What beautiful lyrics. What an amazing performance (not that I watched the ball game.)
(NOTE: I had put Ms Sheryl Lee Ralph's video here but apparently, the NFL is blocking it from being shared. Here's another great performance.)
Lift every voice and sing
Till earth and heaven ring,
Ring with the harmonies of Liberty;
Let our rejoicing rise
High as the listening skies,
Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.
Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us,
Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us,
Facing the rising sun of our new day begun
Let us march on till victory is won.
That some people are protesting that this song was sun is just another sign of brutalizing white fragility and their irrational fear of "being replaced." It would be sad if it weren't so dangerous.
I see white people saying things like, "Why do we need another anthem? Why one specifically for black people??" Not understanding that Lift Every Voice is not "just for black people." It's there in the title: Lift EVERY Voice and sing... we all who care about freedom and justice and human rights can join along.
And some of the same people who criticize black football players for not standing for the national anthem are also the ones who'd refuse to stand for this. I guess it's not harmful or disrespectful if it's white people refusing to stand.
Also, along those lines, when folks like me (anabaptist-ish and otherwise) don't stand for the national anthem or the pledge of allegiance, it's for reasons of religious liberty and opposition to war and the fetishizing of the flag, which the anthem glorifies. When the football players and others took a knee, they GAVE the reason for the protest - protesting the history of black oppression by white police officers. Now, whether or not you agree with us, we have a reasonable, respectful, conscience-based reason for not standing.
But for white folks who refuse to stand or otherwise mock Lift Every Voice (shame on them), what are they protesting? That they don't like the reference to a "black national anthem..."? Where is the moral grounding for that?
More about the brothers who wrote this soaring anthem:
https://naacp.org/find-resources/history-explained/lift-every-voice-and-sing
Saturday, February 18, 2023
Lift Every Voice and Sing
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
40 comments:
Marshal said (in a now-deleted comment, deleted because of hateful attacks against innocent people)...
It's a sign of protest against the notion there should be separate "national anthems" for segments of the American population, rather than the uniting influence of a single anthem for the entire American population.
Who says "THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE NATIONAL ANTHEM?"
Who says that emotionally fragile white folks like you are the ones who get to decide which is "THE ONE APPROVED ANTHEM..."?
Who says that this song is not a uniting influence? It speaks to great humanitarian and Christian and Jewish, etc themes, ideals like fighting against injustice and coming together in one voice in unity?
I mean, it IS true that it's not inclusive of racists or oppressors, but that's only as it should be, right?
Answer to all? No one. You are not in charge of national anthems.
Reminder: Hateful, racist and racist-adjacent attack comments lacking support and respect will not be left on my blog.
Marshal said, in a now deleted comment, that he hasn't been disrespectful or failed to support his comments or racist or racist-adjacent and then, he was disrespectful. In another example of this in a now-deleted comment, he responded to my reasonable question of "who says there can only be one anthem?" by saying...
You pose it because you favor the "black national anthem" as equal to the National Anthem of the United States of America, because you're a race-hustling, white-guilted moron.
In other words, he didn't answer my question or support his answer. He just responded with a rude and unsupported attack claim.
He continued this line of rude, unsupported and borderline racist nonsense by saying...
If we were to change our Anthem, or add to it another, rational people would expect some sort of vote on it by the people of the United States.
And...
I oppose the racist, race-hustling reasoning behind its imposition on a fan base given no vote on its presentation as an equal to the National Anthem.
And...
The imposition of this song is divisive, not the song itself.
Um, these are SONGS. We the people never "voted on" the national anthem (although Congress did recognize it as such), but anthems don't need to be voted upon. People can like them or not. The question then is WHY are you so hostile towards this song and rudely oppositional to it if NOT for reasons of racism/hostility towards black people and their allies who love the song?
And how was the song "imposed..."? Because the NFL (in this case) decided to use it along with the national anthem? But are the NFL and its supporters not part of the free republic for which that flag allegedly stands? Can't they freely choose to use it? HOW is that an "imposition..." and why are white folks you reacting so emotionally over-the-top about it?
If you don't like it, you can just shut up and let other people enjoy it. There's no "race-hustling" (the charge itself is borderline racist and a dog whistle emotionally fragile white people have used for decades) in recognizing its value.
Thou doth protest too much. It just underscores my point. Let your emotional irrationality and white fragility go, Marshal. Or at least, don't bring it here. It just won't fly.
Also, about the slavery-defender, Francis Scott Key, and the "national anthem," itself. I'll remind you of Key's third verse:
"No refuge could save the hireling & slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free & the home of the brave."
And more about the brutalist racists and oppressors who created and defended that "anthem..."
https://andscape.com/features/the-star-spangled-banners-racist-lyrics-reflect-its-slaveowner-author-francis-scott-key/
https://www.change.org/p/the-congressional-black-caucus-change-america-s-national-anthem-from-the-star-spangled-banner-to-america-the-beautiful-a-civil-rights-issue
The things so many white conservatives choose to support and oppose is baffling.
