Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 31 July 2024

Were you offended by some of the elements in the Paris Olympics Opening Ceremony? What did it mean and what should be our response?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #162 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

To say the Opening Ceremony, July 26, 2024, of the Paris Olympics 2024, was controversial would be an understatement. Indeed, since the typically long and over-the-top ceremony took place on and around the Seine River running through Paris, social media has been on fire jousting about whether the opening was sacrilegious and loathsome, or historic and artistic, or an attack on Christianity, or an expression of French culture, creative genius, or simply pagan ignorance.

In case you did not watch or do not know what I am talking about, the issue for the most part focuses upon a presentation near the beginning of the ceremony of what appeared to be a depiction of Leonardo da Vinci’s painting of the Last Supper.

“The scene in question featured a line of drag performers posing shoulder-to-shoulder on a Parisian bridge before turning the bridge into a fashion-forward catwalk. Later, those same queens celebrated over a meal where the dish was revealed to be a nearly nude man painted blue.” 

“In this parody, the Christ figure was an obese woman making a heart symbol with her hands surrounded by a rainbow coalition of drag queens, bearded ladies, and other perversions.”

So, this portrayal included drag performers, a child, and a mostly naked, blue-painted bearded man said be a representation of the mythological Greek god Dionysius, the god of wine, freedom, intoxication, and ecstasy, or as he was later known among the Romans, Bacchus, from which we get the word, bacchanalia, meaning a wild, orgiastic party or celebration.

“The official Olympics Games X account shared photos from the portion of the program featuring the blue man at the tableau’s center and explained, ‘The interpretation of the Greek God Dionysus makes us aware of the absurdity of violence between human beings.’”

Interesting argument.

Media have said reaction came from the “Christian right,” but this is limited and slanted at best, for reaction came worldwide from Catholics, Jews, and non-Christians alike. Indeed, you don’t have to be anti-intellectual, or part of the “Christian right,” or a person uninformed about artistic imagery to wonder how a naked man and a bunch of drag queens make a statement about the absurdity of violence between human beings.

The ceremony, we are told, was an attempt to represent the culture and history of the host nation. “France’s history, particularly during the French Revolution, is complex. This period saw the overthrow of Christianity, the execution of monarchs (including the beheadings of Marie Antoinette and King Louis XVI), the deaths of 16,000 people during the Reign of Terror, and the rededication of Notre Dame as the “Temple of Reason.” This era marked France's official shift toward secularism.

The ceremony embodied this historical narrative and its underlying themes. Lady Liberty in drag symbolizes the Statue of Liberty, a gift from France to the United States, representing liberty and freedom. Dionysus appears not only because of the Greco-Roman origins of the Olympics but also because he was known as “Liber Pater,” the Father of freedom and liberty. The da Vinci-style imagery with Lady Liberty in drag signifies France’s rejection of Christianity and its embrace of secularism, (supposedly) transforming into a nation of tolerance, liberty, and freedom.

Christians are justified in feeling angry and should voice their disapproval. This event distorted a Christian symbol to celebrate revolution and Bacchanalia, rejecting all meaning, order, and hierarchy. This is ultimately a form of spiritual warfare—we battle not against flesh and blood, but against rulers and principalities.”

In response to the backlash, “Anne Deschamps, spokesperson for Paris 2024, stated, ‘Clearly there was never an intention to show disrespect to any religious group,’ Reuters reported. ‘The opening ceremony,’ she added, ‘tried to celebrate community tolerance…We believe this ambition was achieved. If people have taken any offence, we are really sorry.’”

This non-apology apology was roundly condemned by religious leaders representing a variety of nationalities and denominations. The ceremony producers are not sorry for egregiously disrespecting more than 2.6 billion Christians in the world. They are sorry someone took offense. In other words, we don’t have a problem, but we’re sorry you all have a problem.

Several things bothered me about all of this.

