I hope Michael Sam flames out in the NFL

[Crimsoncrew]

Well anyone who bullies anyone for just being who they are when they aren't hurting anyone else, those people are the scum of the Earth.

I don't disagree.

 

[DoobieKeebler]

(this thread)

 

[TobyTyler]

how do those idiot Christians know that Christ is somehow anti-gay? ya, they don't. they're idiots and anyone who says 'god spoke to me' belongs in a sanitarium.

btw, i'm not anti-gay. i'm anti - gays being able to push this in my face every day.

They believe that the bible is the word of God and the bible tells them that homosexuality is not acceptable.

 

[tomikcon1971]

Can't really verify this but......

 

[tomikcon1971]

 

[TobyTyler]

Well first off, I'm pretty sure the bible tells us to tolerate others' sins (something about throwing stones?).

Beyond that, I'm still a little hazy about what we're equating here. You say Sam (and others) need to accept that others' beliefs are valid. I'm still not entirely willing to accept that; the Bible was used to justify slavery and segregation, and I do not believe those were/are valid positions. Hell, racially or religiously motivated genocide could be considered a valid position, it doesn't mean it's right or should be tolerated. However, for the sake of discussion, let's assume you're correct and the belief that homosexuality should not be accepted in our society is a valid position. You're still comparing a belief (homosexuality is wrong) to an act (one man feeding cake to another). The act may have been influenced by a belief, but without an act on the other side, they don't line up. We'd need to change the anti-homosexuality belief into an act in order for it to track.

So what's the counterpoint? A man feeding cake to and kissing a woman? I did that at my wedding, and no one was upset about it (except all those ladies whose hearts I broke when I went off the market....). The issue for me is that one side is not tolerating actions that, had they been taken by a heterosexual couple, would have occasioned no comment whatsoever. And this is where it gets complicated. People are condemning Sam and ESPN for the cake thing. That is intolerance, IMO. But by criticizing this intolerance, I am now intolerant? And people should anticipate an intolerant response and adjust their behavior to minimize it or avoid it entirely? I don't agree with that.

I feel like I'm rambling at this point, but I guess my position is as follows: there are certain things that societies will ban (or at least discourage) based on a given society's values. I don't have a huge problem with that. There are some people who don't see anything wrong with murder; I don't think we should respect that position. However, I believe most positions that don't directly hurt someone else are valid and should be accepted. I also think we should have consistent standards in terms of how we treat people. If racial slurs are not accepted socially, then none should be accepted. If sexual preference slurs are not accepted, then none should be accepted. If acts of affection and intimacy in the public eye are not accepted, then none should be accepted. Conversely, if some of these things are accepted, then all should be accepted. I can't equate Michael Sam eating cake with someone calling him a fag, for instance, because they are completely different things. The person who is angry about the cake/kiss is angry because of who's doing it. The person who is angry about the language is angry because of the language.

Whew! That was a novel! It does sound odd to be defending bigoted Christians but I have to say again, who are we to decide whose beliefs are right and whose are wrong?

 

[Xponentialchaos]

[MEDIA=twitter]467447726230482944[/MEDIA]

Good.

 

[TobyTyler]

Oh absolutely.....along with the many other unnatural things I do!

But ultimately, I am still looking to make a family one day. I'll have to give up masturbating for a few days in order to do that.....and it will have to be done with a woman.

Ha ha! That's funny. I remember when I was about 13 and I first found out you could do that, I didn't let go of my dick for 3 months.

 

[DoobieKeebler]

I'm sorry, but this thread is an embarrassment. Can we please lock or end this?


(I haven't read the entire thread, but if it's true people are invoking the bible... stop. As a theology scholar, there is a difference between old testament, new testament, Jesus, and Paul's letters)

 

[NinerSickness]

people are invoking the bible... stop.

Don't like people invoking the Bible? Ok, Understood.

As a theology scholar, there is a difference between old testament, new testament, Jesus, and Paul's letters)

 

[Xponentialchaos]

lol

 

[DoobieKeebler]

Don't like people invoking the Bible? Ok, Understood.

I am of the "love & peace" version of the bible, which basically means ignoring Paul's letters.

Then again, I believe the Qur'an supports love as well, which also seems to be a minority opinion.

 

[NinerSickness]

The point I was making is that you asked people to stop invoking the Bible one line before you proceeded to invoke the Bible.

 

[SY8goat]

Can't really verify this but......

[MEDIA=twitter]465079538611798017[/MEDIA]

 

[NinerSickness]

I am of the "love & peace" version of the bible, which basically means ignoring Paul's letters.

JUST for the sake of curiosity, boredom and clarity (I've never heard anyone take your position before) and the fact that it's May...

Nay on Paul's letters.

Yea or nay on Peter's, James' & John's?

No explanation is necessary; just asking.

 

[jayviabay]

I am of the "love & peace" version of the bible, which basically means ignoring Paul's letters.

Then again, I believe the Qur'an supports love as well, which also seems to be a minority opinion.

What version of the Bible do you read? It sounds like you have not read Paul's Letters at all

 

[tomikcon1971]

Ha ha....I forgot about that bit. I like the one about tubing as well.

 

[MHSL82]

Won't be a big deal. Look at the woman kicker from the combine. Obviously they're not the same case, but the situations are the same in that you couldn't make a huge uproar if they don't make the League. As a 7th round pick, Sam isn't being looked at as a huge contributor, and the Rams are pretty solid on the DL anyway, so it would be very reasonable why he could be cut before the season. Then the NFL could say he got his shot, he failed, and that's that. End of story. Nobody else picks him up and he fizzles out over time.

The uproar won't be coming from people who watch football. It will be coming from others. And they will make use of the defensive player of the year title as their proof that he should make it if not for his sexuality, when they don't know enough about football to know that doesn't guarantee anything.

 

[MHSL82]

Of course he has the final say, but if he was harassed with offers, and then saw the big paycheck that he is not getting through football yet... How can you blame him?? If you can understand why he is being contradictory isn't it more acceptable... My point is that I don't think it is the contradictory that is bothering anyone, it is the media attention...

Maybe he is an evil genius, and purposely came out knowing that he would be bigger than Clowney and manziel...

Also, if giving enough time with the media, everyone is going to be contradictory a little, and I am sure that he is being told what to say most of the time... I am just not convinced that anyone can be that cliché...

What he said sounds exactly like what I would say if I were him, in coached. But then again, I would have tried to "no comment" the rest of the way until my "no comment" pissed the media off from asking. Not saying that I'd be successful. I just wouldn't have agreed to the documentary.

 

[MHSL82]

[MEDIA=twitter]467447726230482944[/MEDIA]

Should have talked to the Rams before leaking/announcing the show. Now, he looks like a hypocrite without the show that could have enlightened some.