Henderson 1

Cameron Henderson
Dr. Rule
English 201
4 November 2016
Standing up for Yourself by Sitting Down: Sports, Patriotism and Colin Kaepernick
I like to see a man proud of the place in which he lives. I like to see a man live so that
his place will be proud of him. Abraham Lincoln
September 1, 2016. The San Francisco 49ers play their final preseason game against the
San Diego chargers in San Diego, California. It is the home teams 28th annual Salute the
Military night. Jets roar overhead, trumpets blare, fans are whipped up into a frenzy of patriotic
fury, and yet a silence falls on the stadium as the countrys national anthem is played. Fans,
coaches, and players alike stand and place their hand over their heart as a salute to the flag and
its song. But not everybody is participating. A lone figure kneels in quiet defiance on the 49ers
bench. It was their quarterback. Colin Kaepernick set the nation on fire by refusing to stand and
sing the national anthem when the San Francisco 49ers played their final preseason game in front
of a crowd of 70,000 fans. He was using a form of civil disobedience to protest the police
brutality and minority inequality he feels is present in the country as well as to show his support
the Black Lives Matter movement. However, his choice of protest sparked a heated debate, as
many feel it was disrespecting the flag and national anthem and was over the line. Perhaps the
best representation for the broad spectrum of responses that he received came from his own
colleagues within the realm of professional sports themselves. Their responses varied from
unbridled support to utter condemnation:

Henderson 2

I will be STANDING during the National Anthem tonight. Thank you to ALL
(Gender,Race,Religion)that put your lives on the line for that flag Justin Pugh, New York
Giants.
The easy thing to do is to make fun of Kap and his play. How about trying to understand where
he's coming from....but that would be too hard Adrian Clayborn, Atlanta Falcons.
He has the right to choose not to stand. Just as you have the right to disagree with his stance.
Round and round we go.you can't be selective and dictate what freedoms this country stands
for. You're free to have any religious/political views you feel. Arian Foster, Texans.
This guy is a joke. Get lost. You don't like it in a country that has given you opportunity to
succeed? Then get out Aubrey Huff, Former MLB player (Curtis, 2016).
There are many forms of protest available to Americans, but did Kaepernick take it too
far? Or was he simply exercising his First Amendment rights to draw attention to an issue he
believed needed more of a national focus? A huge question that needs to be asked is not only was
his protest acceptable, but was it effective for getting his message across?
The first question that might be asked is one of legality. While this may be dodging the
true nature of the issue by attacking it with a surface level criticism, the legality of the issue does
have to be analyzed before diving into its morality. From a legal standpoint, looking for past
precedent is a tricky process. The First Amendment and sports have been in a constant battle ever
since athletes attained celebrity-like status. There is a multitude of different events to take
precedent from, and all had different outcomes based on the socio-political dynamic of the
country of the time. Muhammed Ali in a famous act of defiance to the Vietnam War refused the
draft in 1967, immediately at this cost of his heavyweight title ("Muhammad Ali refuses Army

Henderson 3

induction"). A year later, two US sprinters, John Carolos and Tommie Smith held up their hands
in the black power salute upon receiving their Olympic medals in Mexico City while the US
National Anthem echoed around them in the stadium, which is now widely regarded as an act of
heroism (Vincent, 2016). And in a stunning act of protest in 1965, Jewish pitcher Sandy Koufax
refused to pitch on Yom Kippur, a holy day for the Jewish faith (Rosengren, 2016). But the
moment that I believe most closely mirrors the Kaepenick event happened more recently in the
NBA. In 1996, Denver Nuggets Player Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf refused to stand or even be present
in the arena during the National Anthem, claiming his Muslim faith prohibited him from
participating in any nationalistic ritual and that the American flag and National Anthem connote
tyranny and oppression (Koening, 1998). This case can be used as solid precedent based on its
similarity with the Kaepernick events. They both deal with refusal to participate in the national
anthem, both happened fairly recently, both are involved in multi-billion dollar sporting
industries, and both cited the American flag and national anthem no longer meaning freedom to
them either in part or entirely behind their reasoning behind their refusal to participate in the
ceremony. So what happened to Rauf? The NBA suspended him without pay until the matter was
privately resolved (he would stand and be present but be allowed to say a silent prayer to himself
while the anthem was playing). Was this legal? According to lawyer Kelly B. Koening, it was
not. In a case study that she wrote in 1998 in the Washington University Law Review, she argued
in favor for Abdul-Rauf. For starters, there is no law or statute imposed by the national or state
governments requiring players to stand and participate in the national anthem. So the real issue
was between Abdul-Rauf, the Nuggets, and the NBA. As his employers, the NBA have
something known as monumental control over its employees, meaning that they can set rules
and regulations that their employees must follow. However, this is only as long as they do not

