You and Recovering Journalist are saying basically the same thing, so I'll address both here. No, the flag doesn't have to "earn" your respect. The executors do. If the law is fair but the enforcer of the law isn't, do you protest the law or the enforcer?

Basic logic.

Yes, the flag represents the ideal. In my analogy, that was "the law." If you agree the ideal is correct, and the flag represents the ideal, why not stand for it?

Of course there are bad laws, and of course there are instances of bad execution. That shouldn't change our allegiance to the ideal.

So you're saying the flag represents different things to different people?

The players kneeling are protesting racism/the lack of equality... But that doesn't mean equality is the only thing the flag stands for.

You're complaining about "the right" making the flag all about one thing but then saying it's OK for the players protesting to disregard what the flag means to other people and focus solely on their cause.

More flawed logic.

And part of what you should love about this country is the freedom of people to react, in whatever way they please, to protests.

Do you ever bring anything meaningful to the conversation other than your cutting biting know everything comments?

Again, we've already established that it's your right to react the way you have. I've been very clear about that. You have every right to react that way.

I just think it's harmful and inconsistent with the ideals you are clearly an ardent supporter of, and am trying to point that out. I would hope that we, as Americans, would be capable of putting the value and importance of the first amendment over our own anger. I don't discount your right to feel what you're feeling, I just think that as an American citizen we all have the obligation to prioritize the first amendment over our feelings. Especially in this case where the infraction seems so, I dunno, minor? I mean, I've gone to plenty of NFL games in my day, and when the national anthem's playing people still walk around the concourse, buy beer, talk, yell, use the silence to make asinine comments, etc. I have a hard time getting worked up over somebody silently sitting.

And I also think, in this particular case, the issues that players are trying to spark a national dialogue about are important enough that they merit that.

I'm standing. Because I don't think it's my place to make this particular statement, nor do I think I have an audience that would magnify it in any meaningful way if I did.

Kneeling itself is not the most meaningful way I can show support for the protesters.

As some of you know, my youngest daughter married an African American. Over the last few years, I've become very close to my daughter's father-in-law. I recently asked him his feelings about the NFL protests, here was his response:

"I believe in protest, so long as it is peaceful. It is not a legal requirement that you stand for the Anthem. I consider myself a 'patriot.' I fought in Vietnam for the flag. I also have been subjected to the uneven justice and protection under the law that we hear so much about. Until . . .[the] President made his statement, I would stand for the anthem. Now I feel more solidarity with the kneelers than the standers."

I'm sure we will have some additional give and take on this issue. He and I are not in the same place on this issue. But, we respect each other, and we listen to each other. We also both realize that we are in favor of the same goal -- color-blind justice and color-blind law enforcement.

I just wish that all of our debate and discussion on controversial issues could be done in a respectful manner. My daughter's father-in-law and I often have discussions of racial and other tough issues over frosty mugs of beer. Now, beer diplomacy, that's something that all BAers should be able to agree on!

I did make it clear that they have the freedom to do as they choose. I laid it out pretty clearly in my response to The Optimist. I'd quote it here, but I was an asshole to him and don't want to be an asshole to you. He deserves that tone because he's here merely to be antagonistic, so if you want to go back and read it feel free, just do your best to parse the premise from condescending tone. That was specifically for my old friend The Optimist.

To summarize: I do get it's the right of Patriot's fans to protest the protests. I just find it narrow-minded, and frankly, damaging. We should, as a country, be pushing against the preponderance of "outrage culture." The angry response, in this particular case, is one that's purely emotional. There's a sense of outrage that the protesters are disrespecting veterans, and that sense persists regardless of how many times the players say otherwise, and regardless of how many veterans speak up to say there's no need to be outraged on their behalf.

So yes, they have the freedom to react anyway they choose. But I think our country needs -- and is terribly lacking -- self-analysis and introspection. Rather than just jumping from culture war battle to culture war battle, and wielding our outrage as a weapon directed at the other side, we should make an honest effort to hear each other.

Which brings me back to my main point in all of this: these protests are protected by the Constitution. You don't have to agree with them, you can even counter-protest them. That's your right. But ultimately, the purpose of these counter protests is to ensure that an individual is punished for exercising a constitutionally protected right. And I find that troubling, and will continue to be critical of that behavior. I can accept that it's their right, while disagreeing with their reasoning and end-goals. They are pushing to punish a fellow American citizens for speaking freely. It's their right to do it, but I choose to side with the constitution here. Personally, I think that's what a patriot should do in this case. Soldiers swear an oath to protect the constitution, after all. Is it more disrespectful to their sacrifice to kneel quietly in front of the flag in a call for equality, or to push against the First Amendment (whether that's the intention or not -- that's what they're doing) because they're upset? I know my answer.

And I can understand how some might find that inconsistent. After all, may on the right merely disagree with Kaepernick's methodology. So what's so different about my stance on the counter-protesters?

The difference is the goal. I find it deeply troubling that counter-protesters are doing what they can to push the NFL to punish somebody for speech. It's doubly troubling that the call to do so was led by the head of state. The right rightly pushes back about PC culture, and the 'intolerant left' getting people fired and ridiculed for speech that's not PC. And then they turn around and do the same here and they do so with the government's blessing. We need less of that, not more, and the notion that the leader of our country is pushing for this is disgusting. It is in direct opposition to the First Amendment and I'm shocked by how little conservatives seem to care about that right now.

Meanwhile, the NFL players are trying to spur a conversation that everybody seems to agree is merited and necessary. The difference seems clear to me, and I'm honestly not at all sure why my stance is so controversial.

Yeah, I think that's a really good point and probably has a significant impact on the reaction.

The only fans I see getting angry are white fans. I wonder if white players and primarily quarterbacks started taking a knee. I don't think we'd see nearly the ruckus we are now experiencing. For some, this is an easy way in a group environment to express racist beliefs. I said, for some.