1. Yes, I felt the presentation was a mockery of Christianity and I was offended this was done in such an in-your-face manner in the Olympics Opening Ceremony.
2. I thought the lying, or what’s now called gaslighting, trying to reinterpret the producers’ intent as something other than mockery was equally offensive, not unlike the mainstream media’s eagerness to rewrite history if it helps a given political candidate.
3. I not only did not like the Last Supper display, I did not like much of the ceremony, for in it I saw a ménage à troispromoted as representative of Paris’s reputation as a city of love, I saw two men kissing each other, I saw the woman who portrayed Christ in the Last Supper, a lesbian DJ named Barbara Butch, kissing her partner after the event, I saw drag queens featured throughout – all this was shared on NBC’s coverage. 
4. I thought the riverboat presentation of the athletes was unique but even longer than usual, thus losing its audience.
5. I don’t blame the athletes for what the IOC approved for the Paris Olympics Opening Ceremony.
6. Virtue signaling by self-avowed Christians hasn’t been helpful. In other words, people who found the display offensive have proclaimed their position online then demanded others do as they do, boycott watching the Olympics. These boycotting individuals have every right, even Christian liberty, to watch or not watch, but they do not possess any biblical rationale for judging others’ Christian commitment based on their viewing choices. That’s just old-style legalism. 

7. On the flipside, I was bothered by the number of people purporting to be Christians, who in their social media comments, pooh-poohed those who didn’t like the ceremony’s celebration of debauchery, acted as if it were no big deal, even defended it on the basis of, well, it’s art or it’s French. Yes, that’s true, but that does not mean it’s good art or that this represents all of what it means to be French nor certainly what is best about being French. 

Some perspective:

1. Olympics opening ceremonies are rarely anything but a celebration of what is called “culture,” but in actuality, is pagan religion. I have especially strong recollections of this for the 1994 winter games in Lillehammer, Norway, and the 1998 winter games in Nagano, Japan, wherein the opening ceremonies were one long presentation of polytheistic religion. So, while what Paris did was objectionable post-Christian wokeism, it was not surprising or new.
2. Ceremony producers are not going to produce any parody about religions other than Christianity, like Islam, or for that matter, Buddhism, Hinduism, and certainly not atheism, because they are afraid of fatwas and other global Muslim reactions, and, ironically, Islam is seen as an ally of the Woke because both want to bring down Western Civilization. 
3. I have wondered about some here in the U.S. who seem to be reacting as if this degenerate display was somehow a new level of public offensiveness. If that is what they think, where have they been? For a few years now, we’ve had so-called Drag Queen Story hours scheduled at public libraries wherein men dressed as women can dance suggestively in front of kindergarten age children. In the U.S. we have Pride Month, parades, corporate kowtowing, and celebrities working overtime to tell us how this is about inclusion, “being seen,” or freedom, when what it’s really about is grooming children and legitimizing immorality. In the U.S., especially under the Biden Administration, we have men masquerading as women in the U.S. military, wearing uniforms, officers in charge of troops, who are symbols not of military preparedness but ideological wokeism. So, while the Paris Olympics captured a worldwide audience, what they did is not all that different from what is taking place every day in the U.S.A.

4. From a pastor friend on Facebook, “I’m grateful we live in the age of streaming television. We can pause whenever, and we don't really have to watch anything we don't want to.”

How should we then respond to all this? Not by angry or self-righteous posts on social media. We live in a fallen and now post-Christian culture, so we need to work harder to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com.  

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2024   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://twitter.com/RexMRogers. 

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 10 October 2022

Have you noticed the startling uptick in violent incidents at sports competitions? 

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #49 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life. 

Sports existed before the Greeks gave us the Olympics. Friendly competition has been and still is an enjoyable pastime, testing skills, athletic prowess, experience, fortitude, and the old who-wants-it-most.

The fact that violent incidents periodically make an appearance on the sports field isn’t all that surprising, given that men and women are usually emotionally cranked during competitions. Add to this the reality that we’re all sinners, and we live in a fallen world, so of course there will be altercations from time to time.

Soccer, or “football” as it is called by the rest of the world, seems to have historically attracted not only fans but fan-atics who believe the game is a prize fight. 

Some 26 fans were injured in a soccer brawl in Mexico, gun shots were fired at a post-game soccer match in Portugal, a match was delayed when the crowd began fighting before a game in France between French and German teams. Saint-Etienne French soccer fans attacked their own players after the team lost, running onto the pitch and throwing flares and other objects at their players. “In the United Kingdom, the country's ‘football policing unit’ reported a 47% increase in arrests at soccer games this season over the same period in 2019-20.”

