(08-24-2018, 02:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This getting ridiculous.  All you do is go in circles.  We have already discussed this.

NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON believes that the NFL players are kneeling because we need a new flag.  EVERY SINGLE PERSON WITH A BRAIN knows that the players are making a statement about the country, not the flag. 

(08-24-2018, 02:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Unfortunately some feel the flag stands for something. 

(08-24-2018, 02:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually EVERYONE feels the flag stands for something, and that thing is our country.

Anyone who thinks the flag stands for him and not other citizens has a problem.

(08-24-2018, 02:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So disrespecting the flag is disrespecting the whole country.

Finally, we have found common ground.

(08-24-2018, 02:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Unfortunately some feel the flag stands for something. No need for a cap locks insult.

(08-24-2018, 02:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ...and I've said I don't think those kneeling intend to disrespect the Troops, but I did ask you do you find it disrespectful; even though it's not the intent

Answer the question posed and then you may see.

(08-24-2018, 03:28 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Wait, so you're suggesting they're "exactly the same" because people feel disrespected by both?

Yea, that doesn't hold up given exactly what I said about one group being the direct subject of the perceived offense and one group not being the direct subject of the perceived offense. 

Native Americans being offended by the use of Native American slurs and images as mascots requires no degrees of separation. On the other hand, veterans being offended that people are kneeling during the national anthem which is about an earlier version of the flag that they feel a personal connection to because of their service has at least two degrees of separation.

(08-24-2018, 04:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Just answer the question

You have 10 seconds.

You're not native American. Do you find the name offensive and disrespectful?

(08-24-2018, 04:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are just too narrow minded in your definition of "offensive".

You are basically saying that any action at any time could be considered offensive.

If I say that all people who wear blue in public are disrespectful and offensive that does not mean that wearing blue in public is disrespectful or offensive.

There are many more reasons for the word Redskin to be viewed as offensive than just people claiming to be offended.  You can't define "offensive" based on just the opinion of the speaker or the person offended.  It is not that simple.

So your supposed "gotcha" is a fail.  The word redskin can be deemed offensive because it is a slur, but just because some people claim to be offended by it.

(08-24-2018, 04:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Offensive: To offend. There's no gotcha. It was an attempt to allow some to see the matter from a different POV. It was simply to illustrate how something can be offensive without intention or offending the entire population.

(08-24-2018, 04:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Offensive: To offend. There's no gotcha. It was an attempt to allow some to see the matter from a different POV. It was simply to illustrate how something can be offensive without intention or offending the entire population.

(08-24-2018, 06:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But surely you are not claiming that wearing blue in public is disrespectful or offensive just because I say it is.

There are substantive elements to defining if something is offensive or disrespectful.  It is not just because a person claims it is.

"Redskin" is not considered offensive just because some Native Americans claim it is.  There is actually a history of it being used as a racial slur.  There is substance to the opinion other than just "because I say so".

(08-24-2018, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Intentionally? No. Though there's an argument to be made that any slur, whether directed at someone or not, is inherently disrespectful, but I think "racially insensitive" is more accurate. 

(08-24-2018, 04:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Just answer the question

You have 10 seconds.

You're not native American. Do you find the name offensive and disrespectful?

(08-24-2018, 08:39 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I answered it 6 hours ago. 

Quote:Nike revealed, through ESPN’s Darren Rovell, that it is making Colin Kaepernick the face of its “Just Do It” 30th anniversary ad campaign.

The initial image, announced through Rovell, has a close up of Kaepernick’s face with the caption: “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.”

(09-04-2018, 12:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Figured this could go here as well as anywhere:
https://sports.yahoo.com/nike-makes-colin-kaepernick-face-just-30th-anniversary-campaign-200029766.html


I doubt Nike will be the official footwear of POTUS any time soon.

(09-04-2018, 06:53 PM)Benton Wrote: Gotta say, brilliant move by Nike.

Couldn't tell you the last time I saw something of theirs, either an ad or something on social media. Then — bam — for the cost of a former quarterback, their ad is all over the place.

(09-04-2018, 06:53 PM)Benton Wrote: Gotta say, brilliant move by Nike.

Couldn't tell you the last time I saw something of theirs, either an ad or something on social media. Then — bam — for the cost of a former quarterback, their ad is all over the place.