Michael Sam

[Superman]

I don't have an answer to that.  I guess I will know it when I see it.

 

 

I find having sex with someone whom you are not married to to be morally wrong. . . Yet I'm pretty sure the Colts have drafted and signed some players who have openly made that lifestyle choice.  

 

I find divorce outside of cases of adultery, abuse or abandonment to be morally wrong.  Yet I'll bet the Colts have signed players who have made that lifestyle choice.

 

Is drafting a player that's openly gay an endorsement of his homosexuality or maybe it's just acquiring a good football player and his lifestyle choices are really none of their business??

 

Seriously since when has employing someone been an endorsement of their lifestyle??  Because my employer never asked me who I was having sex with or what kind of people I liked to have sex with.  That would IMO be a pretty important question if their employment of me ment that they where endorsing my lifestyle.

 

Are the Steelers endorsing Rothlisburger's promiscuity?  Are the Vikings endorsing AP's promiscuity and having children with a bunch of different women and NOT BEING IN THEIR LIVES.  

 

Where the Eagles endorsing Vick's dog murder??

 

Maybe some things are just about football and not an endorsement on what a player does off the field?

 

And for the record, yes I think homosexual acts are morally wrong.  But I also don't think it's any of my business unless the person is a member of my church.

 

I can't really say it any better than Valpo does above. (I'd add abortion to the list.)

 

I'll just add that I'm not trying to attack you or put you on the spot. I just disagree with the idea that drafting an openly gay player amounts to support of their lifestyle or orientation. If a team had Michael Sam on their board before his coming out, and if it's all about football, I don't agree that this should cause them to remove him from their board.

[cdgacoltsfan]

No, Tebow was an excellent college QB and the chastising came before he was even drafted.

 

I'm not sure what separation fo Church and State has to do with this conversation but before I answer let me ask a question.  Where in the Constitution does it state the Church and State are to be separate?  The only thing the Constitution says is that the State cannot establish a religion.

Thanks..you answered exactly as I thought you would.... Everyone is entitled to his or hers oppinions...that being said,

you may want to look at picking up another hobby other than sports pro or amature because Im willing to bet that, at minimum, the 10% or more rule applies as it does in society.

My suggestion for your new hobby is solitaire.

[BHosein]

I hope the Colts draft Michael Sam. What other team has an owner, coaches and players with the courage to give him the support he will need in his NFL career.

[Coffeedrinker]

I find having sex with someone whom you are not married to to be morally wrong. . . Yet I'm pretty sure the Colts have drafted and signed some players who have openly made that lifestyle choice.  

 

I find divorce outside of cases of adultery, abuse or abandonment to be morally wrong.  Yet I'll bet the Colts have signed players who have made that lifestyle choice.

 

Is drafting a player that's openly gay an endorsement of his homosexuality or maybe it's just acquiring a good football player and his lifestyle choices are really none of their business??

 

Seriously since when has employing someone been an endorsement of their lifestyle??

 

Are the Steelers endorsing Rothlisburger's promiscuity?  Are the Vikings endorsing AP's promiscuity and having children with a bunch of different women and NOT BEING IN THEIR LIVES.  

 

Where the Eagles endorsing Vick's dog murder??

 

Maybe some things are just about football and not an endorsement on what a player does off the field?

You make a good point.  Apparantly, I found the point where too much becomes too much.

[Coffeedrinker]

Thanks..you answered exactly as I thought you would.... Everyone is entitled to his or hers oppinions...that being said,

you may want to look at picking up another hobby other than sports pro or amature because Im willing to bet that, at minimum, the 10% or more rule applies as it does in society.

My suggestion for your new hobby is solitaire.

So you won't answer the question about show where in the Constitution it talks about separating the Church and State?

 

Also the societal numbers are more like 2%.  And you may not have read my post above in response to Jason S.

 

Lastly, I don't think I will be taking life advice from you. 

[Coffeedrinker]

I can't really say it any better than Valpo does above. (I'd add abortion to the list.)

 

I'll just add that I'm not trying to attack you or put you on the spot. I just disagree with the idea that drafting an openly gay player amounts to support of their lifestyle or orientation. If a team had Michael Sam on their board before his coming out, and if it's all about football, I don't agree that this should cause them to remove him from their board.

