Buzz Williams/National Anthem Respect

Apples and oranges.

I'm not going to get into a discussion about it. If you ever go to a basketball game, judging by attendance isn't likely, are there more people bowing their head at the flag or looking at it? Vice versa on prayers which you obviously won't get at an OU game.

Who gives a damn? Seriously. So we can look at the flag but not bow our heads? Vice versa? If we bow, do we have to keep our eyes open or can we close them?

The point of all of this is that no one should be judging another's patriotism based on that person not conforming to your (or mine, or anyone else's) idea of what "patriotism" should look like.
 
as an OEF/OIF vet as well ... this comment is garbage ..

would I rather all of our American players salute the flag (as they should per federal law) yes I would but bowing your head is not = to sitting or kneeling

If you seriously think that there's a law requiring ANY American -- athlete or not -- to salute the flag, say the pledge of allegiance, bow our head, sing the national anthem or anything in any way related to any of those, then someone needs to familiarize you with the 1st Amendment to the Constitution and a high school government class.
 
No one has mentioned any laws. Morals and standard can't be governed with laws alone. Nothing wrong with striving to be good, decent, respectful individual.
 
I find it disrespectful. You choose to do and think as you please.

Thanks. I will.

Here are some things I find disrespectful:

When I hold the door open for someone and they don't say "Thank you."
When the waiter brings the check before clearing the table.
When the waiter forces some of the party to sit and watch others eat because he didn't bring all of the food at once.
People who cut you off in traffic without using a turn signal.
People who sit in judgment of others without knowing the facts.
Telephone solicitors.
My neighbor who holds parties out in the street late at night, keeping my dogs barking and kids awake far past their bedtime.

I'm sure there are others.
 
No one has mentioned any laws. Morals and standard can't be governed with laws alone. Nothing wrong with striving to be good, decent, respectful individual.

You're wrong on the first sentence.

But I agree 1000% that we should all strive to be good, decent, respectful people. I wish more agreed with us.
 
It also would have been nice if Buzz had just once mentioned women. There was a female veteran standing right there among the others being honored and he just kept saying "men."

*facepalm*
 
In the grand scheme, showing respect before a bball game isn't a big deal....but the underlying principal of respect towards those whom have served is huge.

This.

And it's the intentions. A lot of the people that aren't observing traditional methods of showing respect are knowing doing it for a reason. A reason I consider disrespectful.

These aren't "new ways" of showing respect. They are new ways of trying to bring attention to other matters, during a time where they should be showing respect to the nation. Intent matters.
 
What exact law would that be?

If you seriously think that there's a law requiring ANY American -- athlete or not -- to salute the flag, say the pledge of allegiance, bow our head, sing the national anthem or anything in any way related to any of those, then someone needs to familiarize you with the 1st Amendment to the Constitution and a high school government class.

No one has mentioned any laws. Morals and standard can't be governed with laws alone. Nothing wrong with striving to be good, decent, respectful individual.

ahh but there is a Law

Title 36 section 301 of US Code -National anthem (aka the law) ..

(a) Designation -
The composition consisting of the words and music known as the Star-Spangled Banner is the national anthem.

(b) Conduct During Playing.—During a rendition of the national anthem—
``(A) individuals in uniform should give the
military salute at the first note of the anthem and
maintain that position until the last note;
``(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who
are present but not in uniform may render the military
salute in the manner provided for individuals in
uniform; and
``(C) all other persons present should face the flag
and stand at attention with their right hand over the
heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should
remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it
at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart;

Note: Part (C) applies to those not in the military and non-veterans. The phrase "men not in uniform" refers to civil service uniforms like police, fire fighters, and letter carriers - non-veteran civil servants who might normally render a salute while in uniform.


I will also note that there is currently no criminal or civil penalty for not following this statute
 
Last edited:
You don't think women who serve in the military are deserving of our respect and gratitude?

I don't think you said anything deserving a "facepalm" or controversial. There are many many women who have served this country just like men. They deserve just as much respect in my opinion. That said, I am sure Buzz wasn't intentionally ignoring them or anything.
 
You don't think women who serve in the military are deserving of our respect and gratitude?

People use men sometimes when speaking to groups that are predominately men. No disrespect was meant. If it was, he wouldn't have had a woman there to begin with. Of all the things to nitpick on...
 
ahh but there is a Law

Title 36 section 301 of US Code -National anthem (aka the law) ..

(a) Designation -
The composition consisting of the words and music known as the Star-Spangled Banner is the national anthem.

(b) Conduct During Playing.—During a rendition of the national anthem—
``(A) individuals in uniform should give the
military salute at the first note of the anthem and
maintain that position until the last note;
``(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who
are present but not in uniform may render the military
salute in the manner provided for individuals in
uniform; and
``(C) all other persons present should face the flag
and stand at attention with their right hand over the
heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should
remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it
at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart;

Note: Part (C) applies to those not in the military and non-veterans. The phrase "men not in uniform" refers to civil service uniforms like police, fire fighters, and letter carriers - non-veteran civil servants who might normally render a salute while in uniform.


I will also note that there is currently no criminal or civil penalty for not following this statute

i get what you are saying, but this isn't a law
 
I am an honorably discharged and decorated combat veteran. I resent other people trying to impose their standard of what patriotism looks like on anyone.

I never thought I would agree with garyeb2 on anything. I, too, am a veteran, although not a combat veteran. I, too, resent other people trying to impose their standards on anyone. Often, this is highly political, and they would object if the flag were used to symbolize something they didn't like.

Meanwhile, boulder, there are no penalties associated with Section 301, likely because they do understand that such penalties would likely be struck down as conflicts with the First Amendment.
 
i get what you are saying, but this isn't a law

it absolutely is a LAW passed and amended by congress and signed into LAW by the President of the United States

the statute making murder unlawful for instance is Title 18 of US Code sec 1111


Of the 53 titles, the following titles have been enacted into positive (statutory) law: 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 28, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 44, 46, 49, 51, and 54. When a title of the Code was enacted into positive law, the text of the title became legal evidence of the law. Titles that have not been enacted into positive law are only prima facie evidence of the law. In that case, the Statutes at Large still govern. Note: Title 52 is an editorially-created title, and Title 53 is currently reserved. For the current list of titles, see http://uscode.house.gov.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionUScode.action?selectedYearFrom=2015&go=Go
 
Last edited:
Meanwhile, boulder, there are no penalties associated with Section 301, likely because they do understand that such penalties would likely be struck down as conflicts with the First Amendment.

no doubt and that is as it should be ....... just pointing out that it is the law ..
 
let met make sure i get this right. I am supposed to stand and respect a song that for one wasn't written for me and two talked about killing slaves? Once I learned the true meaning of that song and the authors beliefs... i lost all respect for it.

However, i will stand for the troops.
 
jeff-capel-popcorn-o.gif
 
no doubt and that is as it should be ....... just pointing out that it is the law ..

Yes. It's a law. It's also only a suggestion. There's no requirement in there. It's just the government saying how they think people should act. It neither prescribes nor proscribes any behavior during the anthem.
 
let met make sure i get this right. I am supposed to stand and respect a song that for one wasn't written for me and two talked about killing slaves? Once I learned the true meaning of that song and the authors beliefs... i lost all respect for it.

However, i will stand for the troops.

I don't know anything about that, but at least it seems like you're standing for the right reason. It's true that America has never been perfect. You mentioned slavery and also women couldn't vote 100 years ago. However, we're also the world's oldest and most successful democracy and that's something people paid for with their lives and bodies. As long as you respect that, I don't care if you actually like the song. That's just my opinion.
 
Back
Top