• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Girl, 11, told by school not to wear 9/11 T-shirt

To be fair, for most Americans, I think 9/11 was a little more significant than the Irish Potato Famine...

School dress code, pointing out the silliness.

And the potato famine was big in my family.
 
I am curious what you all thought about the MLB hat deal that happened after 9/11, were you all siding with MLB on that as well?

Can you show us links to the issue? I can't seem to really find any "hat deal" that happened after 9/11? However, if I remember the time correctly (this was 13 years ago), it seems like you couldn't move without seeing someone wearing an American flag and baseball players were no exception at the time. Maybe the league made an exception during the circumstances?
 
Yet your posting never discusses the way we were lied into Iraq-2 and killed 4,500 of our soldiers and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians.
Only Benghazi.
Nor do you express outrage at tens of thousands of Wounded Warriors and what they and their families are going through to this day.
Not to mention an overloaded VA not planned for by Rumsfeld/Cheney.
And what about the 22 suicides a day Navy ?


and to bring up 6 million Jews is something I never thought I would see from you .
:(



Now you know. Navy Pride has no limits.

Mighty sad. Some people will stoop to anything to try to make a point.
 
Can you show us links to the issue? I can't seem to really find any "hat deal" that happened after 9/11? However, if I remember the time correctly (this was 13 years ago), it seems like you couldn't move without seeing someone wearing an American flag and baseball players were no exception at the time. Maybe the league made an exception during the circumstances?

I can do better. As much as I really do despise Keith Olbermann, he tells this like no one else can. Caution: this will make you angry.

Keith Olbermann Bashes MLB For Banning Mets 9/11 Caps (VIDEO)
 
I can do better. As much as I really do despise Keith Olbermann, he tells this like no one else can. Caution: this will make you angry.

Keith Olbermann Bashes MLB For Banning Mets 9/11 Caps (VIDEO)

This seems to be a rather small issue that didn't really hit the waves. However, the answer is even clearer on this issue or should be clearer. The MLB as the ultimate arbiter of rules in US baseball set a standard on how 9/11 would be honored by its players. It stated that it did this for reasons of uniformity, however, it's really the money that counts in all of these things. Keith Olberman asking people to find their souls doesn't really take into account that hat regulations are there because of free market contracts. They, the contracts, don't have souls. With that said, MLB has had a contract with New Era (hats) as well as Majestic (uniforms) for a very long time. A single player violating the league's contract could mean tens of thousands in fines for the team/player as well as a lawsuit for MLB by its providers. In the end, the players were allowed to honor the event (the way the league asked them to) and MLB worked out a deal with its providers (even using a lapel can be a litigious issue in major sports). I'm not sure why there would be a problem.
 
The left and political correcctness going a muck.When will it end???

Girl, 11, told by school not to wear 9/11 T-shirt | Fox News


Published September 14, 2014

The stepdaughter of a U.S. veteran was told last week that she was not allowed to wear to school a T-shirt to honor the men and women who died in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
A veteran should be familiar with wearing a uniform and know better than to try and ignore a uniform policy without specific authorization.
 
This seems to be a rather small issue that didn't really hit the waves. However, the answer is even clearer on this issue or should be clearer. The MLB as the ultimate arbiter of rules in US baseball set a standard on how 9/11 would be honored by its players. It stated that it did this for reasons of uniformity, however, it's really the money that counts in all of these things. Keith Olberman asking people to find their souls doesn't really take into account that hat regulations are there because of free market contracts. They, the contracts, don't have souls. With that said, MLB has had a contract with New Era (hats) as well as Majestic (uniforms) for a very long time. A single player violating the league's contract could mean tens of thousands in fines for the team/player as well as a lawsuit for MLB by its providers. In the end, the players were allowed to honor the event (the way the league asked them to) and MLB worked out a deal with its providers (even using a lapel can be a litigious issue in major sports). I'm not sure why there would be a problem.

You forgetting the part where an MLB official came down and physically took away a players hat? MLB can bite the bullet financially if need be, and they did it back in 2001. It was a pretty big thing for a week so, as big as any news story in any event. But back to the original point, so you agreed with MLB's decision then to not let the players wear the hats?
 
