Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Players Ready To Welcome Gay Teammate

"Home of the Vikings" Deemed Disrespectful

Got something to say? Register!

If its okay for the Kansas City Chiefs, why not the Vikings?

If you've ever been to a Kansas City Chiefs' game you know how the National Anthem ends, the crowd yells "Home of the Chiefs" instead of "Home of the Brave."

Shawnee Mission West kids say all they want is the right to do the same thing. Students say it's a First Amendment right to sing the National Anthem any way they want. But, the principal says anyone who does will be standing outside the gym.

The principal of the school thinks that singing "Home of the Vikings" instead of "Home of the Brave" is "disrespectful to the men and women who fought and died for our country to change the words of the song."

Consider me on the side of the principal but not in any steadfast manner. I got beaten down when I brought this up last time. A poll and your thoughts after the jump.

Poll
"Home of the Vikings"
Disrespectful
9 votes
Shows school pride
27 votes

36 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 24 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Not disrespectful
It's a school pride thing.

That's getting a bit ridiculous.  At my high school we did the same thing.

by Joel Thorman on Feb 5, 2008 7:38 AM CST reply actions  

This argument is along the same lines
as an amendment banning flag-burning...both the anthem and the flag are symbolic representations of actual virtues of our nation, most importantly liberty.  Being able to change the last word of the anthem, or burn the flag in protest are examples of us exercising that liberty, and if we can't do that, then the symbols lose some of their significance.  I can tell you that when I am at Arrowhead (or anywhere else for that matter), I tear up a little when the anthem is sung, but I still yell Chiefs at the end.  And I am not being disrespectful at all.

by PVChiefsfan on Feb 5, 2008 7:50 AM CST reply actions  

To clarify
I meant I wouldn't mind seeing "Home of the Chiefs" stopped being said. I think people should be able to say it if they want. I don't want it banned.

by Chris Thorman on Feb 5, 2008 7:54 AM CST up reply actions  

I think
that before a game to get fans and players wound up it is a good thing for people to change the words at the end, but on the same note if it is sung before classes or at other school functions it should be kept brave. And on the flag burning part I would attempt to launch my foot as far up the flag burners ass as far as possible!

by Eric @ Arrowhead Pride on Feb 5, 2008 8:24 AM CST reply actions  

In one sense
I find myself worried about this site becoming something other than football and Chiefs related, because of this.  I am not criticizing by any sense the subject being brought up, however I point to all the new names I see that have commented that we do not get to see on a regular basis for regular site posts.

In the other sense I find myself wondering about the ages of everyone who has posted a comment just as a curiosity to relate their thoughts to the time they have grown up in this world.  

I can sit here and tell you many things about our past and our Country since I was raised in the 60's.  On the other hand my daughters who are 16 and 18 can't really tell you much about our Country because it isn't being taught in the schools anymore, especially without the same purpose it was introduced to myself and my classmates.

While I respect anyones right to have free speech, their does come a sense of responsibility with that right. When the argument is presented that all we are doing is changing the last word to the song, we are not disrespecting the anyone one or any tradition, that is wrong in itself.

When the song was adopted by the United States it became a symbol of our pride in our Nation. The same pride we have in our flag.  The same pride we have in our National bird (Eagle). Would you paint the Eagle red just to say it is a "Chief" bird?  Who would that upset? It was done in a manner of free speech.  

I could go on and on because above all of my rights as an American, I love this Country dearly as I do my family, but I took the time to study on why our Country is so great and who and what made this Country that way.

I am not going to take a side on the issue of the song, although I am saddened it cannot be sung proudly by everyone at any venue with the love and respect of why it was written.

Please let's get back to the Chiefs.

by Lanier63 on Feb 5, 2008 8:38 AM CST reply actions  

Well said
You are correct that this is a controversial, non-football issue. And it is a Chiefs issue.

I wouldn't have brought it up if I didn't think our community could handle a mature discussion. I was impressed with the civility with which people conducted themselves last time I brought this up. It's a great example to new comers of the polite, rational and mature discussion that takes place here.