Removing the vulgar and offensive and irrational and unsupported claims from a comment that Marshal made (now deleted) here is the meat of his comment, such as it is...
"My response to your childish question regarding "who says there can only be one anthem" was spot on and beyond your ability to counter it. And of course, you do nothing to support the implicit claim that there CAN be more than one anthem...which is an absurd notion to say the least! How about a dozen, Danny-boy? Does that really make sense even to you? (not a rhetorical question, because you never make sense)
"We the people never "voted on" the national anthem (although Congress did recognize it as such), but anthems don't need to be voted upon."
While it had its detractors, the anthem was widely supported at the time of it becoming our National Anthem, and long before. In the early 1930's when Congress passed the act, there were around 75-77million adults in the United States, with the vast majority regarding the song in the most patriotic way. In 1930, 5 million members of the VFW signed a petition seeking passage of a bill recognizing the song as our Anthem. It was the reverence and support of the song by Americans which led to being made our Anthem by Congress. So yeah...you could say that Americans "voted" for it, despite no referendum on any ballot. Since then, and pretty much up until ****** Colin Kaepernick chose to display such disrespect for it, the flag and our country to protest a fiction, Americans regarded it as nearly sacrosanct, standing, removing hats and placing hand over heart in sincere displays of patriotism and love of country.
"The question then is WHY are you so hostile towards this song and rudely oppositional to it if NOT for reasons of racism/hostility towards black people and their allies who love the song?"
I explained this and you're now lying in direct contradiction of my original comment attesting to the FACT I have no problem with the song itself *****. Lying directly and in the face of a fact presented directly to you..."
blah blah blah. Response momentarily...
Marshal...
you do nothing to support the implicit claim that there CAN be more than one anthem...which is an absurd notion to say the least!
An anthem is a particular type of song. Nothing more. OF COURSE, there can be more than one song or anthem.
Anthem: a rousing or uplifting song identified with a particular group, body, or cause.
Why CAN'T there be a black national anthem identified with the cause of justice for all, for unity, for coming together to oppose oppression?
You can't just make stuff up, Marshal. There IS NO RULE THAT SAYS THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE ANTHEM OR EVEN ONE NATIONAL ANTHEM. Period.
Now, the question is, can you acknowledge that reality and apologize for being an obtuse ass?
Answer that before you comment further.
Marshal is ignorant of the fact that many nations have changed anthems in order to update them.
The Canadian singer, July Black, at the NHL All Star game, just changed the wording of the Canadian National Anthem, singing “O Canada! Our home on native land” instead of “Our home and native land.”
Now there is a swell of public support for changing it.
Australia went with what Marshal calls the race hustlers… otherwise known as The Just by moral people.
January 2021: “Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced last week that the country's national anthem, "Advance Australia Fair," has been changed slightly in order to be more inclusive of Australia's Indigenous communities. The song's first line which goes, "Australians all let us rejoice, for we are young and free," has been changed to, "Australians all let us rejoice, for we are one and free." This small change acknowledges the country's ancient past, before colonization by the British in 1788.”
Canada went with what we must assume Marshal calls the vagina hustlers - otherwise know as The Fair by moral people.
“The final modification to the anthem occurred in 2018 when the line: ‘True patriot love in all thy sons command’ was changed to :
‘True patriot love in all of us command.’ The line was changed to make the anthem gender neutral which Weir's version had originally been.”
Uh oh. Somebody DID have two anthems!
“Before the end of apartheid in 1994, South Africa also had two, racially divded national anthems. In 1997 President Nelson Mandela then decided to blend the two songs “Die Stem” and “God Bless Africa '' together, incorporating lyrics from each. The anthem now has five languages in it, starting with Xhosa, Zulu, Sesotho, Afrikaan and finishing in English.”
Apart from this, Marshal would have love apartheid. He’s that kind of guy.
First of all, Marshal, I've saved all your comments from today - the ones that were deleted due to your vulgar attacks and hostility and lack of respect and your refusal to support your nonsense claims. Using abusive language referring to men's genitals or women's genitals may be fine in the middle school crowd you must circulate in, but amongst rational adults, they just don't fly. That's just the way it is.
I'll deal with any points you made or tried to make as I have time, but your task is quite simple. IF you want to comment here, you MUST answer this question:
There IS NO RULE THAT SAYS THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE ANTHEM OR EVEN ONE NATIONAL ANTHEM. Period.
Now, the question is, can you acknowledge that reality and apologize for being an obtuse ass?
We can move forward but ONLY if you can recognize the reality that there is nothing in all the whole wide world of rational adults that says "There can ONLY BE ONE 'national anthem...'" That is a "rule" YOU made up, just pulling it out of thin air. As Feodor has demonstrated definitively and rationally.
If you are SO delusional that you think it's okay to say, "No! Nononononononono NOOO! There can ONLY BE ONE national anthem! I Pharisee Marshal have SPOKEN. You MUST SUBMIT!" well, that's delusional, not the reality in the real world.
Answer or move on.