I never once thought you were attacking me and I see your point of view.  I just don't agree with it.

[MAC]

 

Ahh I see, so to make your point you are going to create a completely bogus and nonsensical scenario, try to act like it is the same thing and make your point based on your bogus scenario.

 

To answer your legitimate points, it is just sports and I'm not pushing to close down the NFL because they draft gay players.  But I do have a choice how I spend my time and my money and it will not be to an company that gets so far outside what I consider right.

 

As far as comparing to Hernandez or Vick.  All three are wrong and if Hernandez gets off and the Colts sign him I would stop being a Colts fan.  If the Colts had signed Vick, I would have stopped being a Colts fan.

If the team signed Hernandez and Vick I would stand on my head to let management know how I felt. I would have trouble wishing either to succeed because I find their actions so offensive. I knew where you were going, that's why I mentioned them.

 

My other point wasn't bogus or nonsensical, it was simply an amusing way of pointing out that sexual orientation is a matter of genetics, not morality. Clearly you feel differently, and clearly you are entitled to your view. Debating the source or nature of your beliefs would violate forum rules. Suffice it to say that I say "live and let live" when it comes to religious beliefs as well. I don't care what you do as long as it doesn't hurt others.

 

Just some perspective though - I look at it this way. I consider "moral issues" to be pleasurable temptations that people have to willfully ignore to demonstrate good character. Fortunately I've never had any problem doing so.

 

I'm not "tempted" by homosexuality. I'd be as likely to cut off my private parts as to engage in sex with another man. The thought of either is utterly repugnant to the point of being nauseating. This thing is, common sense suggests that a gay man would feel the same way about sex with a woman. I have no right to condemn them for that - in fact it's none of my business. I'm certainly not going to stand on my head to prevent him trying to earn a living because of it.

[Superman]

I never once thought you were attacking me and I see your point of view.  I just don't agree with it.

 

Yeah, I see.

 

I don't understand how it's okay to hire someone who is openly sexually promiscuous, just so long as they're not openly sexually promiscuous with people of the same sex.

[Valpo2004]

You make a good point.  Apparantly, I found the point where too much becomes too much.

 

I just wonder why that has to be homosexuality.  Look I'm a Christian and believe homosexual acts to be morally wrong but at the same time I can't understand the freakout about it.  You are far from the only person that thinks this way but at the same time I don't understand.  How come when a organization or sports team gets a bunch of different players many of whom have like 5 kids by 5 different women, it's par for the course but the moment they talk about drafting a guy that's openly gay that's when it's a problem.

 

I mean do you want to render someone who's openly guy to be completely unemployable by anyone in any industry?  Because it sounds like you think that employment is endorsement of their lifestyle and at the same time you don't want anyone to endorse that lifestyle.  

 

Gay people still have to make a living and how are they suppose to make a living if no one will employ them?

 

Personally I hope we land the guy in the late rounds or something as a steal.  Not because I want to make any sort of political point or because I want the Colts to "endorse homosexuality".  But mostly just because I want to get a draft steal and if others are gonna mark him down for that then we might as well take advantage.  

 

If I was busy caring what these guys where up to in their private lives, I would have never watched the NFL in the first place.  In fact I likely would have thrown my TV in the trash and refused to watch it or any movies ever.  

[Warhawk]

Having trouble proving discrimination doesn't mean that there wasn't discrimination. Discrimination cases are typically difficult.

 

I didn't say there wouldn't be, I just said that it's very difficult to establish who was being discriminatory and who was just making an unrelated business decision.

[Nadine]

aiyiyi

Religion and politics, we can usually avoid them altogether

but in this case we cannot and I must say,I'm impressed that the thread has not devolved into a brawl

nice job 

[Balzer40]

It is, as any type of discussion like this is, very complicated and I don't really know if I can answer that but I will try.

A combination of both actually. First and foremost, I think homosexuality is wrong. That being said, I don't really care what someone does in the privacy of their home as long as it's not hurting someone. And I am almost positive there have been homesexuals in a Colts uniform in the past and perhaps even now. I just make it a point to not support organizations that openly and overtly support homosexuals. And his declaration means that any team that drafts him will be openly and overtly supporting that lifestyle choice.