People on the right are not into political correctness my left wing friend........we cherish 9/11tshirts.
The whole point of having the uniform in the first place is to remove political messages. The uniform shirt she was supposed to wear had the school's logo, that's not political correctness.
 
The whole point of having the uniform in the first place is to remove political messages. The uniform shirt she was supposed to wear had the school's logo, that's not political correctness.

The whole point of uniforms is conformity, avoidance of behavior problems, control of individual expression and other reasons such as cultural control.
 
The whole point of uniforms is conformity, avoidance of behavior problems, control of individual expression and other reasons such as cultural control.
Eh, whatever, same thing.
 
You forgetting the part where an MLB official came down and physically took away a players hat?

I'm not. The official made sure the players stayed within the restrictions set by MLB. I don't seen much wrong with that.

MLB can bite the bullet financially if need be, and they did it back in 2001.

Major League Baseball prohibits New York Mets from wearing first responders hats on 9/11 anniversary - NY Daily News

The NFL's leniency towards 9/11-themed uniform embellishments did not extend to Major League Baseball, which nixed the New York Mets plan to wear NYPD, FDNY, and PAPD caps during last night's game against the Pittsburgh Pirates. Mets union representative Josh Thole said the league told the Mets front office there was "no chance at all" of the team wearing the non-regulation hats, and promised a hefty fine for any player who violated the edict. That's the same position the league took back in 2001 when the team wanted to wear hats bearing the logos of first responders for the remainder of the season, but those Mets went ahead and wore them anyway. [New York Daily News]

It seems MLB didn't bite the bullet isn't taking the hit at all and is instead fining teams which do violate league policy. Again, I'm not sure what your issue seems to be. The league has been consistent in its approach to honoring 9/11.

It was a pretty big thing for a week so, as big as any news story in any event. But back to the original point, so you agreed with MLB's decision then to not let the players wear the hats?

The forum wasn't around in 2001 (to my knowledge) and I'm not sure what my position on this issue would have been 13 years ago. However, in retrospect, I see nothing wrong with the league's approach. They were allowed to commemorate the event in other visible ways however, refused. Why? I don't know.
 
Eh, whatever, same thing.

You could say there is a state interest in controlling political messages expressed by the youth of the country. :D
 
I am curious what you all thought about the MLB hat deal that happened after 9/11, were you all siding with MLB on that as well?

Looking it up, are you referring to MLB players having a flag on the side of their cap on 9/11? If so, I can't see where that would be an issue. It is however a significantly different thing.
 
OK, not what I found in my quick search. Your article does not offer enough information to make a real call on whether it was appropriate or not. What was the reason for MLB to ban the Mets cap?

At the very end he explains it, basically the MLB has a dress code that you could only wear the hats they were selling online. (which is why I brought it up here, as it was a dress code thing.) Back in 2001, a week after 9/11, they tried to stops the Mets from wearing the hats of first responders, but quickly gave up on that idea when everyone had a crap storm over that. Yankees did it as well during the World Series, and again the MLB tried to stop it again but quickly gave up. On the tenth anniversary, I guess they decided that enough was enough.
 
I'm not. The official made sure the players stayed within the restrictions set by MLB. I don't seen much wrong with that.

Major League Baseball prohibits New York Mets from wearing first responders hats on 9/11 anniversary - NY Daily News

It seems MLB didn't bite the bullet isn't taking the hit at all and is instead fining teams which do violate league policy. Again, I'm not sure what your issue seems to be. The league has been consistent in its approach to honoring 9/11.

The forum wasn't around in 2001 (to my knowledge) and I'm not sure what my position on this issue would have been 13 years ago. However, in retrospect, I see nothing wrong with the league's approach. They were allowed to commemorate the event in other visible ways however, refused. Why? I don't know.

That was their initial response yes, but in the end they had to give up on the idea because word got out. And when I was referring to the news story, I wasn't referring to 2001, but 2011.
 
I know your a lefty and believe every word someone on the left says is gospel but even you can't defend this.

I used to think nobody could be continually wrong all of the time, but you are proving that assumption incorrect.
 
I am curious what you all thought about the MLB hat deal that happened after 9/11, were you all siding with MLB on that as well?

No idea what you are talking about... baseball?
 
Back
Top Bottom