Marshal...
You want to dictate to us what we must accept...
Says the guy who wants to dictate that there MUST ONLY be one national anthem, that the NFL and anyone else who wants to use other or another anthem MUST bow to your childish demands.
Grow up.
Marshal...
You don't care about what most Americans want.
Says the guy (and others like you) who doesn't care about what some large portion of American citizens want. You want to tell us what anthem we prefer, you don't care about our opinions, you have decided that only what white jerks like you childishly demand.
Right now, in Kentucky, the conservatives are not caring that many families and citizens WANT LGBTQ stories in our schools, want LGBTQ folks to have rights, that we WANT women to have the freedom to make decisions about their pregnancies... the GOP doesn't give a damn about ANY of those women, LGBTQ, liberal, people of color, young people and others want. They are literally trying to dictate by law that only THEIR old white male choices are respected.
You have no credibility on this. You all don't want large, top-down decisions made... you say you want "local control..." but then, ONLY want "local control" when it's at the state-level where there are more conservative representatives, but not the "local control" of cities or individual citizens deciding for themselves who they marry, what they read, what medical choices they make.
You're hypocrites and it's obvious to all.
It's not a matter of what song is chosen, but the intention behind it. You want to pretend it's about something noble.
I repeat:
"Lift every voice and sing
Till earth and heaven ring,
Ring with the harmonies of Liberty;
Let our rejoicing rise
High as the listening skies,
Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.
Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us,
Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us,
Facing the rising sun of our new day begun
Let us march on till victory is won."
That IS noble. The words are noble words about a noble fight for justice that is for ALL people, regardless of race or nationality. Defending that song against racists (who clearly don't like anything called "the black national anthem") and their allies IS noble.
Marshal...
I insist multiple NATIONAL anthems are divisive, because unless there is some means by which all Americans can weigh in, that's all it can ever be.
What a small-minded, petty, hateful little world you live in. Feodor is right, you'd love apartheid. Letting the minority create rules that they foist and enforce upon the majority and doing so for such petty little reasons, "THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE! I DECLARE IT TO BE! LISSEN TO MEEEEEEE!!!"
Grow up.
Marshal...
I insist multiple NATIONAL anthems are divisive, because unless there is some means by which all Americans can weigh in, that's all it can ever be.
How about, US citizens can "weigh in" by having their own opinion? And that's OK??!
By having a live and let live attitude. "Oh, he likes the Star Spangled Banner and she likes America the Beautiful and considers it her national anthem and they like Lift Every Voice and Sing... Well, fine, that's okay with me..."
Why get all emotional and possessive of that which is not yours to decide (ie, other people's opinions)?
Do you see how fascist-wannabe that appears, when you disagree with people daring to disagree with your little opinion and daring to have their OWN opinion?
Marshal...
an invention of great deceit by race-hustlers and the truly fragile white-guilt lefties
You object when I note that you are using abusive terms often used by racists to attack black people and their allies fighting for justice. "Race-hustlers" itself is a term used almost exclusively by old white conservatives to demean black people and their allies when they are fighting for justice in a way that these white conservatives don't approve of.
Here's the thing: We don't need your approval, you aren't no one's "massa." So just quit using that term, it WILL NOT appear here.
And the white guilt thing is, likewise, nonsense. When have I EVER suggested I or white people in general should feel guilt for anything? My ancestors owned slaves. That was HORRIBLE and oppressive. Do I feel guilt for something that I didn't do or support? Of course not.
Do I recognize the reality of measurable privilege I and other white people enjoy as a result of the very real oppression and racism towards black folks over the last 400 years? Yes, but that has nothing to do with guilt. It's measurable. It's demonstrable.
Recognizing the reality of racism, the benefits that white people still enjoy from the years of slavery and overt racism and the harm that black people still suffer from the same is just recognizing reality.
I and others rightly use the term "white fragility" to talk about those white folks who don't want to even acknowledge the reality of the demonstrable privileges we have benefited from over the years. It's like when you hear they're teaching about the reality of slavery and racism in school... you all can't abide it. You try to block it and ban it, not allow books or discussion of it in the classroom. And not just for your own children (as in, "I'd rather my children not read these books or take that class...") but as in banning and forcing your white cis-gender demands on others.
You have the right to make your own decisions, but NOT to force it on others. That is what we mean by white fragility, at least in part. It's a demonstrable phenomenon. This who "make america great again" nonsense is appealing to the fear and cowardice and fragility of white conservatives who fear that they no longer will be the dominant political force in this nation and that notion is SO appalling to you collectively that you gerrymander and try to discourage voting and otherwise enforce an increasingly minority view on the majority. THAT is white fragility.
If you're truly confident of your positions, rationally and respectfully make the case for them and IF and WHEN the majority disagrees with your opinions, then respect that and go on to try to improve your arguments. But DON'T use minority white rule gained by whatever means possible to force your demands on others.
Educate yourself. Improve yourself and your arguments and IF you are in the minority, then recognize that and respect the rights of others.
