|
|
 Originally Posted by boost
Again, I'm fairly agnostic about the morality on all sides here-- but I think there's some strange doublethink going on in your post.
Disagree
As I understand it, you think that it is not morally objectionable for an employer to fire staff for not participating in patriotic pageantry.
Some loaded language there, but yes. I think it's totally fine if an employer chooses to enforce consequences if one of its employees chooses to do something that offends the overwhelming majority of its paying customers. There are lots of jobs out there with rules and people who get fired for breaking those rules. Show up on time, wear steel toed boots, and for fucks sake..DON'T PISS OFF THE CUSTOMERS!
Therefore it follows, there is no issue with an employer forcing staff, by threat of termination, to perform overt patriotic gestures
Right
So where's the doublethink? Yes, a team can make its own rules about the anthem and it can punish players for not following the rules. I'm not even sure why that's ambiguous My comment regarding your post was in relation to this passage here:
The league really screwed this up, and their actions show that they realize it now. They should have made sure CK kept a job,
What you said here is that another entity, the league, should intervene and force a team to put CK on its roster. Yet the players are saying that it's not right for another entity, the president, to intervene and call for teams to fire players. That's double think
Again, boost, it seems your entire argument hinges on the idea that CK was somehow 'punished' by a team for his actions. He wasn't. He chose to become a free agent and test his value on the open market. And when he found that the market didn't want him, his average level of play, his inability to perform in a pro-style offense, and the media headaches that he brings with him.......then folks cried "racist conspiracy!"
|
Reply With Quote