Henderson 4

interfere with any national government laws, rights, or statutes. In this case, Abdul was actually
protected by both his Title VII rights (part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that prohibits
employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin,
and religion and the First Amendment, both of which in part protect against discrimination based
on religious and moral beliefs. So, while the NBA may have been able to ask Rauf to stand, they
had no legal right to force him or punish him if he did not based on his demonstrated sincere
belief and practice.
This case can transcend into Kaepernicks event. While the NFL can ask him to
participate, they cannot force him to, as he is protected by Title VII and First Amendment rights.
However, I believe most people knew that without needing a legal precedent or any law jargon.
The real beast of the event is not COULD he refuse, it is SHOULD he. This is the question that
seems to be dividing people throughout the country. It is a question that branches into several
other discussions on race relations in this country that I will not be getting very deep into. Instead
of getting too deep into police brutality and the BLM movement (the why of Kapernicks protest),
I want to focus on Kaepernicks decision to not participate during the national anthem (the how of
his protest). The why of the argument is a complicated, multifaceted blend of political and
cultural turmoil that involves police brutality, BLM and race relations that require its own
dissection that separates it from this how as discussed in this essay. Did he choose the right
outlet for his protest? Are the National Anthem and American flag held on higher pedestals than
the rest other symbols of our country, and therefore out-of-bounds for means of protest? Is it
possible to separate one representation of a symbol from the others? Was it an effective means of
protest? Should freedom of speech ever stain patriotism? These are the questions that seem to be
dividing people the most.

Henderson 5

I have primarily seen arguments falling into two different camps. On one hand, there are
millions that believe Kaepernick is in the wrong. They argue that refusing the anthem and the
flag is disrespecting what they truly stand for. They are symbols for the freedom of speech that
allowed him to protest in the first place, after all. In addition, disrespecting the flag disrespects
the thousands of soldiers who gave their lives defending the USA. The flag and anthem are
symbols not owned by one person or corporation, rather, symbols owned by an entire nation and
those that inhabit it. They can be strong symbols of unity and cooperation, which transcends
race, age and gender. By refusing to participate in such displays of patriotism, they are causing
more divide and hate, which would be the opposite of Mr. Kaepernicks intention. I think this
argument was best summed up by an article by Dr. Ben Carson, a prominent figure in the GOP
and former presidential candidate, in the Independent Journal Review (2016). Dr. Carson argues
that while Kaepernick is not in the wrong for exercising his right to protest, he chose the wrong
outlet. According to Carson, refusing to show appreciation for the anthem and flag is not only
disrespectful to the nation and its history, but also chips away at bonds of unity and fortitude that
are fundamental in keeping the country together. H believes that strong national symbols
strengthen a nation and to call into question the character of those symbols would only be
detrimental to the country. In addition, he urges Kaepernick to switch the tone of his protest. He
asks him to build ladders rather than the barrier he is creating (Carson, 2016). By focusing on
building opportunities rather than participating in exercises of resentment (which create sources
of discord and create barriers for progress), Kaepernick can more effectively help those he
protests for, Carson argues. The flag does not need to be perfect to garner respect, and by
participating in the national anthem, we pay tribute to the success of the nation, rather than

Henderson 6

focusing on its shortcomings. Another side of the argument, however, is equally persuasive and
compelling.
Another side of the issue is that Kaepernick has every right to do what he did. The first
amendment protects freedom of speech, and he was well within his right to non-violently protest
for an issue he felt deserved more attention. His form of civil disobedience follows the likeness
of Dr. King or Gandhi. Did people criticize them? Absolutely! Thats the point. Plying by the
rules or social standards defined by others does not make for an effective protest. He chose the
flag and anthem purposefully, knowing they hold emotional power, and therefore attention, of
many people. There is certainly one side of the pro-Kaepernick argument that undermines an
assertion of the anti-Kaepernick camp. Those against the 49ers quarterback often claim that
showing disrespect to the flag shows disrespect to all the servicemen and women who fought to
defend this country. The flag is a symbol of freedom and hope not just to us at home, but to
wherever our soldiers must carry it. However, this assertion of our militarys viewpoint may be
an overgeneralization. While certainly Kaepernick was immediately denounced by veterans in
and around the bay area (Park, 2016), not all veterans were so quick to attack him. Many even
ran to his defense. Sunny Anderson, veteran and Food Network personality, tweeted her support
by saying I took an oath & served, so players on a team I don't even like could have freedom of
speech (Park, 2016). Antonio Buehler, Army Ranger who served in Kosovo and Iraq and
received the Bronze Star, tweeted that the NFL player was an American hero. Other examples
came in the forms of Don't use my service--or that of any veteran--to justify the silencing of
black Americans. Not on my watch. (Charles Clymer) and allusions to Voltaire I don't agree
with all of his points, but I'll fight to the death for his right to say it (Isaac Wright). Included in
all of these tweets was the hashtag #VeteransforKaepernick. Veteran defense of Kaepernick

