Nike' and Kapernick together now.

DarqueKnight wrote: »

FTGV wrote: »

Looks like Nike is making a political statement.

No, Nike is making a social statement. Kaepernick's protest was not political in nature. He was protesting social injustice.

Politics is only one facet of a particular social structure.

This is one of the points where I've been having a problem with this thread. There was nothing political about his protest, nor, was there any thing in the league, or team, rules that he was violating. That is why the league officials, owners and players union dug in over the off season and tried to come up with some sort of policy. This was a social injustice issue to which he wanted to focus attention. From that perspective I say job well done. This issue is now being talked about in case you guys haven't noticed.

I, personally, wouldn't kneel during the national anthem for the simple fact I choose to honor those that sacrificed for their country. I don't, however, place my hand over my heart and make a pledge to a symbol. Some think that's disrespectful, and, I say you have a right to your opinion. I wouldn't burn the flag in protest, either, but, I'm against the principle of banning these forms of protest. The thought of banning, or controlling, forms of protest because it's disagreeable to some is more reprehensible to me than the actual protest itself. Aren't these the very things soldiers fought and died to protect? Who are we to try and undermine what they fought to preserve?

I also agree with the poster who stated that sacrifice can come in many forms. It's not just one narrow definition that several have seemed to embrace. Further, along that same line, I'm thankful that he has the recourse to sue if he feels there has been collusion to prevent him from gaining employment. Hope we all would have that same recourse if employers were colluding to black listing any of us as a potential employee. That should be something for the courts to decide. Why should we think, in America, that he shouldn't have that right? Because he's black? Because he did something you don't agree with? Some other lame excuse of a reason along this line of thinking? Why would any of us as Americans want any of his rights to be taken away? I'm curious as to why any TRUE American would be so vehemently against his protest. Isn't the right to expression one of the bedrock principles on which this country was founded? Do those fundamental principles only apply if YOU agree with the viewpoint?

Long before Nike decided to jump on this wagon the media and politicians had turned it in to a circus and tried to capitalize it, with paid talking heads being the ring leaders. I say to those that are here regurgitating your favorite talk show host mantra that you should think for yourself. Read opposing views with an open mind and form your own educated opinion. I initially stood on the side of "he made a bad decision and should have handled it a different way," After some time passed I changed my position to that of approval. I feel he made a tough decision and decided to press on regardless of the consequences. The dialogue has been started, the consciousness raised, on something most of us would rather not be aware of.


For the record I am a white male that will soon be 53 years old, I don't own Nike shoes because I think they're junk.

Certainly are a lot of OFFENDED people who make fun of others for being OFFENDED.