Author Topic: Colin Kaepernick  (Read 7435 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #140 on: September 09, 2016, 11:18:53 AM »
Not having a problem with it does not mean the issue does not exist.

The problem with your view of an obligation is that you think an obligation is universal.  An obligation to you is not necessarily an obligation to another.  And what if one obligation to a custom overrides an obligation to another custom?  That is exactly what I think is happening with Colin.  His obligation to stand up to an injustice where people are dying, overrides his relatively hollow obligation of standing for a flag.

What is the source for the custom then if not the flag code?  What is the actual custom?  Sounds like it is not clear at all.  Is it presence, participation, or both?  And where and why is the support for the criteria?

And what is the "larger point" if I am missing it?  I seem to be trying to make a different point and you arent following.
You totally copped out of my hypothetical question too.  It was a simple question.
Would you stand if they coud see you on your couch?  It is a question that, to me, exposes some of the reasons people stand in the first place.

If I was on my couch watching the game, I would not stand.
If I knew that stadium full of people could see me, I would 100% stand and hold my hand over my heart.
Why?  Fear

Fear of being crucified for not fulfilling my obligation to show respect.  But you say there is absolutely no need, requirement, obligation, or custom to stand when watching from home.  Yet I feel you, and most, would stand anyway.  JMO

 
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 11:36:13 AM by eric42434224 »
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #141 on: September 09, 2016, 11:37:20 AM »
If fear is your motivation, fine.  I think that is the wrong motivation, but that's fine.  I gave a complete answer to your question, so I'm not sure how I copped out of it.  Despite it being a strange hypothetical, it implies that I am being made a participant, as in the case of a conference call, so I would participate.  Being physically present would make me a participant.  But as your examples pointed out, modern technology makes it possible for one to be a participant without being present.  By means of two-way video, I would then be a participant.  So I would fulfill my then-obligation to actively participate.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #142 on: September 09, 2016, 11:42:14 AM »
If fear is your motivation, fine.  I think that is the wrong motivation, but that's fine.  I gave a complete answer to your question, so I'm not sure how I copped out of it.  Despite it being a strange hypothetical, it implies that I am being made a participant, as in the case of a conference call, so I would participate.  Being physically present would make me a participant.  But as your examples pointed out, modern technology makes it possible for one to be a participant without being present.  By means of two-way video, I would then be a participant.  So I would fulfill my then-obligation to actively participate.

You are complicating the question unnecessarily.
Its simple really.

Would you stand if you were watching it on TV on your couch.

Would you stand if you were watching it on TV on your couch....but the stadium full of people could see you?

And whatever your reason, why would you stand or not stand?

No need to bring any other information in.  You are not there physically, and you are not a participant.  They can simply see you.
It doesnt have to be vetted out with a likely backstory.  The custom was formed before TV was even invented, so lets not restrict ourselves to it having to be a bulletproof real life scenario.


EDIT:  This isnt a trick question or a trap.  It is a legitimate question I even asked myself, and answered, to give insight in to this custom, and what I feel are some hypocritical behavoirs by many in this country (not you specifically).
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 11:49:02 AM by eric42434224 »
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #143 on: September 09, 2016, 11:49:18 AM »
You are complicating the question unnecessarily.

No, I don't think so.  But if I am, it is only because it is, as I mentioned, a strange example that doesn't occur in real life.  And that goes to show why it is often not helpful to try to deal with a straightforward concept by bringing in the most outlandish fictional hypotheticals to try to create the exception to the rule.  Trying to undermine the validity of a rule by creating a fictional exception to the rule is to take a weak position in the argument.  And, don't get me wrong, you are entitled to do that.  But it doesn't get very far in trying to prove your point. 

But back to your hypothetical, yes, I did answer it, and answered every one of the sub-questions in your most recent post as well.  Whether you like or accept the answers doesn't much matter.  I gave you complete answers, and the reasons for my answers.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #144 on: September 09, 2016, 11:55:29 AM »
You are complicating the question unnecessarily.

No, I don't think so.  But if I am, it is only because it is, as I mentioned, a strange example that doesn't occur in real life.  And that goes to show why it is often not helpful to try to deal with a straightforward concept by bringing in the most outlandish fictional hypotheticals to try to create the exception to the rule.  Trying to undermine the validity of a rule by creating a fictional exception to the rule is to take a weak position in the argument.  And, don't get me wrong, you are entitled to do that.  But it doesn't get very far in trying to prove your point. 

