A few thoughts on the recent furor over a pro football player refusing to stand for the National Anthem. I couldn’t care less what Colin Kaepernick does and don’t question his right to protest as he sees fit. But I do find it bizarre that he believes that standing for the anthem somehow implies that he personally and necessarily shows pride in the flag, the country, or its character, for the same reason that I don’t believe that when people recite the Pledge of Allegiance they truly think or believe that by doing so, they are offering their “allegiance” to a flag or the country for which it stands. Children and adults who recite the Pledge don’t—either implicitly or explicitly—personally endorse the statement affirming that America actually provides “liberty and justice for all,” nor do they assert that our nation is indivisible (or, for that matter, that it exists under the Christian god). Instead, like the National Anthem, it’s a custom largely devoid of significance; it’s not actually an oath of fealty or assertion of support from a citizen to a state. “This country stands for freedom, liberty, justice for all—and it’s not happening for all right now,” Kaepernick said—apparently lamenting that an unachievable, aspirational statement had not come to fruition in the real world. I’m fine with his protest, and my issue has nothing to do with disrespecting the country or the flag but instead the strange premise that standing for the anthem implies personally endorsing its content or asserting that the country’s ideals are being met; I’ve never heard that before, and don’t know of any logical basis for that assumption. I've also not seen anyone explain this reasoning, but will be curious to see if anyone does.