to sit on private property? Oblige the traditions and customs recognized by that property owner.

Now friends...

What ya have here is yet another example of the Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressive, Liberal... respecting the American way... defending property rights and standing to DEFEND the Constitution of the United States; through the misuse of the judicial process.

The representing attorney here is attacking his neighbor in the premise that THEY have a right to come onto his property and promote behavior which stands contrary to that which is acceptable to the man who owns that property.

Understand what is at stake here...

Where the Suit prevails... anyone can LAWFULLY disregard, overtly reject and otherwise disrupt any measure which the OWNERS of private property have instituted to recognize and respect the traditions and customs to which they adhere.

Like ROE-v-Wade such a ruling; and by default, such a plea, serves to undermine justice and the cultural standards on which America rests.

But it DOES serve to demonstrate the folly of tolerating the forces of tolerance and compassion for the differing ideas of others; or those who can't quire bring themselves to adhere to such a representation; and weasel out of that tepid responsibility, through the flaccid labels of 'Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressives...'

So, it appears that the answer is 'no'...the Clerk will NOT apologize if he is proven wrong about this being a National Anthem issue. In fact, he is already spinning the facts to slink away. Not much else to be expected from someone who BEATS someone who isn't doing what he wants them to do during the National Anthem.

And again the addle-mind is incapable of comprehending what she reads...

And I beat his ass for being an ass... Most people recognize that such represents common rudeness... and when made aware of their poor behavior, summarily apologize.... where one takes a stand that it is their right to disrespect that which left them free to disrespect such... need their ass beat.

And FTR: it's a policy of mine which remains in effect today and will remain in effect until my passing. The good news here is that I pass that policy along to my progeny; who enforce the same policy, in the same way; and for the same sound, immutable reasons.
We don't accept that civility is a means unto itself... and that the burden of being accussed of individual intolerance for anti-American attitude, is a greater burden than being subjected to being governed by a popular consensus of that attitude. So we take keeping such in check very seriously.

And a couple of days in Jail and a few grand in fines, doesn't even begin to overcome the duty to do so.

And we're not talking about a softly spoken comment... we're talking about the outright boisterous, overt belittling of the process... open, vociferous denigration of those standing with their hands were over their hearts, listening or singing along with the National Anthem; just as they had done through the moment of prayer...

It won't be tolerated... as to tolerate it, applies such as the standard.

So, you are passing on to your children that it's quite acceptable to beat someone up if they don't display the outer trappings of patriotism in just the way you want them to. Does that include gifting billy clubs and jack boots at Christmas?

(And if the mods think this is bringing in families, please note that I am not the first one talking about passing on bullying behavior to one's children)

ROFL...

So this idiot defends a lawsuit where an individual seeks to impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE, using the full force and power of goverance; as she complains about ONE individual imparting their will over another individual...

In other words, it's OK to trump up a lawsuit and sue in Federal Court to impart Anti-Americanism on the ENTIRE COUNTRY... but it's NOT ok to lay a hand on an Anti-American who had openly belittled and ridiculed an entire stadium of Americans who were openly reflecting upon their nation's history and the sacrifices of the individual lives of millions of men who fought to preserve that nation...

Everyone got that? Understand how it works? They're entitled to disrespect us; and they DEMAND THAT WE TOLERATE THEM! But where we hold THEM TO ACCOUNT... well that's intolerant and won't be accepted.


Screw these people... either they will impart their will on us; or we will impart our will on them.

Look around and see who's winning that one and decide what you want to do.

America is dying... and WE are the generation that is letting her be choked out, right in front of us.

The choice is yours.

 

[bodecea]

My guess is the angry phone calls... or letter wherein the law suit was threatened...

Where one is presented with such; the path of least resistance is to offer an apology... and given the circumstances, such seems reasonable. There's no evidence that such took place; no means to gather the facts, thus it is reasonable to simply say: "IF things happened as you assert; we, having no means to prove otherwise, apologize."

Where upon, the reasonable contestant would accept such, accept the contrition which did not contest the facts as one presented them... and move on...

However, where one is not reasonable; where one seeks to use the threat of the hassle and expense common to judicial review towards personal gain... one would advance towards that end.

Nothing particularly complex here... it's all common sense stuff.

This is AT WORST, a contest between private parties... over what amounts to $18 the typical amount charged for seats to a minor league baseball game. There is no government policy at play... no one at the Park has taken the position that 'the LAW REQUIRED THEM to act in such a way... .'

Their is no right to sit on private property to do anything, where the owners of that property have concluded that your presence is no longer welcomed.

Want to sit on private property? Oblige the traditions and customs recognized by that property owner.

Now friends...

What ya have here is yet another example of the Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressive, Liberal... respecting the American way... defending property rights and standing to DEFEND the Constitution of the United States; through the misuse of the judicial process.

The representing attorney here is attacking his neighbor in the premise that THEY have a right to come onto his property and promote behavior which stands contrary to that which is acceptable to the man who owns that property.

Understand what is at stake here...

Where the Suit prevails... anyone can LAWFULLY disregard, overtly reject and otherwise disrupt any measure which the OWNERS of private property have instituted to recognize and respect the traditions and customs to which they adhere.

Like ROE-v-Wade such a ruling; and by default, such a plea, serves to undermine justice and the cultural standards on which America rests.

But it DOES serve to demonstrate the folly of tolerating the forces of tolerance and compassion for the differing ideas of others; or those who can't quire bring themselves to adhere to such a representation; and weasel out of that tepid responsibility, through the flaccid labels of 'Independent, Centrist, Moderate, Progressives...'





And again the addle-mind is incapable of comprehending what she reads...

And I beat his ass for being an ass... Most people recognize that such represents common rudeness... and when made aware of their poor behavior, summarily apologize.... where one takes a stand that it is their right to disrespect that which left them free to disrespect such... need their ass beat.