But back to your hypothetical, yes, I did answer it, and answered every one of the sub-questions in your most recent post as well.  Whether you like or accept the answers doesn't much matter.  I gave you complete answers, and the reasons for my answers.

No you didnt answer my question, and as a lawyer, you would never let a witness get away with that cop out answer adding tons of stuff to the scenario.  You and the judge would have directed a yes or no answer to the question.  It is a simple yes or no answer. 

My hypothetical question does not need to be about an everyday normal real-life scenario.  That is why it is called hypothetical.

Would you stand if you were watching it on TV on your couch....but the stadium full of people could see you?
No presence, and no participation. No NFL or team inviting you to do anything. SIMPLY...they can see you.

If you cant answer a yes or a no, then I must assume you are not comfortable sharing your answer to my question.  I can understand that and I will not ask you anymore.  If anyone else is interested in giving a straight answer, I would like to hear that discussion.  If not, I will let this tanget go.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 12:01:54 PM by eric42434224 »
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #145 on: September 09, 2016, 12:12:32 PM »
You are mistaken about how, as a lawyer, I would expect such a question to be answered.  First off, lay witness are generally NOT allowed to be asked hypothetical questions.  It just is not permissible. 

Second, as a matter or routine practice, when preparing a witness to answer questions, I specifically train the witness to, more often than not, NOT answer what may appear on its face to be a "simple yes/no question" with a simple "yes" or "no," because there is almost ALWAYS some explanation required to ensure that the answer is not misunderstood, taken out of context, are assumed to either incorporate or leave out other key information.  The basic rule of thumb is to almost never just give a "yes" or "no," but to answer as thoroughly and completely as necessary.  And for most questions, a judge will NOT direct the witness to simply give only a "yes" or "no," despite what you may have been led to believe from the television.

Again, sorry if you don't like the answer or if it doesn't fit your argument, but it is what it is.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #146 on: September 09, 2016, 12:27:42 PM »
All that and you still didn't answer my question. You are free to explain your answer to your hearts content.  But you merely answered your own modified question, not my question.  If you don't want to answer that is Fine, I simply won't ask anymore.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Skeever

  • Posts: 1108
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #147 on: September 09, 2016, 12:38:52 PM »
I would not stand if the stadium full of people were watching me on the jumbo tron. They would watch me crack open a beer and snicker at the celebrity butchering the anthem.

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #148 on: September 09, 2016, 12:48:25 PM »
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #149 on: September 09, 2016, 01:12:49 PM »
All that and you still didn't answer my question.

Yeah, I did.  http://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=48311.msg2212932#msg2212932

No, that was my question with several modifications and assumptions you added in.  It was not my question.  Clearly that was not my question, and clearly you have no desire to answer it.  So I have stopped asking
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #150 on: September 09, 2016, 01:17:02 PM »
Suit yourself.  Again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #151 on: September 09, 2016, 01:22:23 PM »
Suit yourself.  Again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.

It's not that I didn't like your answer to the question you constructed yourself.  I have no feelings about it at all.  You didn't answer my specific question.  Again I am sorry you can't or  won't answer it, but it is what it is.  I won't ask you again.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #152 on: September 09, 2016, 01:25:11 PM »
Okay.  Again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #153 on: September 09, 2016, 01:35:53 PM »
Okay.  Again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.

Are we playing some sort of game?  Let's see if I understand how it's played.....

It's not that I didn't like your answer to the question you constructed yourself.  I have no feelings about it at all.  You didn't answer my specific question.  Again I am sorry you can't or  won't answer it, but it is what it is.  I won't ask you again.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Sir GuitarCozmo

  • Official Forum Sous Chef and broler5
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 13773
  • Gender: Male
  • whahibrido pickingant in action...
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #154 on: September 09, 2016, 01:37:20 PM »
C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #155 on: September 09, 2016, 01:44:05 PM »
Okay.  Again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.

Are we playing some sort of game?  Let's see if I understand how it's played.....

It's not that I didn't like your answer to the question you constructed yourself.  I have no feelings about it at all.  You didn't answer my specific question.  Again I am sorry you can't or  won't answer it, but it is what it is.  I won't ask you again.

