I understand, but I think to say that they just threw it in there with a stream of songs by other musicians with no thought of why it is in there (as another poster said, why would people make a big deal about a religious hymn) seems like a deliberate avoidance of an issue.
The song is part and parcel of BLM and the racial grievance crowd. That is the reality. So if they played it with the league and network collaboration, it was for a reason.
People are angry about this embrace and inclusion of what is felt with some justification to be racially tinged due to the common modern day use of the song (this is not disputable that the song is used for that political/ideological purpose if one follows the news).
I don’t fault you for not being angry or offended, but I think to dismiss people’s anger at this as unfounded is a narrow view of it.
Not really. Way back in 1919 the NAACP declared it the “negro national anthem” because of its “cry for liberation”. Which to me isn’t very different than declaring the Cowboys “America’s team”. In the end it’s a pretty song, with a nice message, that really doesn’t have to be color based at all and isn’t in the original text. So in the end what we got was:
a patriotic country song
a kinda patriotic black gospel song
and a patriotic folk song
Really, not a big deal.
were all of Rhinna’s dancers black or were there some whites doing black face?