Fan fights, however, are becoming increasingly common in the US – at all levels of sports from little kids to the pros. University students are chanting the F-word at opposing players. Recently, Clemson and Georgia fans got into a brawl before the game, same happened Florida State v. Alabama, Fresno St v. Boise St, several NFL pre-season games, Rams-Chargers, Lions-Eagles, Dolphins-Bills, Jaguars-Steelers, including women by the way. 

And Major League Baseball too. A huge brawl erupted at Wrigley Field between Chicago Cubs and St Lous Cardinals fans.

An NBA player’s mother and wife were physically harassed by fans at a ballgame in Dallas and other players are saying they will no longer bring their families to games.

Professional tennis, historically one of the more mannerly sports, has witnessed an increase in verbal abuse. Players and fans using racial slurs at matches, spitting, cheating accusations, cursing, thrown racquets, angrily hit balls—some endangering personnel or fans, or just an egregious increase of poor sportsmanship, perhaps epitomized by Australian men’s player Nick Kyrgios, who curses loudly, shouts at the crowd or umpires, and after losing at Wimbledon, stood courtside pounding his racket into smithereens.

At a youth soccer game in Arizona, a father assaulted a referee while his son, the player, threatened to kill the referee.  

Parents youth players are becoming so verbally abusive and physically threatening that referees around the country are quitting and fewer are signing up for the job, creating a shortage of youth sports referees. 

“The high school sports landscape has lost an estimated 50,000 officials and referees over the past three years.”

“A 2017 survey by the National Association of Sports Officials found that 87 percent of the participants had suffered verbal abuse, 13 percent reported being assaulted, and 47 percent said they felt unsafe. 

Parents have also attacked each other, youth referees, and even players, including tripping teens on the field, shining a laser into a player’s eyes or knocking them over. Racist catcalls, taunts and insults against teams of color from parents are also all too common.”

“Last fall, the father of a player in Vail, Colorado, sprayed a youth hockey coach in the face with Lysol. 

The mother of a player in Laurel, Mississippi, ambushed the umpire of a softball game for 12 year olds at a parking lot after a game this April and gave her a black eye. 

And in August 2022, popular football coach Mike Hickmon of Texas was shot and killed – in front of horrified children – after a game for nine-year-olds during an argument over the score. Small wonder that 80 percent of all new high school sports officials in the U.S. leave the field after two years.”

Now, “kids in the U.S. are quitting youth sports in droves, with nearly 70 percent dropping out before age 13 “because it’s just not fun anymore.” 

This trend, experts say, is largely due to too much pressure and the growing number of overzealous sports parents screaming insults at coaches and kids from the sidelines.”

“'Violent sports fans are causing alarm at every level, from high schools to the pros, there are nearly daily incidents of abusive behavior in the stands.” 

Anecdotally, you see the increase in aggressive, abusive, threatening behavior, along with actual assaults.

Then there is the use of alcohol, not mentioned in most of the examples I cited, but it’s there, particularly on the professional level. 

Teams have learned that 10-cent-beer nights are counterproductive, but while they may limit beer purchases after the seventh inning or during the fourth quarter, by then fans are already sauced.   

Some are saying this increase in sports violence is due to the stresses of the pandemic. Maybe.

Others say it is rooted in the hours people spend online, yelling and cursing virtually and now not adjusting to real-life exchanges. Maybe.

But more likely, this increase in abusiveness and violence is more evidence of the breakdown of American culture. Civility and empathy are disappearing in our society, so why wouldn’t we expect this in sports as well?

I’ve noted in earlier podcasts, we’re living in a post-Christian culture, a time of serious cultural chaos. Individuals are attempting to live, without genuine religious faith, often without healthy family support, with a focus upon personal happiness and little else. 

So, they are developing more neuroses, more anger. People no longer live with the reinforcement religious faith provides, nor its restraint either. Anything and everything sets them off, including sports not going as they wish.

