You say, "Mr. President, let me introduce you to the First Amendment, which you have obviously never read and may not even know exists - like it or not, agree with it or not, that behavior is protected by our Constitution. A lot of good people have died over the years protecting our right to do exactly that. "
However, in recent posts on other freedom of speech/protest topics you were claiming that if someone disagrees with another person's speech, they have the right to shut it down, and have been even willing to overlook the violence that some have engaged in to do just that.
Which is it Mike, do you believe in freedom of speech or freedom of speech only for that which you agree with?
If it is the latter, then your and Trump's (mis)understanding of the First Amendment are the same, you just happen to disagree on which speech should be protected.
Regardless of the inconsistency in your free speech arguments of late, Mike, I do agree with you on the point that Trump should be focused on much more important issues rather than telling Americans when they can/can not engage in protests & telling private companies who they should fire.
For the record, in this case specifically, the players protests are subject to their employers allowing them to protest while they are at work. As private citizens, they have the same rights to protest and freedom of speech that we all have. It appears that their employers are allowing them to protest while "on the clock" so there really is no issue over should they or shouldn't they be allowed to protest from an employee/employer standpoint.
With that said, if I purchase a ticket to a game, then those same players are, in one aspect, infringing on what I paid for, namely, to watch a football game, not be a party to any political protests. From that viewpoint, I disagree that the players should be protesting. If the players wish to protest, let them hold marches or rallies where others who wish to express the same sentiment can freely join them in their protest. If people wish to stop paying for NFL network or paying for tickets to NFL games because they do not want to be a party to paying for such protests, that is their right as well. If enough people decide to do that, then the market will lead the NFL and team owners to change their minds about allowing such protests during NFL games.
Also, the latest version of these protests have absolutely nothing to do with the original meaning of the protest, now it's more of a middle finger to Trump rather than what it started as. That doesn't change a person's right to free speech or not, it might make a difference in just how far others are willing to go to voice support for such a protest. ... just sayin' |