Henderson 7

seems to come in two forms: those that agree with his stance on the BLM movement (such as
two Rams players Kenny Britt and Robert Quinn, who raised their fists in solidarity with
Kaepernick (McKirdy, 2016)), and ones that are defending his method of protest. They consider
Kaepernicks protest as a means of exercising free speech, and I agree with them. His protest was
not violent in any way, and he did not advocate for any form of harm, violence or unlawfulness
in any way. He was well within his right to exercise his first amendment rights, and using
nationalism rhetoric in an attempt to silence him I think is actually more of a disrespect to the
soldiers that fought to give him that right. So, legality and shallow rhetoric aside, I think the
main source of divisiveness in this issue lies in its aftermath. Was it an EFFECTIVE form of
protest, and should it be mirrored by others looking to forward the same cause?
Despite how you feel on the morals of his protest, you cannot dismiss its ability to gather
attention. Kaepernick knew what he was doing and chose the tools of his protest to perfection.
The American flag and national anthem are things that hold an enormous amount of emotional
weight for a portion of Americans. By protesting symbols usually considered out of bounds, he
ensured his protest was unique in its character and its emotional response. Almost overnight
every major news outlet had seemingly the entire nation talking about the lack of rigidity in his
legs. He wanted to get the nation talking and he did. But what did he get it talking about? Is the
new attention on the BLM movement and police brutality useful and positive? Or did his choice
of protest targets turn people off of his message and undermine his goal to legitimize the
movements which he follows?
Again, this splits the camp. Katheryn Russell-Brown, director of the Center for the Study
of Race and Race Relations at the University of Florida, stated that it was effective. It has
already brought along something meaningful because we are all talking about it, she stated

Henderson 8

(Perez, 2016). This certainly has some weight. Any press is good press right? The race relations
talk is one that America seems to need to have. But rather than deal with it head on, our country
seems to want to shelve it for later. What Kaepernick did was bring this issue into the living
rooms of millions of people around the country. For better or for worse, he broadened the
audience of the issue. In that regards, it can be considered a success. On the other hand, Edward
Kian, a sports media professor at Oklahoma State, stated that the effectiveness of Kaepernicks
protest was dampened by two things. First, the quarterback struggled to get more NFL players to
take the stand with him, so it appeared to be more of a one-off rather than a unified front.
Second, he timed his protest at a time when his team and career were heading downhill. By not
playing well, people found it harder to empathize with his protest, rather than if the 49ers were
winning. If Kaepernick had timed his protest to occur at a time three years ago when he was an
exciting prospect and doing big TV commercials, then the interest behind his protest wouldve
received more favorable attention (Perez, 2016). Certainly, Kaepernick has struggled to find
form or even a starting spot this campaign, and he hasnt quite found the NFL player support
needed to be to give his protest any sort of sustainability. While he is now currently working with
Seahawks long-snapper and former Green Beret Nate Boyer to transform his protest to include
aspects of veteran positivity (Wagoner, 2016), NFL rating have been falling ever since his
protesting began. With the commissioners losing money, they are running out of patience, and
Kaepernick seems to be working against the clock here. He only had a few weeks in the spotlight
until his star-power and viewership began to fade.
I fall somewhere in the middle on this issue. While I believe that Kaepernick had every
right and reason to exercise his First Amendment rights to protest, I think using the flag and
national anthem were poor choices of tools to further his agenda. They ended up being counter-