Scripture reminds us, “As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man,” (Matt 24:37). So then, what was it like in the days of Noah?

Again, Scripture tells us, “Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence,” (Gen. 6:11).

In the days of Noah, it was violent, and “every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time,” (Gen. 6:5).

I wish I could say recent sports violence is a blip, that it will go away soon, but sorry to say, I think this will get worse, as it is now in other societal activities, like going to the mall, school, parades, concerts, workplace, even church.

So, taking reasonable precautions is good stewardship. Don’t go to games where beer is the primary marketing push. Know where you are booking seats in the stadium or fieldhouse. Be aware of what other fans are doing around you during the game, and if needed, take your family out of there. Don’t allow younger if not even teens to go to the restroom on their own. Park in lots or ramps that are well-lighted and easy to access. Use common sense.

But Christians should not despair—ever—for our light should shine brighter in cultural darkness. We are to be salt and light, peacemakers, voices of reason, testimonies of faith in a better way only possible through faith in Christ.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. 

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2022   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.  

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 16 March 2022

I like watching football. But I don’t much like the NFL.

1. There is the politicization of the game, first the national anthem controversy, then the wokeism, in the name of civil rights but really pretty shallow self-serving posturing.

2. Then there’s the League’s history dealing with or rather winking time and again at players involved in abuse of women. Lot of examples. Take the current DeShaun Watson case: 22, or is it 24, women accuse him of sexual assault, misconduct. Yes, a TX Grand Jury declined to prosecute. Yes, one is innocent until proven guilty. But that’s a lot of smoke to suggest there’s no fire. In the post-“Me Too” era it’s mind boggling how many teams are actively considering trading for him to be their QB. Do you want this guy to be the face of your franchise? Apparently many do.

3. Then there’s the League’s decision, as soon as the law allowed, to embrace sports gambling as a business opportunity, this after decades arguing gambling could undermine the integrity of fair and free competition. And while the League pulls in millions on the backs of its fans, it has the moral audacity to fine players who gamble on their teams.

Remember Al Davis? “Just win, baby.”

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2022    

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.    

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 28 July 2020

American professional sports are morphing into just another segment from cable news.

If you’re like most people I know, you watch sports for the love of the game, the excitement of competition, the entertainment, and the escape from everyday pressures. Given the increasing politicization of American professional sports, that last one about escaping everyday news is not going to happen, at least not in 2020.

Consider these recent developments so far:

• “The NFL pledged to spend $250 million over the next decade to combat systemic racism and fight injustices against African-Americans.” 
• “NFL is planning to play"Lift Every Voice and Sing," also known as the Black national anthem, before is expected to be performed live or played before every Week 1 NFL game,
• NFL is considering social justice patches on uniforms, helmets.
• NFL will stencil “End Racism” in end zones as part of its social justice effort for 2020 home openers.
• “WNBA revealed the "Black Lives Matter" decals it placed on its court prior to the start of the 2020 season.” 
• Sports leagues will place “Black Lives Matter” messaging on attire.
• MLB will donate over $1M to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and several other social justice charities.
• Many MLB players, but not all, will kneel during the National Anthem.
• WNBA warm-up jerseys will feature social justice messages. 
• NBA will paint “Black Lives Matter” murals on the courts at Walt Disney World in Orlando, and players will be permitted to wear personal messages on their jerseys. 
• The Premier Lacrosse League will permit players to wear message patches on shooting shirts or leg sleeves or arm bands. 
• New Jersey Devils install “Black Lives Matter” on their ice as part of their commitment to racial equality.  
• The Washington Redskins changing their name to an interim Washington Football Team.

Drew Brees, long-time star quarterback for the New Orleans Saints and reputed all around nice guy, said in an interview that he “will never agree with anybody disrespecting the flag of the United States of America or our country,” then after enormous criticism from other players, Black and White, he apologized profusely for his “insensitive” remarks, as did his wife, repeatedly. 

My point here is not that Brees said what he did, which a majority of Americans agree with, or that some people didn’t like it. My point is that he got ostracized for expressing the “wrong view,” i.e. he made what at one time was considered a patriotic statement and then was blasted for not aligning with the social justice views of multiple other players. Beyond that, he was not accorded his own freedom of speech and he chose to retract his statements, likely so he can play another year in the league. 

