Kaepernic's Argument Against Racism In Sports
Martin Luther King was assanated for his numerous actions for equallity, Mohamad Ali was banned from boxing for his stand against the Vietnam War, and now San Fransico 49ers quaterback Colin Kaepernic is being creully punished and denounced by the public for his peaceful and utterly harmless protest against racism in America. Colin Kaepernic and all other althletes and celebraties should be able to use their fame to promote positive ideals because they would act as good role models, they would be happier if they were able to speak their mind, and sports would not suffer at all. First of all, we adress the fact that racism is undisputley a problem in America, and actions need to be taken, such as letting athletes encouge their audience to fight for equality. Sports are watched by a wide varitey of people, from young to old, and if veiwers saw their favorite sports stars speaking out against racism, it would make them far more likley to not be racist themselves. It's important to realize that the opinion of Kaepernic was not a political one, nor one ushering others to do
…show more content…
morally questionable things. Racism is bad. Refusing to let a quaterback tell his fans not to be racist is on the same level as refusing him the right to tell his fans not to do drugs or not to murder people.
Secondly, free speech is a right of all American citizens.
It's true that sports programs aren't meant to be used as forums, but really, is saying something on television any worse than staging a protest in a public space or placing a poster in your local coffee shop? Also, once again, saying that Americans should strive to not be racist isn't swaying anyone to do anything remotley bad. Imagine you see the players and the end of a football game on television, and while an interviewer is talking to a quaterback, the quaterback looks at the camera and says "Don't do drugs". It may be a cheesey thing to say, but the only countries where a someone could get legitamatley punished for saying that on a television program are North Karea and Nazi Germany, so why should it be cosidered fair to act like Colin Kaepernick did somehing wrong when he promoted doing something equally objectivley
good.
Finally, we should adress the fact that most arguments against Kaepernick are simply and utterly absolutley false. One of the most common, I kid you not, is that, while athletes protests may seem docile at first, they will grow into violent ones. To anyone who has recieved any education ever, this is obiously a classic example of a slipery slope argument that is far from valid. Others claim that Colin Kaepernick interuppted the ball game, but how can that be true if his silent, non-violent, non-active protest caused a delay of literally no seconds, and was staged far before the game anyway? Simply put, the only reason anyone would care if a football player did not stand for the national anthem for the sake of instilling equality is if they themsleves are racist.
From youths to seniors, a huge amount of people could be changed for the better by athletes speaking their mind. There's no reason the right to free speech should be striped from someone simply because they are on TV. The only people who hate what Kaepernick did hate it because they hate minorities equally. If Colin Kaepernick wants to kneal, than he should by all means be able to kneal, darn it!
morally questionable things. Racism is bad. Refusing to let a quaterback tell his fans not to be racist is on the same level as refusing him the right to tell his fans not to do drugs or not to murder people.
Secondly, free speech is a right of all American citizens.
It's true that sports programs aren't meant to be used as forums, but really, is saying something on television any worse than staging a protest in a public space or placing a poster in your local coffee shop? Also, once again, saying that Americans should strive to not be racist isn't swaying anyone to do anything remotley bad. Imagine you see the players and the end of a football game on television, and while an interviewer is talking to a quaterback, the quaterback looks at the camera and says "Don't do drugs". It may be a cheesey thing to say, but the only countries where a someone could get legitamatley punished for saying that on a television program are North Karea and Nazi Germany, so why should it be cosidered fair to act like Colin Kaepernick did somehing wrong when he promoted doing something equally objectivley
good.
Finally, we should adress the fact that most arguments against Kaepernick are simply and utterly absolutley false. One of the most common, I kid you not, is that, while athletes protests may seem docile at first, they will grow into violent ones. To anyone who has recieved any education ever, this is obiously a classic example of a slipery slope argument that is far from valid. Others claim that Colin Kaepernick interuppted the ball game, but how can that be true if his silent, non-violent, non-active protest caused a delay of literally no seconds, and was staged far before the game anyway? Simply put, the only reason anyone would care if a football player did not stand for the national anthem for the sake of instilling equality is if they themsleves are racist.
From youths to seniors, a huge amount of people could be changed for the better by athletes speaking their mind. There's no reason the right to free speech should be striped from someone simply because they are on TV. The only people who hate what Kaepernick did hate it because they hate minorities equally. If Colin Kaepernick wants to kneal, than he should by all means be able to kneal, darn it!