Henderson 9

productive to his ultimate goals and drew him into the mud of an anti-nationalism argument, one
which alienated him and gave him no chance of winning. This event and its backlash have shown
that the flag and national anthem are symbols tied up in so much emotion and national rhetoric,
that any protest against them, despite purpose or full legality, would be tricky and faces an uphill
battle to give the protest any sort of legitimacy or positive attitude needed to sustain such a
venture. While his cause may have been a noble one, I believe that it was ill-timed and illperformed. While he did succeed in broadening the issues scope, Kaepernicks form of protest
failed to achieve the positive support the issue deserved, and unfortunately brought more
enemies and divisiveness to a discussion that did not need any more. I dont believe he should be
damned for choosing his form of protest, but I do believe he should realize the possible
ramifications and loss of efficiency of it. The comparisons between himself and other famous
leaders of civil disobedience throughout history (King, Gandhi, ect) are valid to an extent. While
both deal in forms of non-violent protest to support a social issue that requires more attention,
the difference and ultimately result lies in its execution. Dr. King were very tactical in their
protests. They made sure to project their protests against the nations government and unjust
society, rather than the nation itself. Kaepernicks protest differed in that by basing it around
symbols typically revered within the nation, he was able to garner attention quicker, but opened
himself and his movement up to misunderstanding stemming from fierce patriotism, ultimately
harming the overall goals of his cause. Instead of a slow, more calculated approach based on a
strong, fundamental support group and well planned protests such as Dr. King, Kaepernick may
have been a little too rash. By choosing the symbols he did, his protest ended up facing
unnecessary backlash from which it might not recover.

Henderson 10

It is important to look at this event with a broad range of thinking. Washing away the
shallow rhetoric from both sides, the core debate is one that should continue to be pursued. I do
believe that Kaepernick had every right to stand up for something he believed in and protest in a
way that grabbed attention to his issue and harmed no one. However, the targets of his protest
seemed to be a poor choice, and one that seems unnecessary to transmitting his point. He
couldve chose other symbols or people to protest, but by choosing such symbols as the flag and
national anthem, he ended up caught up in the middle of a patriotism debate, which in the end
harmed the message of his protest by detracting attention away from his concerns. His choice of
protest ended up switching the debate to its execution, rather than its core message. While the
future of his protest still remains in doubt, future protestors should look at this form as an
example. They should recognize his bravery, but also acknowledge his mistakes. This way, they
can exercise their own rights of speech and protest in ways that both draw attention and
ultimately positively impact their movement.

Henderson 11

References
Carson, Ben. "My Advice To Colin Kaepernick (And All The Athletes Who Choose To
Disrespect Our
Flag)." Independent Journal Review. N.p., 07 Oct. 2016.
Web. 16 Oct. 2016.
Curtis, Charles. "Athletes Respond on Twitter to Colin Kaepernick's Refusal to Stand
for National
Anthem." USA Today. Gannett Satellite Information
Network, 27 Aug. 2016. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Elikwu, David. "Colin Kaepernick, The First Amendment And Political Change In
America." The Market
Mogul. N.p., 2016. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.
McKirdy, Euan. "Colin Kaepernick Continues Kneeling Protest Ahead of 49ers
Opener." CNN. Cable News
Network, 13 Sept. 2016. Web. 04 Dec. 2016.
Koening, K.B. 1998. Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf 's Suspension for Refusing to Stand for
the
National Anthem: A Free Throw for the NBA and Denver
Nuggets, or a Slam Dunk Violation
of Abdul-Rauf 's Title VII Rights?
Washington University Law Review. 76:1.
"Muhammad Ali Refuses Army Induction." History.com. A&E Television Networks,
n.d. Web. 04 Dec.
2016.
Park, Madison. "#VeteransForKaepernick Trends as Vets Defend NFL Player."
Cnn.com. CNN, 31 Aug. 2016. Web. 6 Nov. 2016.
Perez, A.J. "Will 49ers QB Colin Kaepernick's Protest of National Anthem Wind up
Mattering?" USA
Today. Gannett, 30 Aug. 2016. Web. 06 Nov. 2016.
Rosengren, John. "Myth and Fact Part of Legacy from Sandy Koufax's Yom Kippur
Choice." Sports
Illustrated, 23 Sept. 2015. Web. 4 Dec. 2016.
Vincent, Donovan. "The Forgotten Story behind the 'black Power' Photo from 1968
Olympics | Toronto
Star." Thestar.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 04 Dec. 2016.
Wagoner, Nick. "From a Seat to a Knee: How Colin Kaepernick and Nate Boyer Are
Trying to Effect
Change." ESPN.com. ESPN, 6 Sept. 2016. Web. 04 Dec. 2016.