IMO, being a homesexual is not news worthy, yet people want to act like this kid is some kind of hero because he admits he does something wrong. Yet the same people that claim Sam is a hero chastised Tebow because he believes that unborn babies should not be killed.

Again it's a complicated subject and would take a lot more than this to fully explain it. But you asked, what I believed to be a sincere question, so I wanted to try to answer it.

Answered the best you could and thats all you need to do. Careful though, I had posts removed from this thread because I was honest about my feelings on the subject and when I asked why, well I have yet to receive an answer. I insulted nobody and made no rude or off color remarks. Just my honest feelings about this subject. I find it so hypocritical that those who claim to be so tolerent are only that way if everybody agree's with their views otherwise the intolerance flows through and their real feelings come out. Im so tolerant and open minded...as long as you think exactly as I do.(rolls eyes)!

[Superman]

I didn't say there wouldn't be, I just said that it's very difficult to establish who was being discriminatory and who was just making an unrelated business decision.

 

In context, discrimination is pretty obvious (doesn't mean it's provable in a court of law). A prospect like Michael Sam not being drafted would be an issue.

[Nadine]

Answered the best you could and thats all you need to do. Careful though, I had posts removed from this thread because I was honest about my feelings on the subject and when I asked why, well I have yet to receive an answer. I insulted nobody and made no rude or off color remarks. Just my honest feelings about this subject. I find it so hypocritical that those who claim to be so tolerent are only that way if everybody agree's with their views otherwise the intolerance flows through and their real feelings come out. Im so tolerant and open minded...as long as you think like me.(rolls eyes)!

Do not complain about moderation. I received no message from you

And the forum is not the right place for a moderation discussion anyway

This particular post here............is an example of what would be removed

 

you are taking shots at people who disagree with you

 

you also complain about moderation

 

both are site violations

[Warhawk]

In context, discrimination is pretty obvious (doesn't mean it's provable in a court of law). A prospect like Michael Sam not being drafted would be an issue.

 

Sure, it's easy enough to say, in that circumstance, he was discriminated against, my point was just that it's very difficult to hold individuals or teams, as opposed to the system in general, responsible.  If he goes undrafted, it's one thing to say that Michael Sam was the victim of discrimination, it's another to say "Jerry Jones discriminated against him" or "Ryan Grigson discriminated against him" or "Bill Belichick discriminated against him."  The closest thing you could say is that the NFL as a whole did it, but the NFL as an entity, specifically the NFL offices, don't make hiring decisions; the teams do.  So absent some GM getting recorded as saying "let's not draft the gay guy, because he's gay", there's no real recourse, and even then it's a shaky argument.

[Nadine]

Sure, it's easy enough to say, in that circumstance, he was discriminated against, my point was just that it's very difficult to hold individuals or teams, as opposed to the system in general, responsible.  If he goes undrafted, it's one thing to say that Michael Sam was the victim of discrimination, it's another to say "Jerry Jones discriminated against him" or "Ryan Grigson discriminated against him" or "Bill Belichick discriminated against him."  The closest thing you could say is that the NFL as a whole did it, but the NFL as an entity, specifically the NFL offices, don't make hiring decisions; the teams do.  So absent some GM getting recorded as saying "let's not draft the gay guy, because he's gay", there's no real recourse, and even then it's a shaky argument.

no no recourse

And he knows that

[Superman]

Sure, it's easy enough to say, in that circumstance, he was discriminated against, my point was just that it's very difficult to hold individuals or teams, as opposed to the system in general, responsible.  If he goes undrafted, it's one thing to say that Michael Sam was the victim of discrimination, it's another to say "Jerry Jones discriminated against him" or "Ryan Grigson discriminated against him" or "Bill Belichick discriminated against him."  The closest thing you could say is that the NFL as a whole did it, but the NFL as an entity, specifically the NFL offices, don't make hiring decisions; the teams do.  So absent some GM getting recorded as saying "let's not draft the gay guy, because he's gay", there's no real recourse, and even then it's a shaky argument.