Who now, in the NFL or any league, assuming they disagree with the direction the leagues are going, is going to speak up? 

Perhaps it is U.S. Senator Kelly Loeffler, part owner of the Atlanta Dream WNBA team, who penned a letter to WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert decrying the league's association with the "BLM" movement and suggested wearing American flag jerseys instead. Loeffler later appeared on Fox News to say "Black Lives Matter " is "based on Marxist principles" that could "destroy" the country.

She told ESPN. "I think we all agree the life of every African American is important. There's no room for racism in this country, and we have to root it out where it exists. But there's a political organization called Black Lives Matter that I think is very important to make the distinction between their aim and where we are as a country at this moment. The Black Lives Matter political organization advocates things like defunding and abolishing the police, abolishing our military, emptying our prisons, destroying the nuclear family. It promotes violence and antisemitism. To me, this is not what our league stands for."

Some people question whether Loeffler, who has seemingly evidenced support for progressive causes in the past, may be using this recent sports controversy to prop up her senatorial campaign.

Since this time, several players and others associated with the league or the team have tried to get Loeffler ousted from ownership. Why? For expressing “the wrong views.”

In October 2019, Houston Rockets GM Daryl Morey tweeted on his personal account, "Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong. The NBA wants the China market, so when the Chinese government reacted negatively to the tweet a firestorm broke out resulting in Morey apologizing, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver offering a weak recognition of Morey’s free speech rights while all the while condemning the incident, Houston Rocket’s star James Harden apologizing to China, and NBA king LeBron James coming off looking like he endorsed China more than American values. 

Why was this incident such an issue? It was the first national level story featuring personal social media privileges/rights vs corporate interests and accountability, and it involved freedom of speech, international politics, and money. Free speech lost the game. Follow the money.

“In the end, it will be money that dictates the future of political expression in professional sports.”

These are but a few illustrations. The rush-to-political-correctness boulder is rolling down the mountain faster than anyone could have imagined. Major corporations, not least the sports leagues and teams, are turning into pretzels trying to assuage the woke-culture-bully. 

They say this is about racial justice and police brutality, and undoubtedly for some athletes and executives it is just that. They hold sincere concerns, they work in a league comprised of majority Black athletes, they care, and I give them kudos for this.

I also salute and defend any athletes’ right to his or her freedom of speech, to say whatever and to use their sports fame to advance ideas they believe in. Back when, I wrote in support of Colin Kaepernick’s right to his views, even though I thought is method of conveying them by kneeling during the National Anthem was a mistake, and I did not like the imagery. I recognized that for him, this was not about the military or veterans or even the flag per se, yet for millions of others it was and still is, and he and subsequent players know this. Now he is being touted as a hero, yet Drew Brees, a far and away more talented and more important player in the league, is being tossed aside.

What I don’t think is wise, even if legal and within the leagues’ or teams’ rights to freedom of speech, is:

1. a wholesale embrace of the organization Black Lives Matter, which is about many things other than Black lives, nearly all of them dangerous to the social fabric, including promoting abortion, “queer affirming” lifestyles, destruction of the family structure, dismantling of the current political system, even attacking Christianity. 

The danger for the leagues is viewers who disagree with this ideology may choose to skip television coverage, much less paying exorbitant ticket prices, to see professional sports.

2. the sudden not-thoroughly-considered groveling to the new woke doctrine that brooks no disagreement, then pushing it on their viewers. There is racism, and there are incidents of police brutality, but the level of purge this movement has attracted is not warranted by reality. Check the evidence. 

Plus, the primary leadership of the movement can in no way be compared to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. That movement sought to achieve liberty and justice for all including Black people. Many within the Black Lives Matter movement today are working to destroy the system, the country, the values that make America and made America a land of opportunity, including for all races and ethnicities.

The danger for the leagues is that viewers will vote with their feet and walk away from the political propaganda.

I hope the politicization of professional sports tops out, but I am not optimistic. Right now, every professional sports league is trying to outdo the other one in its we-are-more-woke-than-thou. So they aren’t selling competition. They’re selling their version of social justice. I can watch that on cable news.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2020    

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.    