It is a frail, fragile, emotionally-fraught child who tries to bully and cry his way to get what he wants.
If you don't want to have others note your white fragility, stop acting in ways that say, "Boy, he's a fragile white conservative!"
Interestingly, while I'm absolutely certain that "race hustlers" is almost exclusively used by conservative whites to demean and attack black people and their allies, I can't find anything about its etymology or origin.
Feodor, is that anything you've read? Do you suspect I'm correct or mistaken?
https://www.learningforjustice.org/magazine/fall-2018/what-is-white-privilege-really
https://www.theroot.com/yes-you-can-measure-white-privilege-1794303451
https://www.american.edu/ocl/counseling/upload/understanding-white-privilege.pdf
Before “race baiting” became the phrase of choice, race hustler was used to smear Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
The American Enterprise Institute used it as recently as 2021.
https://www.aei.org/events/rescuing-american-history-from-revisionists-and-race-hustlers/
How far back it goes I don’t know.
Marshal, I've saved all of your comments (your MANY comments) and may post the non-vulgar, non-abusive, more-rational parts eventually. For now, a few quickies:
I had asked...
"Using abusive language referring to men's genitals or women's genitals..."
You responded with an abusive insult right away...
Where did I do that? You need to man up.
You ask questions and then answer them right away, albeit ignorantly. Suggesting that I need to "man up" is a sexist, offensive comment, as if being a "man" were a sign of strength or integrity. If you want to ask me to act like an adult, do that. "Man up" is an insult of the past. That's not the most vulgar comment, but it's an example of the sort of disrespectful, abusive sexism that WILL get your comments deleted.
Likewise, referring to men as a woman's body part is insulting and, frankly, incredibly childish. Or just using more vulgar references to men or women's body parts. Be an adult in your insults, if you're going to shoot for insulting. But given that you're already on a tight leash from your years of abusive and disrespectful and hostile language, just give up the insults and deal with the topics at hand and answer the questions put to you.
I've been abundantly patient with you and in fact, every single of your comments shows up here. Every single one. Now, with that said, IF they contain vulgar comments, they will likely be deleted. IF they contain sexist or racist-leaning attacks or words that are demeaning to LGBTQ folks, women or people of color, they will likely be deleted.
You know this. I've told you repeatedly. Nonetheless, I will often lift out the non-vulgar comments you make and post them back in the comment thread, with the vulgar, disrespectful, sexist and racist portions deleted. I do that so I can deal with your points, such as they are.
So, your much-whining about being deleted is something entirely within your control, not mine. You know my rules. Abide by them or be deleted.
You must answer the questions in bold below if you want to comment here now, Marshal. And just a pretty short direct response to these questions, not hundreds of words going on and on.
Now, to the question you needed to answer... I had said:
"IF you want to comment here, you MUST answer this question:
There IS NO RULE THAT SAYS THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE ANTHEM OR EVEN ONE NATIONAL ANTHEM. Period.
Now, the question is, can you acknowledge that reality and apologize for being an obtuse ass?"
And you responded immediately with a disrespectful insult:
Only an obtuse ass, who whines about disrespectful tones, would think that's an intelligent question that makes any difference to anything regardless of the answer.
Now, I'm going to walk you through WHY it's a reasonable question, given your comments.
1. You've said over and over, words like this:
We aren't talking about "anthems". We're talking about our National Anthem and whether or not those like the NFL are justified in imposing upon their fans an alternative to it prior to kickoff.
and...
Keep in mind also how few black people there are as a percentage of the American population, and that you can't provide any proof even a majority of that 13% support replacing the SSB with this other song.
To which I asked
"Who's to say we - the NFL, black people and their allies or ANYONE must accept one and only one national anthem?"
And I also note
"Who's talking about replacing the SSB with this other song?"
MY WORDS were live and let live.
Some folks like the SSB? Fine, let them enjoy it. In spite of the racist slave-owner who wrote it and the militaristic lyrics overtop an unsingable song, if some people like it, I'm not telling them they can't enjoy it.
And others like "My Country Tis of Thee..." and others like "Lift Every Voice" and others something else? FINE. Live and let live. I've never once complained about the SSB being played at sportsball games.
Do you acknowledge that reality?
Do you further acknowledge the ONLY one complaining about an anthem being sung at a sportsball game is YOU?
Cont'd...
I had asked my question and you responded (after the typical childish insults):
There is no written rule...no civil law...which prohibits the possibility of multiple National Anthems.
YES. You are correct thus far.
You continued...
And of course, the issue isn't one of "anthems", but of "National Anthems". A "National Anthem" is one which a nation's official song, played and/or sung on public occasions.
A nation's "official song" selected by a few white men long ago, and not in any democratic or actually official sense. It's just an honorary title to the song with no meaning other than that it's considered the honorary anthem and had been accepted by many people.
But, there is no requirement to use the SSB in ANY place, school, proceeding or grouping. If some people choose to do so, they can, but it's not like a requirement.
Do you agree and recognize that reality?