And FTR: it's a policy of mine which remains in effect today and will remain in effect until my passing. The good news here is that I pass that policy along to my progeny; who enforce the same policy, in the same way; and for the same sound, immutable reasons.
We don't accept that civility is a means unto itself... and that the burden of being accussed of individual intolerance for anti-American attitude, is a greater burden than being subjected to being governed by a popular consensus of that attitude. So we take keeping such in check very seriously.

And a couple of days in Jail and a few grand in fines, doesn't even begin to overcome the duty to do so.

And we're not talking about a softly spoken comment... we're talking about the outright boisterous, overt belittling of the process... open, vociferous denigration of those standing with their hands were over their hearts, listening or singing along with the National Anthem; just as they had done through the moment of prayer...

It won't be tolerated... as to tolerate it, applies such as the standard.

So, you are passing on to your children that it's quite acceptable to beat someone up if they don't display the outer trappings of patriotism in just the way you want them to. Does that include gifting billy clubs and jack boots at Christmas?

(And if the mods think this is bringing in families, please note that I am not the first one talking about passing on bullying behavior to one's children)

ROFL...

So this idiot defends a lawsuit where an individual seeks to impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE, using the full force and power of goverance;

Yes, I defend the right of anyone to sue in a court of law...tho I fail to see where this lawsuit would impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE. Maybe I am missing the "impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE" part and you can show it to me.

as she complains about ONE individual imparting their will over another individual...

Absolutely, when that ONE individual imparting their will on another is YOU (or anyone) committing a beat down on someone who you disagree with.

Seems to me, you have a 'little' problem with what is LEGAL and what is ILLEGAL in this country.

In other words, it's OK to trump up a lawsuit and sue in Federal Court to impart Anti-Americanism on the ENTIRE COUNTRY...

Got Drama? Lawsuits are legal in this country...last I checked. Sounds like you would like to change that. Am I right?

but it's NOT ok to lay a hand on an Anti-American who had openly belittled and ridiculed an entire stadium of Americans who were openly reflecting upon their nation's history and the sacrifices of the individual lives of millions of men who fought to preserve that nation...

That's right...it's NOT ok. Because last I checked, one is free to show their patriotism or lack thereof AS THEY PLEASE.

Sounds to me, that if you had YOUR way, you'd be in every stadium with jackboots and blackjacks, monitoring the spectators making sure that everyone stood, everyone took their hats off, everyone sang, no one went to the bathroom, no one could be standing in line to get food or beer, no one was talking to their neighbors, no one was picking their nose, no kids were crying, no kids were sleeping or pooping their diapers during the National Anthem or ANY OTHER PATRIOTIC SONG. (maybe even 'Take me Out to the Ballgame?)

Now THAT'S PATRIOTISM!!!!!

Everyone got that? Understand how it works? They're entitled to disrespect us; and they DEMAND THAT WE TOLERATE THEM! But where we hold THEM TO ACCOUNT... well that's intolerant and won't be accepted.

No, that's against the law to beat someone up. Everyone got that?

Screw these people... either they will impart their will on us; or we will impart our will on them.

That's right, Clerk...you don't like it when others use LEGAL means to resolve issues. You prefer the jack boot and beat down method.

Look around and see who's winning that one and decide what you want to do.

I would like to think that civilized and LEGAL behavior is winning. You? Not so much.

America is dying... and WE are the generation that is letting her be choked out, right in front of us.

The choice is yours.

America is doing just fine, despite keyboard kommando bullies such as yourself. Tho I will say this. Keep on with your "I will beat you if you don't show 'proper patriotism' at a sporting event" ways. One day you will miscalculate and the person you pegged as a weakling you can take will give YOU a beat down I won't shed a tear. Kharma.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

So, you are passing on to your children that it's quite acceptable to beat someone up if they don't display the outer trappings of patriotism in just the way you want them to. Does that include gifting billy clubs and jack boots at Christmas?

(And if the mods think this is bringing in families, please note that I am not the first one talking about passing on bullying behavior to one's children)

ROFL...

So this idiot defends a lawsuit where an individual seeks to impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE, using the full force and power of goverance;

Yes, I defend the right of anyone to sue in a court of law...tho I fail to see where this lawsuit would impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE. ...

ROFLMNAO...

Does anyone need anything else? Ya see, Lawsuits don't really have the means to change things for everyone... Roe... it didn't do nothin'...

And lawsuits which fight for the right to burn the flag, sit during the National Anthem or other public respect for American traditions and customs, could NEVER effect 'everyone...'

NOooooooouuuuu....


LOL...














Leftists...

 

[bodecea]

ROFL...

So this idiot defends a lawsuit where an individual seeks to impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE, using the full force and power of goverance;

Yes, I defend the right of anyone to sue in a court of law...tho I fail to see where this lawsuit would impart THEIR WILL on EVERYONE ELSE. ...

ROFLMNAO...

Does anyone need anything else? Ya see, Lawsuits don't really have the means to change things for everyone... Roe... it didn't do nothin'...

Did it MAKE you or your wife get an abortion?

And lawsuits which fight for the right to burn the flag,

Did a lawsuit MAKE you burn a flag?

sit during the National Anthem

Did a lawsuit MAKE you sit during the National Anthem?

or other public respect for American traditions and customs, could NEVER effect 'everyone...'

NOooooooouuuuu....


LOL...














Leftists...

Thank you for proving my point about you. You aren't mad about the lawsuits themselves. You are mad that YOU don't have the power to MAKE people do what you want them to. You don't like that others DON'T HAVE TO DO what YOU want them to do.

No wonder you turned violent on some stranger at a ball game.

Good that you were arrested for it.