That explains some of the disconnect. I though the article and conversation was primarily about the motivations and actions of people protesting his actions. I assumed that was what all the name calling at the beginning of the post, and the analysis of whether people who oppose his protest are able to think rationally was. But you are also absolutely right that it was incorrect to imply that anyone is claiming that people who stand are doing it because of racism. That was not said, and I was wrong on that. I should have said that people who stand, and are offended by those who do not, are not necessarily motivated by racism.
I am pretty offended by the guy sitting on the flag. I hope I would not be more or less offended if he were another race. Either way, I would have spoken to him about it.