You continued:
John Lennon's "Imagine" has become an anthem for [*people who dare disagree with me, Marshal] all over the world. Some would dare propose it as a replacement for the Star Spangled Banner.
Those [*people who dare disagree with me, Marshal] look upon it with the same reverence you demand be shown for "Lift Every Voice And Sing". I like the latter song far more than the former, but
[**I, Marshal, in MY PERSONAL OPINION] do not want it to played as if equal to the SSB until such time as it is ordained our actual national anthem. It's that simple.
You are free to your personal opinion on that matter. But, and THIS is the important thing, it doesn't mean a damn thing what you do and don't want. That's only YOUR personal preference, not a law or rule, as you acknowledge. That you get your feelings hurt if someone considers something else equal to or better than SSB, but that doesn't mean we need to bow to your wishes to avoid hurting your fragile feelings.
People in a free nation can have their own personal opinions and that's okay.
Do you recognize and accept that reality?
People in a free nation do NOT need to bow to the personal opinions of someone else just to avoid hurting their feelings.
Do you recognize and accept that reality?
++++++
* Replaced disrespectful abusive words for people whom Marshal disagrees with
** Added a clarifying statement to make sure we're recognizing reality
So, given the reality that people in free nations can and should exercise their own opinions on all matter of issues, so long as they're not harming others;
And given that the "National Anthem" is only an honorific and there are no legal or societal requirements surrounding SSB that says other songs CAN'T be played at sports events or elsewhere;
And given the reality that YOUR words were saying that YOU (personally) didn't want other songs to be treated as an "equal" to the SSB, but that your personal opinion doesn't really need to matter to anyone else, including the NFL;
ALL of that explains why it is reasonable that I get you to admit that you're only expressing a personal preference and that your personal preference is not binding on anyone else, including the NFL.
And having admitted as much, then perhaps a better adult would admit that they were being disrespectful and belligerent over a personal opinion that doesn't need matter to anyone else and thus, apologize for getting so emotionally overwrought over nothing more than personal opinion... How about it?
Marshal...
I insist multiple NATIONAL anthems are divisive, because unless there is some means by which all Americans can weigh in, that's all it can ever be.
And you are free to be as irrational and self-centered as you like and hold this opinion of your own in your own head. But it's just a personal opinion not bound by any legal defense or much of a rational defense (other than, "well, it's what I think")...
Do you recognize that reality?
...and no one else is beholden to honor or recognize any validity to the opinion.
Do you recognize that reality?
Do you object to the notion that many/maybe most black people and their allies might appreciate having "Lift Every Voice" identified specifically as the Black National Anthem (given their real world history of oppression, a song that talks about justice instead of merely winning in war might be seen as something that better represents their values)?
If they do, do you have a problem with them holding that opinion?
If so, why should they care what you think?
Marshal...
I insist multiple NATIONAL anthems are divisive, because unless there is some means by which all Americans can weigh in, that's all it can ever be.
But all US citizens never "weighed in" on the SSB, so was it divisive for those white men who designated it a "national anthem" being divisive? Or is it okay, because they were white men with a more conservative tilt?
Marshal...
I insist multiple NATIONAL anthems are divisive, because unless there is some means by which all Americans can weigh in, that's all it can ever be.
Again, this is an unsupported and weightless opinion and let me demonstrate objectively how this is not at all necessarily the case.
In a live and let live/embrace grace world like what I aspire to, one person can like SSB, another LEVAS, another Imagine and so on... And that is FINE with me and folks like me. You like SSB and want to consider it your "national anthem..."? Fine. That causes no division between me and thee. It doesn't hurt my feelings or bring offense to me that you'd dare disagree with my preferences/opinions.
BUT, in a brutalist "There is only ONE right answer and it's the answer that WE tell you!" I can see how it's divisive - or would be considered divisive by those who insist upon conformity. "They're daring to disagree with what WE told them they must accept!!"
But truly, that's not division, not in the rational, freedom-loving adult world. That's free choice. That's liberty, man! God bless those nations that aspire to promote liberty.
So, demonstrably speaking, it's not necessarily divisive. It's only "divisive" if you insist everyone must agree and conform to what a few white men decided a long time ago (and even then, there was no insistence upon it, I don't think.)
Look how very long you're fighting against free choice and personal preference! How many words and how much time your devoting to this windmill of yours.
Come on.
Marshal said, in a now deleted comment...
I don't care if you delete me. Each time you do it you further confirm the truth of your low character.
You complain an awful lot for someone who doesn't care. But what your comments being deleted actually confirms is this:
You've used the words dick, pussy, whore, bitch or otherwise engaged in vulgar hate speech, much in the manner of an ill-tempered but dim-witted child who doesn't know how to express himself when he gets all emotionally overwrought;
You used the words like hustler, thugs, race hustler or other words that racists have tended to use to attack black people;
You've used demeaning or rude words to attack LGBTQ folks, women, immigrants or people of color;
You've made ridiculously false and unsupported claims without acknowledging you have no proof of the stupidly false claims.
