What we need is a test case, and I think I’ve found a good one:

In a few weeks, when all the teams are forced to wear pink in support of breast cancer awareness, I want one player to stand up and refuse to wear pink because he says he can’t support breast cancer awareness because those organizations behind the awareness campaign suppress the scientific studies that link abortions to breast cancer.

The player could stand up and publicly say: “I support TRUE breast cancer awareness, and not telling women that abortions may lead to an increased risk is not helping women at all”

I’d LOVE to see that. It would be a hoot. Oh, and best of all, it would tell us where the NFL really stood on the free speech issue.

A+

Protip: Goodell fining a player for criticizing an official has nothing to do with “freedom of speech.”

If you didn’t already know that, then you don’t know enough about “freedom of speech” to ever invoke it. Just shaddup. And no, me telling you to shaddup is not a violation of your freedom of speech, either.

Tell that to all the pantywaists getting sandy crotches because some people dared to say they would no longer go to Chick Fil A. “OH NOES, the libruls are doing the same thing we said we’d do when we suggested boycotts of them queer lovin’ Oreo cookies!!”

When I see people like Chris Kluwe get attacked for what he said, all while his teammate Big Sack Mullet can run his mouth all he wants and get cheered, it only makes you look stupider.

Then again, you are the types who want to silence people like George Clooney and those who support the Democrats, claiming that all celebrities are idiots, then you go and put senile Dirty Harry on national television to make your campaign look even more haphazard and ridiculous.

No matter your opinion on whether goodell fining his players is fair, lets not lump him fining players for complaints about the refs and him allowing the players to speak openly about their political and religious beliefs like they are the same thing

Politically incorrect speech = fines

Lost in all this is that Rev Burns was speaking up for his constituents. They are low income African-Americans whose voices are not usually heard in the media. In fact, because the media consensus is pro gay marriage, they are in effect being told to shut up.

I don’t know if it’s true, the legendary Packer players sometimes embelish stories a bit, but supposedly Lombardi told his players that his team had a no-bigotry policy. He specifically told players there would be no tolerance for harassment based on skin color, no tolerance for
harassment of the gay players. (I think it was Fuzzy Thurston who talked about this)

As for the people saying Rush is a victim (ha!), Goodell wasn’t the only one who didn’t want Rush to be one of the NFL owners. Most of the other owners also felt that way. And it wasn’t because Rush is a right-winger. Virtually all of the owners are right-wingers. Follow the money and that will tell you their politics.

What Rush does (speaking hatefully to provoke reactions) is good for ratings for his syndicated radio show, but is bad for a national brand appealing to a broad audience (like the NFL). From a business perspective, Rush alienating fans provides zero benefit to the NFL brand. Being associated with Rush’s hate speech would have been bad for business.

As for Tebow and Christian players being victims … really? Are you kidding me? We see prayer circles on the field all the time. If you drank a shot every time a player prays in an NFL game, you wouldn’t make it to the 4th quarter.

(i.e. if it bends lefty and supports the Owebama Regime and or that agenda, if it’s PC, then it’s all A-Okay…but otherwise, it’s fair game for mockery, ridicule, condescension, or censoring)

What we need is a test case, and I think I’ve found a good one:

In a few weeks, when all the teams are forced to wear pink in support of breast cancer awareness, I want one player to stand up and refuse to wear pink because he says he can’t support breast cancer awareness because those organizations behind the awareness campaign suppress the scientific studies that link abortions to breast cancer.

The player could stand up and publicly say: “I support TRUE breast cancer awareness, and not telling women that abortions may lead to an increased risk is not helping women at all”

I’d LOVE to see that. It would be a hoot. Oh, and best of all, it would tell us where the NFL really stood on the free speech issue.

Goodell doesn’t have reasons for what he does, he has motives.

For your information, Roger Goodell is a Republican. While I disagree with his hardline stance against the players union last year (he was more of a cheerleader for the owners than an independent voice for the NFL) and his similar stance against the unionized officials this year, I will applaud him on this. Players should be allowed to state their political views without fear of reprisal – regardless of what those political views are.

For the record, I am a liberal Democrat, and a proud one at that. And, while I think that Paul Tagliabue was a far better Commissioner than Goodell, I respect his defense of free political speech, regardless of whether that political speech is liberal, moderate, conservative, or libertarian.

For 3+ hours on a given day, I can forget about bills, health, politics, wars, nagging girlfriend etc. I want to act irrational, engage in silly stupid superstitious rituals, have a drink or three, enjoy the company of friends, and yell at inanimate objects WITHOUT some athlete or team representative telling me what their political views are.

The pure beauty of sports can only TRULY be observed, enjoyed, and celebrated in the absence of all politics.

I think you are correct. Political speech is welcome only if it fits the politically correct profile. In today’s society, anything not politically correct is insensitive and biased (and often considered racist). To the point that someone made about Tebow not being muzzled, he was simply expressing his faith. That is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Too many people improperly think that religious expression equals political viewpoint.

What’s that? No one did anything to them? Right.

While I guarantee you that many a fan don’t like Tebow’s “aww shucks” evangelism, I have yet to see any fans, much less this league, propose that his right to speak his mind and heart be violated.

Countdown to deletion of this post: 3, 2, 1….

The difference between Democracy and Republic:
Democracy and Republic are two forms of government which are distinguished by their treatment of the Minority, and the Individual, by the Majority.

In a Democracy aka “mob rule”, the Majority has unlimited power over the Minority. This system of government does not provide a legal safeguard of the rights of the Individual and the Minority. It has been referred to as “Majority over Man”.

In a Republic, the Majority is Limited and constrained by a written Constitution which protects the rights of the Individual and the Minority. The purpose of a Republic form of government is to control the Majority and to protect the God-given, inalienable rights and liberty of the Individual.

I just hope that no player or NFL execs keep any conservative players from voicing their political opinion. I say this b/c 75% of the player are black and are probably democrats and would label as a “racist” any conservative player who dares to speak his mind.

Then it will be “open your wallet”….

This guy has no clue what “freedom of speech” means….

Who could possibly have their finger on the pulse of America more than Maurice Jones-Drew?