Consider this the one "political" thread type of the year, if you want to call it that.

by Chris Thorman on Feb 5, 2008 8:45 AM CST up reply actions  

Red Eagle
I just giggled when I read the painting a bird red and calling it a "Chief Bird." Why do I feel like you just brought up a marketing idea that hasn't been done yet, but will be done by next season! :)

My only issue with that is by painting the bird (hypothetically), you're infringing on its "rights".  [Not to say the bird is protected by the Constitution or anything like that, but you can't kick your dog because it's 1) wrong and 2) protected by certain laws.] The principle behind that is to not injure the animal. Painting the bird would hurt the bird; thus, it's against the spirit of the law. In other, Colbert-like words/syllogisms:

Beating dog = against the law
Beating dog = intentionally hurting the dog.
Intentionally hurting the dog = Intentionally hurting the bird.
Painting the bird = Intentionally hurting the bird.
Painting the bird - against the law

My point is not about the bird, but about the song; singing different words doesn't hurt anyone. I agree, if you consider the whole "honoring our troops" thing, it's messed up, and I'm not personally down with that. However, it's not hurting anyone else and not breaking the law. Let 'em sing in French if they want--they're kids, and they'll get bored with it soon enough.

by webby37 on Feb 5, 2008 11:03 AM CST up reply actions  

And BTW
Go effing Chiefs, man! When the hell does our crap start again? I'm getting withdrawl.

-cw

by webby37 on Feb 5, 2008 11:04 AM CST up reply actions  

And Chris
you did get badly beaten down, ouch.

by Eric @ Arrowhead Pride on Feb 5, 2008 8:45 AM CST reply actions  

Yes
Perhaps that's why the conversation never got political. People were busy tearing me apart!

by Chris Thorman on Feb 5, 2008 8:46 AM CST up reply actions  

I was hoping
for more comments on this.

by Eric @ Arrowhead Pride on Feb 5, 2008 9:07 AM CST reply actions  

Pfft!
I'll sing "God save the Queen" and nothing more!
Blame my wife!

by sir eccles on Feb 5, 2008 11:26 AM CST reply actions  

Well
there are a couple angles to follow on this.

first is the respect issue that is what people get hyped most about.

we need to remember respect is earned and learned.  not just an automatic.  The kids will never learn respect if the folks around don't teach them why it is should be respected.

Respect is not earned just by saying "cuz I told you to".

When a kid goes to a chiefs game and sees the players play as hard as they can and the contest is fierce, then see those same players congratulate the other team and shake hands, it teaches them respect for the game, the players and the notion of fair play.  That is learned respect.  Those players earn it by demonstrating it.

One of the greatest things people get upset about changing words is they feel it shows a lack of respect for veterans or freedom and rights, etc.  It is exactly those rights that earn respect on their own though.  By seeing that people have been in wars and given time and sacrifice for all people to be able to express themselves as they deem fit is what earns respect in time.  It is the lessons that should be going along with the hype that the kids are not seeing.

Once the people can identify the freedoms and rights that the songs and words represent, they will begin to respect the words themselves for being representative.

Until then, all they see are blowhards who tell them they can't do something but don't teach by example.

BTW, you are right, it is off sports, BUT, it is still important for as long as the anthem is sung at a sporting event, it will be customized to fit the occasion.

Your not at  a presidential swearing in or veterans day parade.  It's a football game, with athletes, mascots, cheerleaders and the media circus all in one.

Big Bear

by bigbearomaha on Feb 5, 2008 11:39 AM CST reply actions  

Vikings are ghey
Vikings has two syllables, Chiefs has one, I might be okay with "Vikes," but it's a stupid mascot and aesthetically lousy move.  They should change their name to the insurgents, after all what were Vikings other than blood-thirsty foreign mercenaries?  It's really only a matter of taste.

Actually, several states have statutes insisting on the proper, complete singing of the anthem, so it's unlikely they'd get a constitutionality ruling before say flag-burning, etc.  That said several states still have laws against sleeping in boxcars and oral sex.  (Surprise bigots, sodomy laws effect you too.  You're breaking the law anytime the missus might give you a knee wobbler).

What's so disturbing is that so many people want to make it an issue of patriotism, wrap themselves in the American flag, and throw around the "brave men and women who gave their lives in defense of this country."  Yes, they should be honored, that's why we have numerous monuments and a holiday in their honor.

Does changing the words to a song detract from that?  Really?  More so than the fact that we are now allies with Vietnam, Germany, Japan, Iraq, Mexico, and England?  Does anyone feel guilty about how much our lives profit from those alliances?  Does anyone have a problem with G.I. Joes or Jessica Simpson wearing an American Flag bikini?  Those don't bother you proud defender of the American service men and women?