Like that. EVERY comment from EVERY person comes in, I don't have a gatekeeping process in place for my comments. They ALL show up, including yours. But anyone who makes vulgar, overtly and childishly disrespectful and false ones is likely to get deleted.
I DID answer them and you deleted them, then lied that I didn't answer them. Fine. It's how you roll and I just need to get used to your world-class dishonesty and cowardice.
""Who's to say we - the NFL, black people and their allies or ANYONE must accept one and only one national anthem?""
No one. But that's an entirely irrelevant question.
""Who's talking about replacing the SSB with this other song?""
No one directly. But that's another entirely irrelevant question.
"Do you acknowledge that reality?"
Who cares? I never said you complained about the SSB being played anywhere. Why would you expect me to acknowledge something so incredibly insignificant to the discussion?
"Do you further acknowledge the ONLY one complaining about an anthem being sung at a sportsball game is YOU?"
That's WILDLY untrue! MILLIONS are unhappy with this song being played along side the anthem...and the very notion of a "black" national anthem being in any way necessary or helpful for national cohesion. You need to get out of your leftist echo chamber more.
"Do you agree and recognize that reality?"
That's NOT the reality. The reality is that the SSB was widely regarded as an anthem well before Congress passed the resolution making it the official National Anthem. That is to say, it is because of widespread public opinion in favor of the song which compelled the resolution. If you want to suggest no black people were in favor at the time, feel free to try and prove that. I'll wait here while you don't. In the meantime, you weak attempt to downplay just how widespread that support was is totally without factual basis and is only a white-guilt desire.
"But, there is no requirement to use the SSB in ANY place, school, proceeding or grouping. If some people choose to do so, they can, but it's not like a requirement."
Irrelevant. The fact is that it's been a standard, favored and widely accepted practice...a tradition favored by the vast majority of Americans from all walks of life including the black community.
"People in a free nation can have their own personal opinions and that's okay.
Do you recognize and accept that reality?"
Yes, but this, too, is an irrelevant question. Worse is the lead up to it. It's not at all about hurt feelings " if someone considers something else equal to or better than SSB". That's insanely stupid for you to suggest such a thing, which you do only to further unjustly disparage me for not worshiping the song and its use. No. It's that the song has been imposed upon a non-consenting fan-base who's forced to accept it. How many different races and/or ethnic groups get to do this and when will we get to see the freakin' game for which we paid our hard-earned money? Where do people like you get the idea anyone gives a damn about your agenda when their interest is solely on the game for which they paid that hard-earned money? Why is this basic and obvious problem lost on even a simple mind such as yours? (Here's where YOUR hurt feelings will provoke you to delete rather than to respond like a man of integrity.)
"People in a free nation do NOT need to bow to the personal opinions of someone else just to avoid hurting their feelings.
Do you recognize and accept that reality?"
Sure. But the rich irony here is this is EXACTLY what YOU'RE doing. You...and those who impose this song on sports fans without their consent...demand those fans bow to YOUR personal opinions lest they be labeled racists and bigots. But you won't recognize that far more relevant reality.
"* Replaced disrespectful abusive words for people whom Marshal disagrees with"
The above is a lie. The words I used accurately reflect the character of those referenced and truth is never disrespectful.
"** Added a clarifying statement to make sure we're recognizing reality"
Given I was clearly speaking for myself, all you did was add redundancy to what was obvious. You did it, as usual, to disparage unjustly. The hypocrisy of you daring to refer to me as disrespectful when you wallow in disrespect for me and conservatives in general is world-class.
"And having admitted as much, then perhaps a better adult would admit that they were being disrespectful and belligerent over a personal opinion that doesn't need matter to anyone else and thus, apologize for getting so emotionally overwrought over nothing more than personal opinion... How about it?"
A "better adult"? I'm already a better adult than you merely for refusing to lie in order to push my position. Lying about me is disrespectful and belligerent. We're not talking about mere personal opinion, but the reality that no one asked for this song to be forced upon them at a football game. And I doubt it was announced prior to tickets being sold. And I doubt that even if it was, that they asked the opinion of those paying the big money to see the game what they thought about a "Black National Anthem". And I doubt those who favor the performance of this song would have sat quietly for players who would kneel or turn their backs. So cut the crap, liar. I've said nothing for which I'm obliged to apologize. Can't say the same for you.
I'll get to what follows later while you resort to your cowardly ways and delete this on the lie that I've done something wrong to deserve it. It's what you do.
See how easy that is? Now to your answers...
I asked:
"Do you further acknowledge the ONLY one complaining about an anthem being sung at a sportsball game is YOU?"
You replied...
That's WILDLY untrue! MILLIONS are unhappy with this song being played along side the anthem...and the very notion of a "black" national anthem being in any way necessary or helpful for national cohesion.
First of all, I was speaking of those involved in THIS SPECIFIC conversation between you and me.
Of the two of us, only one is complaining about a song being sung - you.
Right?
Secondly, that would be an example of an unsupported claim that's almost certainly not true. Where'd you get millions??
