Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
If a majority agreed with a protest it would negate the need for said protest. Furthermore, majorities are not the measure of what is moral/righteous. You can be sure that a majority of Alabamians didn't agree with the march on the Edmund Pettus bridge in 1965 (and likely celebrated the cops beating the shit out of the protesters).
Using the majority-equals-morality argument, Bull Connor was on the right side of the civil rights protests. According to Gallup polls conducted in the early 1960s, a majority of Americans disapproved of the “freedom riders,” and thought “sit-ins” at lunch counters, “freedom buses” and other demonstrations were more likely to hurt than help integration in the South.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/o...e-destroy.html
|
You keep going in circles. I've already stated that no one disagrees with the players having a "right to protest". I've said that its the time and the place they're choosing to protest that fans have a disagreement with.
In the meantime, here's the owner of the Detroit Lions trying to get ahead of the issue, quite brilliantly I might add. I'm glad that there are still adults in the NFL.
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opi...way/106253520/
I'll also add that since Mrs. Ford, now in her 90's, has taken over the Lions franchise, the product on the field has improved. Looks like we could all learn a lot from her. At 92, she's still going strong.