"O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?"

Those are the final words of our national anthem, the Star Spangled Banner, written by Francis Scott Key while imprisoned on a ship during the Battle of Baltimore in the War of 1812. Pretty courageous stuff by a near nobody. But that's not what's in the news today. That's not what's making the headlines.

Instead, famous athletes across multiple platforms are making a stand by refusing to stand for the anthem prior to the start of their respective events. The first to do so was San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who sat down during the anthem because of what he sees as social injustice. Specifically, Kaepernick states that he will not stand and celebrate a country that in his words, "oppresses black people and people of color." Although following the initial protest, the QB was seen wearing a shirt that celebration Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. So much for being against oppression. His actions caused a national discussion and many heated debates that involved political figures, law enforcement and sports personalities across the country.

The floundering QB is not alone, however. Since initially protesting, he has been joined by teammate Eric Reid, Seattle Seahawks CB Jeremy Lane, Megan Rapinoe of the Seattle Reign, and most recently Brandon Marshall of the Denver Broncos.

Are they right in doing so? I'll explore that in a few minutes.

Rapinoe admitted that her action was a "nod to Kaepernick and everything that he's standing for right now." Though her choice was met with resistance by another women's soccer club, the Washington Spirit. They decided to play the anthem before teams took the field in order to avoid future conflict. Their reasoning was based on that fact that they did not want to "subject our fans and friends to the disrespect we feel such an act would represent." Further, they believed that allowing others "to hijack this tradition that means so much to millions of Americans and so many of our own fans for any cause would effectively be just as disrespectful as doing it ourselves."

Marshall's stance on Thursday night was met with immediate press and reaction, since it was clear that the NBC television crew was on the lookout for such protests and therefore focused their attention on the entire sideline during the anthem. Marshall has since lost his sponsorship with the Air Academy Federal Credit Union.

Though Marshall explained his action more than the others did. Following the game he said, “I’m not against the military, police or America. I’m against social injustice. I think the more people do it, the more it’s seen — there’s going to be hate mail, hate comments, but at the same time, people will talk about it."

That's really the crux of the matter. It isn't a conservative/liberal issue or a race issue per say. It could be, but it's mostly about free expression, agenda setting, and anterior motives.

Colin Kaepernick has every right to do what he pleases regarding free speech and protest. As does Rapinoe, Marshall, Lane, Reid, and ultimately every citizen of the United States. It is a right that our soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen fight for every day. It is a right held close to all Americans, regardless of demographic.

Those who sit or kneel for the anthem wish to protest what they see as oppression by police against minorities. That is their worldview and their subsequent right. However, there is also agendas to be set and personal motives at hand. For example, Kaepernick probably knew that sitting for the anthem would cause a national debate; so what better way to set a national debate than to create one? His mission is accomplished because a) we are now discussing the issue, and b) other athletes are following suit.

Sitting for the anthem is bold, blunt, and considering the backlash, pretty brave because it's noticeable in large sporting and entertainment events. But the anthem doesn't represent the U.S. Government, it represents the American people. It represents those who died for our freedoms. It represents the values to which our nation was founded, free expression being one of them.

But the question does remain, to stand or not to stand?

That is ultimately up to them. It is their right as Americans to speak, act, and behave freely about what they believe as long as it's not violent. In fact, non-violent protest have brought out the most social change in our country's history.

However, these individuals that protest should realize that their right to sit during the anthem was fought for by people who died protecting that flag they refuse to celebrate. Likewise, the veterans who died for the flag died to protect the right of free speech. So in essence, it is a double-edged sword.

In conclusion, the choice and opinion is ours to decide.

We must value everyone's rights while keeping in mind those who fought to protect them.