Right?
Thirdly, I suspect what's happening is you're speaking from within a far right echo chamber, and all the white conservatives you listen to are complaining about a simple song.
But you all don't represent or speak for all or even a majority of us citizens.
You understand and agree?
You need to get out of your leftist echo chamber more.
Ah, there it is. You're projecting.
Marshal...
and the very notion of a "black" national anthem being in any way necessary or helpful for national cohesion.
Well, it is helpful and appreciated by many black people, they'll tell you, and their allies. Why get so emotionally overwrought about something so easy to just live and let live about? Why not just let those who value it enjoy their/our preferred song?
Would you ban the song being played alongside the SSB if you could?
Why the attack on personal liberty and choice?
Marshal...
"It's that the song has been imposed upon a non-consenting fan-base who's forced to accept it"
How many people voted and gave specific approval to schools and sports teams to play the SSB at gatherings and events?
None?
Does that mean it was imposed upon a non-consenting fan base?
Or is it the case that it's a decision that those schools and teams are entirely free to make?
If they're free to make that decision, why aren't they free to decide to play Lift Every Voice?
As you've already acknowledged, they ARE free to make that choice.
And ANYONE who doesn't like it can just ignore it, if they want, but why would you?
Why not live and let live?
Can you not see that what you all are saying, in essence, is...
If you do what WE want, it's not divisive.
But if you freely decide to do something WE don't want, you're being divisive!
Do you not see how childish and anti-liberty such irrational demands are?
Marshal falsely claimed...
this is EXACTLY what YOU'RE doing. You...and those who impose this song on sports fans without their consent...demand those fans bow to YOUR personal opinions lest they be labeled racists and bigots.
1. I had nothing to do with this decision. In this case, the people at the NFL used their personal freedom to choose to play SSB over the years and more recently, chose to play Lift Every Voice.
2. This is their right to do so, and I recognize it. I personally am not a fan of SSB but never once in my life have I complained about them playing that song. Live and let live. AND, they are also using their free choice to also play Lift Every Voice.
3. And, in spite of there being no rule saying they can't choose to play LEVAS, you and white conservatives like you want to denounce them and maybe even take away their rights to use whatever anthems they want because... what? It hurts your feelings? You personally don't like two anthems being played??
Who is actually trying to impose their choices on others?
Marshal..
Irrelevant. The fact is that it's been a standard, favored and widely accepted practice..
that's an entirely irrelevant question...
But that's another entirely irrelevant question...
Why would you expect me to acknowledge something so incredibly insignificant to the discussion?
All of these questions I asked were precisely relevant and significant because they clearly establish...
1. There are NO rules precluding two anthems being sung
2. That it's a matter of personal preference with no overt legal or moral compunction for one, two, zero or ten anthems to be sung
3. With the possible exception of personal liberty, choice which would vote in favor of the live and let live, let the organizers make their own decisions because, why not?
Having established those points with your answers (and their relevance), we're left with this:
It's your personal preference, along with many other white conservatives, that the SSB be sung alone at public gatherings like sporting events, and certainly not have LEVAS sung along with it...
And,
It's the NFL's (and many others) opinion and personal preference to include LEVAS...
And in that scenario, WHO should make that ultimate decision? I say, of course, the NFL should.
You?
I've very little time at present, but it's clear you needed to interfere with my responding to the rest of your "questions" due to how easily I exposed their irrelevance and falseness. Your first response is clear indication of your desperation:
"First of all, I was speaking of those involved in THIS SPECIFIC conversation between you and me.
Of the two of us, only one is complaining about a song being sung - you."
Good gosh! First, you gave no indication you were referring only to the two of us. Even so, it's absurd given the point of the discussion is the imposition of this song upon non-consenting fans (and without any doubt, the numbers of those displeased with this imposition goes far beyond the fans in the stadium). So pointing out it's me "complaining" is moot, Cap't Obvious.
"Secondly, that would be an example of an unsupported claim that's almost certainly not true. Where'd you get millions??"
Saying it's "almost certainly not true" is an unsupported claim and far less true than mine. But let's start with some who don't even have a problem with the song itself:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/black-fans-call-nfl-s-plan-play-lift-every-voice-n1233164
https://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/07/21/black.national.anthem/index.html
A (2020)YouGov poll of more than 25,000 US adults finds that most (60%) Americans do not want to see the national anthem changed. I tried to link to the article presenting this info in detail, but when I clicked on it, it's totally blurred out. I don't know why. You might have better luck. But while I'm not a guy who thinks much of polls, most only query 1-2000 or so people. This one is much larger and therefore more indicative of public sentiment. But even if a larger poll would result in a smaller percentage, it would have to be really small to indicate less than one million. So what's 60% of 350,000,000 come to?
"Thirdly, I suspect what's happening is you're speaking from within a far right echo chamber, and all the white conservatives you listen to are complaining about a simple song.
But you all don't represent or speak for all or even a majority of us citizens.
You understand and agree?"
