"Requirement" can refer to a moral requirement, not necessarily legal. There's nothing wrong with employees objecting to certain aspects of their work situation, even ones they knew about when they started.
Because I was responding directly to your use of "right."
Of course. We obviously disagree with what is moral and decent, and who is more accountable to behave that way.
Seems you're the one who keeps falling back on "rights."
I believe a person in the Military can join the Military with good intentions and still disagree with a war he may be asked to fight.
How is it a double standard. Name one scenario where Donald Trump will be asked to risk his life for a Cause he finds unjust. One.
You ing Trump apologist, this is ducks-level logic.
That's what you got from that? Maybe you need to be more selective instead of continuing to increase the number of individual replies you're making to each of my posts.
Or we can take this up to 100. I'm good with way.
Obviously neither of us knows if he has that option. My point is the player shouldn't have to be the one to come up with the idea of staying in the locker room.
Don't act ignorant about the history of this protest, you know why Kaepernick started it. If you want to debate his rationale, go dig up one of those old threads. You asked why it would be different for Canada and I told you.
Obama didn't insert him into the demonstration. No one is protesting Trump for being commander in chief over hostile police officers.
Dumb n!ggers, amirite?
Now you're inventing reasons they should protest while also saying they shouldn't protest. It's a weird position to take.
Obama didn't call them sons of es who should be fired. Trump did. Period.
Oh yeah you clearly don't give a who kneels.
See my first response for the rebuttal to your ludicrous "don't take a job that involves anything you disagree with" position. And as far as charity work, I'm not going to do your googling for you but a lot of these players have done plenty for their communities.
Nope, that's not why you're a bigot.
If that's your family history then I'm not sure what happened to you and how you're so oblivious and dismissive of the experiences of many African Americans.
I don't stereotype or call everyone who disagrees with me a bigot. I am calling you one, though. I have your own words to fall back on.
If you say so.
I don't remember what edit I made. It's kind of weird that you do. Unless you quoted my reply pre-edit and didn't finish until an hour later. And then you replied with a new post. Speaking of salt.
Anyway, the point I was making there is you claim you're not a bigot but upon seeing me attribute the word "n!gger" to your position, your first thought was some militant black guy going knockout game on me. It betrays a view of black people that seems exclusively derived from watching local news or reading Breitbart, versus having actual personal relationships and interactions with black people. It's Fox News style manufactured outrage.
Seems to work just fine. It's all you guys want to talk about.
And this controversy is fundamentally about race, neither you or I have made it so.
Reply With Quote