Yeah, I did answer your specific question.  As long as you keep insisting I didn't, you will get the same response.  So, again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #156 on: September 09, 2016, 01:47:05 PM »
Okay.  Again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.

Are we playing some sort of game?  Let's see if I understand how it's played.....

It's not that I didn't like your answer to the question you constructed yourself.  I have no feelings about it at all.  You didn't answer my specific question.  Again I am sorry you can't or  won't answer it, but it is what it is.  I won't ask you again.

Yeah, I did answer your question.  As long as you keep insisting I didn't, you will get the same response.  So, again, sorry you don't like my answer, but it is what it is.

No you answered a question you modified.  Not my question.  Again I am sorry you can't or  won't answer it, but it is what it is.  I won't ask you again.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Online AngelBack

  • I'm officially a lard......
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 758
  • Gender: Male
  • Why you want beef with broccoli ?
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #157 on: September 09, 2016, 01:58:51 PM »
So maybe this says more about me than CKap but I would be sympathetic if his dad was the guy the cop in SC shot in the back.  But coming from him....not feeling it.  Rather him just be grateful for his "american dream".

ALSO how would the NFL react if a group of white players started sitting out the anthem in protest of some perceived injustice they would lay at the feet of Obama?
Until you struggle through the dark, you'll never know that you're alive.

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #158 on: September 09, 2016, 03:34:39 PM »
Goddammit, eric.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #159 on: September 09, 2016, 03:42:01 PM »
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 404
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #160 on: September 09, 2016, 03:50:57 PM »

Online kingshmegland

  • defender of the brew!
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 35577
  • Gender: Male
  • Take that Beethoven, you deaf bastard!!
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #161 on: September 09, 2016, 05:19:04 PM »
I'll guess Hef doesn't agree with Eric's stance.
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down'. - Bob Newhart

So wait, we're spelling it wrong and king is spelling it right? What is going on here? :lol -- BlobVanDam

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 16587
  • Gender: Male
  • As above, so below
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #162 on: September 09, 2016, 07:02:31 PM »

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9040
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #163 on: September 12, 2016, 07:20:49 AM »
Goddammit, eric.

What does that mean?

I have a guess that is probably best kept to myself.

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #164 on: September 12, 2016, 08:21:21 AM »
I probably should have kept it to myself, as well.  Sorry.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #165 on: September 12, 2016, 12:27:23 PM »
Everything is fine between us. 
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 16587
  • Gender: Male
  • As above, so below
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #166 on: September 12, 2016, 12:30:44 PM »

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #167 on: September 12, 2016, 12:59:02 PM »
Goddammit, eric.

What does that mean?
It means that I am human, and that I make the occasional mistake.  I posted something when I shouldn't have.  I have already apologized to eric in private, and I should do so publicly as well.

I humbly apologize (again), pal.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3234
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #168 on: September 12, 2016, 01:07:35 PM »
Goddammit, eric.

What does that mean?
It means that I am human, and that I make the occasional mistake.  I posted something when I shouldn't have.  I have already apologized to eric in private, and I should do so publicly as well.

I humbly apologize (again), pal.

Now go say 5 Hail Marys, drink 6 beers, smoke a cohiba, and sin no more.  You are forgiven.  ;)
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #169 on: September 12, 2016, 01:23:55 PM »
I have no Cohibas  :(

But I do have a Liga Privada  :tup
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline kaos2900

  • Posts: 1872
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #170 on: September 14, 2016, 07:47:46 AM »

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2755
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #171 on: September 17, 2016, 10:39:05 PM »
As a foreigner, it's super weird to me that Americans give a shit about whether or not someone stood or not during a national anthem. If a person didn't stand during the Canadian anthem during a sporting event ... I wouldn't give a shit. The anthem and the flag are nice, but I'm not insecure enough to give a shit if some person doesn't pay them proper respect.

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 16587
  • Gender: Male
  • As above, so below
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #172 on: September 17, 2016, 10:51:59 PM »
Well, you're not from a country that defends the freedoms of others by giving their lives.

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24822
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #173 on: September 17, 2016, 11:00:50 PM »
Well, you're not from a country that defends the freedoms of others by giving their lives.

Yes he is.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2755
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colin Kaepernick
« Reply #174 on: September 17, 2016, 11:02:45 PM »
Well, you're not from a country that defends the freedoms of others by giving their lives.
I'm Canadian, so, yes I am dude.