You suspect what you desperately hope and wish is true. I'm speaking from a position of common sense and factual understanding of public sentiment. And unlike you, my position is an accurate representation as my links and stats in the previous demonstrate. So I'm not "speaking for" anyone, but merely presenting facts. The real problem is: You need to get out of your leftist echo chamber more. Facts aren't in there.
Gotta go.
Marshal...
But let's start with some who don't even have a problem with the song itself:
STOP.
The claim YOU made was that millions oppose LEVAS being played next to SSB.
You cannot support that claim, can you? It's just a number you made up, right?
Answer the question.
I'm running out of time and patience with your constant childish nonsense.
Perhaps you didn't understand. Let me repeat:
STOP.
The claim YOU made was that millions oppose LEVAS being played next to SSB.
You cannot support that claim, can you? It's just a number you made up, right?
Answer the question.
Saying, "But many people - even the majority - like the SSB..." is NOT AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION.
You have NO DATA that says the majority or even "millions" of people are OPPOSED TO LEVAS being sung next to SSB.
Isn't that correct?
Last chance.
And just to be clear:
YOU HAVE NOT ONE SINGLE BIT OF REAL DATA FROM THE REAL WORLD OR FROM ANYWHERE BESIDES UP YOUR ASS THAT SAYS THE MAJORITY OF EVEN MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ARE OPPOSED TO SINGING LEVAS NEXT TO SSB - IS THAT CORRECT?
Put another way, that IS the reality. Do you recognize the reality that you have no data to support that made up claim?
While waiting to see if you recognize reality or not, let me summarize what we've come to.
1. You personally don't like LEVAS being sung next to SSB. It's a personal quirk of yours and some white conservatives.
2. There is no reason beyond personal preference for your strong reaction to this great song being played next to the SSB. You just don't like it for reasons that you may think are justified, but STILL are only your personal whims and preferences.
3. If you don't like the song being played next to the SSB, you can always choose to ignore it or not participate. You'll come across as a racist crab, but you can choose to do not participate.
4. We, the NFL, black people or any one else are not obliged or required in any way to NOT play a song they want just because it makes you angry or uncomfortable.
No need to answer. Those are the facts of it all. You can agree with reality or not.
Just know that the world doesn't revolve around you. This is not your nation to force others to bow to your ego and will.
Get over yourself.
"YOU HAVE NOT ONE SINGLE BIT OF REAL DATA FROM THE REAL WORLD OR FROM ANYWHERE BESIDES UP YOUR ASS THAT SAYS THE MAJORITY OF EVEN MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ARE OPPOSED TO SINGING LEVAS NEXT TO SSB - IS THAT CORRECT?"
No. It's clearly not at all correct when I've produced several articles, including polling data, which would lead an honest person to conclude there is no support for singing the song next to the SSB as if it, too, is or should be regarded as some kind of national anthem...for Americans or even for the black community.
So, an honest, mature adult, in taking a contrary position, would best be served by providing some indication there is actually widespread support for performing LEVAS along side the actual National Anthem of these here United States (to the extent they're still united at all...not necessarily the case given the divisive nature and behavior of those like yourself) as if it is equal to or in any way another anthem worthy of the same degree of respect and allegiance.
The outcry against the performance of this song imposed as it has been as if a second or alternative anthem has been widespread, including among enough of the black community to indicate it lacks support there as well. I've produced plenty to support my opinion and like a whiny, petulant child not happy with an outcome, you demand of me what you won't and can't produce for yourself.
So yes, I have proven I have data enough to support my position, while you again, as you do with Scripture you find inconvenient, simply reject it all as if it carries no weight, while providing nothing but your typical "Nyuh uh" as if that's a mature response in support of your position.
You're just factually wrong, Marshal. Your bigotry has blinded you to reality.
JUST because some majority of the nation is fine with the SSB DOES NOT MEAN that they would oppose LEVAS being sung along with it. "A majority likes X" does NOT translate to "AND, they also oppose Y being sung along with X."
It's an irrational and unsupported claim.
You have ZERO data to support your claim of "millions" opposing it, and certainly nothing supporting the idea that the majority opposes it.
No need to comment further UNLESS you recognize reality. Further comments that don't begin with, "I'm sorry. I was mistaken..." will be deleted out of hand.
Look, those people like Milky Ways a WHOLE lot. Hm. That MUST AND CAN ONLY MEAN that they also don't want anyone to promote or eat 3 Musketeers. Because, if they like Milky Ways, then of course, they MUST be opposed to 3 Musketeers.
Said no one, ever.
It's an irrational claim. You could post 10 million links to articles or surveys that say that many people like the Star Spangled Banner and that would STILL not suggest that they ALSO are opposed to having another song played along with it. It's a logical fallacy. It's a false dichotomy and just not supported by what you've provided.
Now, IF and WHEN you find research that says "90% of fans of the SSB also are opposed to LEVAS being played along side it..." THEN you would have data. Your data does not do what you claim it does. It just doesn't.
Apologize and repent or move on.
Post a Comment