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 15 November 2017

“Never talk about religion and politics in polite company.” So goes the old adage.  Now we could add, “Or sports, protest, and patriotism.”

We used to play flag football. Now its flag and football. 

If you want to launch a debate, or pick a fight, just weigh in on news stories reporting NFL players kneeling or sitting during the playing of the national anthem prior to a football game. Guaranteed you’ll get a rousing response, because feelings on all sides of this now multi-faceted issue are right on the surface.

Background

August 2016, then NFL San Francisco 49ers quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, refused to stand during the playing of “The Star-Spangled Banner” for an NFL preseason game. In an interview with NFL Media after the game he said, “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color…To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder."

Later, according to NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport, the NFL released a statement saying, “Players are encouraged but not required to stand during the playing of the national anthem." (The NBA has a clear, must-stand policy.)

Periodically during the 2016 NFL season, various players around the league emulated Kaepernick’s actions, but the reasons behind their protest began to broaden. Given the limited number of players involved, the protest may have been dying out, or at least was getting to a point it attracted minimal attention.

Then September 22, 2017, at a Huntsville, Alabama rally President Donald Trump called for owners to fire protesting players refusing to stand for the national anthem and encouraged fans to walk out on games when players protested. He also ridiculed the NFL for safety concerns regarding CTE, charged the game was being ruined by tighter safety rules, and used profane language to reference players.

This vigorous challenge by the President galvanized players, coaches, and staff across the NFL such that September 24, 2017, protests occurred throughout the league at virtually every game with more than 200 players sitting or kneeling during the national anthem. Some protests included owners and some locked arms or raised fists, while other players stood at attention.

Since this time, President Trump has periodically continued his push back on the NFL players and many fans nationwide have interpreted the players’ protests as disrespectful to the flag, dishonoring to veterans, police, and first responders, evidence of rich “whiny millionaires,” or “spoiled,” “entitled,” ungrateful athletes who are biting the hand that feeds them.

At the same time, the original meaning of protests—police brutality, killing of young black men by police, racial justice, or racism in general—have been rejected or set aside by many fans, NFL owners, and some coaches. And in much media, a focus on the original meaning of the protests has morphed from police brutality and racism to disrespect for the flag, police, and veterans.

Protesting players and those who support them have argued this is a First Amendment issue, that professional football players have the right to express themselves as much as any other American citizen. But a counter argument has been made saying professional football players on a field of play are “at work” so when they interject political protest “on the job,” whether during the national anthem or otherwise, they are in violation of common workplace expectations and policies that one should express one’s politics outside of the workplace.

Television networks have begun to skip coverage of the national anthem. October 17, 2017, the NFL owners and Commissioner met with players and the NFL Players Association Executive Director to discuss the matter and rumors suggested the NFL considered changing its policy regarding what is expected of players during the playing of the national anthem. But to date, no rule change has been enacted.

Protest Effectiveness

If the measure of the effectiveness of a political protest is the amount of attention it garners, then by any standard, Kaepernick and subsequent players’ protests have been eminently successful. You’d have to have been on Mars for the past few months to not know something about players taking a knee during the national anthem.

If the measure of effectiveness of a political protest is the number of people you recruit to supporting your cause, then Kaepernick and other players’ protests have been an abject failure, because NFL game attendances have plummeted, notables (nearly all White) are on record saying they will never watch another NFL game, and more importantly, the original intent of the protests have been wholly overwhelmed and displaced by patriotic concerns for the symbolism of the flag, i.e. few people are talking about police brutality or racism.

Other than earning its own Wikipedia page, perhaps the jury is still out on the ultimate effectiveness of this protest. But more than a year in, the controversy has not gone away and is not likely to do so anytime soon. One reason is that this protest and reaction gets to core matters in the American political culture—race relations, criminal justice, professional sports, and patriotism.

Everyone has an opinion, which may be good. What’s not so good is that the hyper-sensitive nature of race and patriotism writ large in the optics of a national anthem protest lead much of the public and/or media response to gloss over a number of critical considerations.

