USAA Rejects Military Members' Calls to Pull NFL Sponsorship

1SG Furr, since you decided to comment, I'll respond. Yes, it is your right to down-vote Shirley. I never said it wasn't your right.

I said it was unprofessional to do so without stating why, and merely because they disagreed with you.

I blocked you because I don't like to deal with those who don't care about their oath to support the Constitution - and the right to free speech and to protest are Constitutional rights.

I'm surprised to see a lawyer tie the 1A to this issue. As you well know, the 1A does in fact, not apply. NFL owners are free to put the kibosh on it.

SN Greg Wright - free speech still applies, the players have both a right to speak and to protest. The NFL owners can't stop them, but they can fire them.

Capt Gregory Prickett - Not an arrogant assumption, but possibly wrong in some cases. I support heir constitutional rights, I don't support the venue they are using it in. If anyone disrespecting the anthem has lost someone in the service, they are essentially disrespecting their sacrifice.

MSgt Danny Hope - what I'm saying, and what I assume that SSG Jessica Bautista is also saying, is that I don't view taking a knee at the National Anthem as being disrespectful towards veterans in any way. It's speech, plain and simple, and I swore an oath to protect the Constitution. Someone burning the flag pisses me off, but SCOTUS has said that it is free speech and allowed, so if it comes down to it, I'm honor-bound to protect their right to burn the flag. I'm part of the reason that they have the right to take a knee, or to burn the flag, and so are you, and so is Jessica.

So they can take a knee, it's their right, and that right was decided by SCOTUS in the middle of World War II. You can't force someone to stand and salute the flag. We swore to protect their freedoms, and we should be standing between them and the people who would stop them.

That's what honors our fallen comrades.

Capt Gregory Prickett - I understand your position, I too want everyone to have the freedom to protest. All this is doing is pissing people off and ruining what little respite anyone has from politics. Add to that how, any other statements in support of police is denied by the NFL. If the NFL does not allow all players to support their views, they should not allow any....it fails to be freedom of speech when the organization picks and chooses who can exercise it.

MSgt Danny Hope
Capt Gregory Prickett puts it nicely. I don't take their protest as disrespect because I know it's not personal. Racism and other factors that contribute to police brutality must be addressed. Protest is MEANT to make people uncomfortable. As far as protesting goes, taking a knee harms no one. Why won't people address what they're protesting? Because it requires us to talk about uncomfortable truths. People and their beliefs are valid, legalities aside. We can't stop people from protesting, but we can make a serious attempt to find solutions.

LTC (Join to see) - Sir, the idea of protest is to be effective by making the general populace uncomfortable, which is what they are doing. The typical response of the majority has always been to claim that the style or manner of protest is not appropriate. The same thing was said during the civil rights protests of the 1960s. Your example of the 97-year-old is a deflection, a claim that the type of protest is not appropriate.

With respect, the fact that people are upset prove that the protest is effective. I would support your objections on one condition - provide a plan for a method of protest that would be at least as effective as what they are doing now. Otherwise, what you are doing is the same as telling them to shut up and live with it.

Capt Gregory Prickett - They haven't made me uncomfortable. They've made me angry. While I'm angry, I am non-supportive. They are their own worst enemy ... in a number of ways. As much as they have a right to be assholes, I have a right to despise them for it ... and I do.

I think the meme’sters articulate matters better than I.

LTC (Join to see) - sir, when one is angry, they aren't comfortable. The reaction of Bull Connor in Birmingham was one of anger, when you use attack dogs against men, women, and children it's not because one is just uncomfortable. Malcolm X generated anger among many, as did King.

You do have a right to despise them for the protest, but that doesn't change the fact that the grounds for protest are legitimate, nor that their protest has been effective. Again, if you don't like how they are doing it, come up with another way that would be as effective. Otherwise there is no reason for them to change what they are doing.