What about the brave men and women who risk their lives everyday in law enforcement?  Is that enough for you to declare rap music unpatriotic?  What about every halloween, when there is invariably one group of slutty cops or slutty firegirls?  Do you tell them to go home and think about 9/11 proud defender of the American way?

Kneejerk patriotism and couching one's arguments in the blood of American soldiers is possibly one of, if not the most, dangerous lines of thought prevalent in our society today.

It provides blinders to imperialism and global racism and been the undoing of every great empire from the Romans to the British.

It replaces solemn reverence and thanks with inflammatory rhetoric and puritanical chastisements to the everyday ironies of life, death and society.

From Gaul to India and Pakistan and now Iraq and Afganistan the subterfuge and perversion of the battle drumcall for domestic empowerment has been the undoing, God save the Queen indeed.

by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Feb 5, 2008 12:23 PM CST reply actions  

1st
amendment right.  The principal obviously doesn't know the U.S. constitution and it sounds like a personal/ego decision.

by ilamuku on Feb 5, 2008 1:08 PM CST reply actions  

Really?

So under the 1st amendment it'd be okay for the students to hold up a banner that said "Bong hits 4 Jesus" right?

And of course it's a personal/ego decision.  It's a high school principal!  Doesn't everyone who gets out of high school immediately realize that high school administrators are exactly what you thought they were in high school?  Socially Napoleon Complexed jerks who rule over their kingdom of learner's permit holders with an iron fist.

It's a conflicting value system where football and country are top priorities.  What would be better is if they were named the "baby Jesuses" or "dinosaurs" instead of "vikings."  Then they'd be having prayer in school or implicitly advocating evolution in a Kansas School district.  Oh man, it's a like a King of the Hill episode.

by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Feb 5, 2008 1:28 PM CST up reply actions  

unless
they had a school ordinance banning drug-related references (which i am sure they do), then yes, it would be okay for students to hold up the "Bong hits 4 Jesus" banner.  Being sacrilegious is not illegal...yet.

by PVChiefsfan on Feb 5, 2008 2:18 PM CST up reply actions  

but of course
what is deemed "sacrilegious" is subjective, like that which is deemed "offensive" (I know it when I see it? come on Supreme Court, you're gonna have to do better than that...oh wait, you have a guaranteed job for life, never mind)

by PVChiefsfan on Feb 5, 2008 2:20 PM CST up reply actions  

Not as clear cut
There a plenty of court cases some as high as the supreme court that discuss whether students rights under the constitution are protected or not. It isn't as clear cut as one might think with the courts going both ways. Such things as keeping discipline seem to trump disruptive free speech activities from what I've read.
Blame my wife!

by sir eccles on Feb 5, 2008 4:01 PM CST up reply actions  

Bong hits 4 Jesus?
Joey Lawrence(WHOA!)

by Eric @ Arrowhead Pride on Feb 5, 2008 3:26 PM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Kansas City Chiefs blog! Follow us on Facebook and on Twitter.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Dscn3246_3_small
Worst Case Scenario
Lips-rhps_small
Translating Coachspeak (Humor & Satire)

Recent FanPosts

Supernova1007_small
What Does it Take?
Small
Chiefs OTA's: Some Real Football News
Ford-mustang-gt-2011-wallpaper-02_small
Hope
New_kc_helm_small
Scott Pioli: Genuine Mastermind Part 1 - Quarterbacks
Dirtyhippy_small
The Epic Battle of Pittsburgh(Game 9 preview)
Spit_small
A Unique Look At Elite QB's and Ricky Stanzi
309look_small
Cassel, can the chiefs get a ring on his back?
Small
Trade McCluster...
Supernova1007_small
A New 3-4 team in the NFL
Supernova1007_small
Fashionistas

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Ct_fb_small Chris Thorman

Headshot_small Joel Thorman

Editors

288-chiefstexans0944_sp_8-15-09_jfs woodman212

Matt_ssv_pic_small_small Matt Conner

Stag_20silhouette_small stagdsp

Lips-rhps_small upamtn

Contributors

Kc_ny_small NJ Chiefs Fan

Phoenix_by_melen_small KaloPhoenix

N1358340181_30185582_5800_small Flowers24

Small Jon Yoon

Dirkness_small HisDirkness

Dscn3246_3_small MNchiefsfan

Cassel_small Steve_in_RI