Considerations

• Until 2009, professional football teams stayed in the locker room to conserve game preparation time, so lining up for the national anthem is a relatively recent phenomenon in the NFL, one that started as much for the perceived profitable optics as any zeal for patriotism.
• While the US Code calls for standing during playing of the national anthem this has never been enforced or considered a legal matter, so NFL players are not breaking the law when “not standing.”
• As noted earlier, the NFL does not require players to stand during the national anthem, so players opting to kneel or sit during the national anthem are not in violation of league policy.
• While a symbol vested with enormous emotional sentiment based upon a history of sacrifice and patriotism, the US flag is not sacred and thus protected from all desecration, including burning, stomping, wearing as clothing, etc., so the public’s veneration of the flag, while understandable and admirable, is not a legal or moral requirement of any citizen.
• The First Amendment restricts government’s intervention upon citizen expression, but one’s freedom to speak or otherwise express oneself is not unlimited or apply to every life circumstance and an entire body of case law interprets this, plus, there is no absolute right to freedom of speech in the workplace.
• Members of the public who consider it disrespectful to the flag and offensive when people do not stand for the national anthem and in turn call for players or others to be required to stand for the national anthem may have forgotten that the US has experienced similar dilemmas before, for example, no one can be forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance.
• Colin Kaepernick may have been a poor spokesperson, given his penchant for wearing socks with police officers depicted as pigs and his negative comments not about issues per se but about the United States, but of course this is a subjective observation and whatever one thinks of Kaepernick, he is an American citizen with every right to express himself.
• President Trump may be speaking for the feelings of many citizens regarding the form of the protest, but when he called players, in general, “S.O.B.s,” and attacked the NFL’s slow but progressing uptake on legitimate safety issues, he seemed to be baiting people more than making substantive comments.

Observations

The NFL players’ national anthem protests, and President Trump’s later and continuing follow-up, have produced considerable heat but not much light on the issues involved.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is that opposing sides do not seem to be listening to each other. This is apparent in the virtual absence of any discussion of race relations or police practices, a wholesale media focus on the flag and the national anthem, and except for one NFL owners/players meeting, only limited attempts to discuss what prompted this protest and what, if anything, can and should be done about the issues involved. The focus of national dissension or discussion re the protests is not really about race and justice but about patriotism. This said, there is some response among leading players and at the team and city level where players are working together with police and others to find ways to serve their communities.

Another disheartening outcome of this controversy is the incredible fan and public reaction that, if taken at face value, willingly recommends silencing players’ freedom of speech or forcing players, via some corporate or legal coercion, to stand for the national anthem, or otherwise demanding compliance with what’s considered the appropriate action. The patriotic sentiment involved is understandable, but players have repeatedly said they are not aiming their concerns at the military.

Where the public’s reaction possibly would make sense is if the NFL actually had a policy on standing for the anthem, or if the league would make clear to players that what they do on the field is part of their workplace and employee relationship.  To date, the NFL has not done this and seems to not be sure what to do next to get itself out of a P.R. debacle. So one wonders if the issue is more the stumbling way the NFL has handled this protest than it is players’ freedom of speech, or even the nature or time of the protest.

Lastly, there are the national anthem and flag themselves. Aside from what the protests represent, the fact that players chose to express their views during the national anthem was a huge misstep in Kaepernick’s or later players’ strategy. It backfired on them miserably and would have done so without President Trump’s ill-conceived and needless intervention. If indeed some players wish to encourage serious discussion about race relations, police practices, and criminal justice in general, they would be well-served to find a way to express these views in a manner that does not appear to be undermining the free country in which they live. 

Some would reject this comment out of hand, even calling it racist because perhaps it is not sensitive enough to African Americans’ concerns. But this is not the point here. Martin Luther King Jr’s approach during the Civil Rights Movement was not to attack or dismiss the country in which he lived (which a small number of players have done but by all means not most) but to point to its unrealized ideals in the lives of Black citizens. He called people to a higher account. He did not tear down; he built up. He did not want to silence those who disagreed with him; he wanted to hear from those he represented, to give them a voice in the public space. This is a lesson Colin Kaepernick, and it appears many in the general public, missed.

Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2017    

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.