Taking a Knee

I will, cautiously, wade into the treacherous waters surrounding NFL players taking a knee during the national anthem.

I don't have any problem whatsoever with it.

These players are not wiping their rear with the flag, nor are they giving it the finger, nor are they spitting on it. They are solemnly taking a knee or raising a fist to demonstrate that while they revere this country, they and others of their skin color have dealt with (and continue to deal with) grave injustice that cannot be ignored. That they make millions of dollars to play a kid's game is of no moment; they rightly recognize that all the money in the world can't buy them justice, nor can that money buy justice for their families, who generally are not multi-millionaire athletes.

This is in spirit with similar protests nearly fifty (50) years ago:

Patriotism.

I do note that some haughtily claim that this is a disgrace when soldiers are fighting and dying overseas while making a tiny fraction of the income that NFL players make. While this argument is duly noted, its relevance escapes me. Does the injustice suffered by the black community somehow count less when there is a war going on? Did the black NFL players have some sort of collective conversation wherein they decided to trade their dignity for soldiers' blood? If the soldiers made more money, would the protest then be OK? What about if the players were amateurs or poorly paid? Would their protest then be more acceptable? Is this really that disrespectful?

Quiet Strength

My point is that I am proud, PROUD, to call myself a fellow citizen of these young men who had the courage (and temerity) to stand (or sit, or kneel, or raise a fist) for their convictions. That is what this country is about. If free speech means anything, it has to apply to just and noble causes such as this at least in the same measure that it applies to those "very fine people" in Charlottesville, VA, and elsewhere who march and chant for their abhorrent causes.

I note the disparity between protests such as the NFL and the 1968 protest, pictured above, and those shown below from more recent times:

I always like to remind myself that my opinions and reactions to all things will someday be judged by St. Peter at the Gate. When my turn comes, I hope that I can say that I supported those who stood for justice and opposed those who stood against it. Don't we all want to wind up on the right side of history?

UPDATE: I just saw this screed in the Washington Times today. A snippet:

Don’t kneel when my anthem is played.  Too many people died for that flag.  You are free to protest but not then.  I am free to not watch, or pay to watch you play if you do that.  The NFL should make it a rule that you stand for the national anthem.  There is no free speech to disobey a private employer on private property.  This would solve the problem immediately.

The NFL has deeply offended most of America.  They will pay an economic and reputational price, as they should.

If a player is free to protest, then he is free to protest. You, Mr. Conservative Columnist, have no right to tell him when he can and can't protest. I also find it interesting that he states simultaneously that (a) too many people died for rights in America, but (b) NFL players don't have the right to protest. Also, the league should make a rule governing the protests, the right to which many Americans died to preserve.

I also can't help but notice his comment about "private property." Citizens of Indianapolis and surrounding counties: You paid for Lucas Oil Stadium. Do you, having paid for the stadium, consider it to be the private property of someone else?

Finally, if Mr. Ass-Hat Conservative Columnist believes that the NFL will pay an economic and reputational price, and it doesn't, what then? Can we disregard him as full of it? Is that proof positive that this blowhard doesn't know what he's talking about and should forever thereafter be disregarded?