 

The NFLPA has a lot of money, a lot of lawyers, and the desire to make an issue out of this (which is already clear from the comments from DeMaurice Smith and Domonique Foxworth). It probably wouldn't take more than a couple days for a suit to be filed against the NFL is Michael Sam goes undrafted. Doesn't mean they'd win, but legal proceedings would be quick and spirited, to say the least.

 

I agree with your viewpoint, it's difficult to prove discrimination in the case of any particular member team of the NFL, and bringing suit against the entire NFL is an even bigger deal. But there have been reports that multiple teams had already downgraded Sam before he "came out," and it was because they knew about his orientation (which is discrimination, provable or not). If there's any kind of evidence to support that assertion, that's more than enough basis for a lawsuit against the league altogether.

 

This, by the way, is all the silly part of all of this. I hate hearing about overly litigious things like this, even though I find the nuances in law interesting (with my very limited knowledge, by the way). But I would be absolutely shocked if Sam goes undrafted, and even more shocked if a lawsuit isn't filed by the NFLPA immediately thereafter.

[K-148]

Is it possible Sam is not a gay but smart businessman trying to force Goodell to push teams to take him higher on a draft day?

[Warhawk]

This, by the way, is all the silly part of all of this. I hate hearing about overly litigious things like this, even though I find the nuances in law interesting (with my very limited knowledge, by the way). But I would be absolutely shocked if Sam goes undrafted, and even more shocked if a lawsuit isn't filed by the NFLPA immediately thereafter.

 

Sorry about that, I'm a lawyer.  I have a tendency to jump right to the practical legal issues.

 

And, yes, that's a good point about draft boards, if we could find out which teams did so.

[Superman]

Sorry about that, I'm a lawyer.  I have a tendency to jump right to the practical legal issues.

 

And, yes, that's a good point about draft boards, if we could find out which teams did so.

 

Doesn't bother me discussing it; like I said, I find this stuff interesting. Bothers me how litigious people are these days..

 

Didn't know you were a lawyer. You obviously know this stuff better than I do. I only play a lawyer when I'm drinking Scotch.

[pacolts56]

Is it possible Sam is not a gay but smart businessman trying to force Goodell to push teams to take him higher on a draft day?

Sure....and I'm having lunch with Elvis Presley and Jim Morrison today.

[K-148]

Sure....and I'm having lunch with Elvis Presley and Jim Morrison today.

Well, Martin has showed us how to be a "victim of the NFL society".

[Superman]

Well, Martin has showed us how to be a "victim of the NFL society".

 

Do you understand how far-fetched -- I'm being nice -- your theory is?

[pacolts56]

Well, Martin has showed us how to be a "victim of the NFL society".

Sam told his college team a year ago....I really don't think he's lying about anything.

[K-148]

It's not a theory, it's a question. After Te'o's "dead girlfriend", Martin's "harassment" I wonder is it possible for Sam to take such a gamble. I am from the outside of the US so I don't know how your society will react and would Sam try to find out it.

Elvis and Jim are dead, right?

[Warhawk]

It's not a theory, it's a question. After Te'o's "dead girlfriend", Martin's "harassment" I wonder is it possible for Sam to take such a gamble. I am from the outside of the US so I don't know how your society will react and would Sam try to find out it.

Elvis and Jim are dead, right?

 

It's phenomenally unlikely, to put it mildly.

[John Dee]

You are being a tad bit over dramatic here.      If the player just "plays football" and leaves all the other junk alone it can work.

 

BUT, will this guy have a Tim Tebow type following?   I guarantee you all that is the great fear of NFL teams.      They will NOT TOLERATE that kind of circus.     For "that" individual.    Right or wrong?   I promise you all, they will not want it.

 

I said it 6 or 7 years ago..  the internet will destroy our society.    Facebook and Twitter are the worst things to ever happen to modern society...  next to video games...  

 

JMO

 

 

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

[Warhawk]

I said it 6 or 7 years ago..  the internet will destroy our society.    Facebook and Twitter are the worst things to ever happen to modern society...  next to video games...  

 

Well, I was being tolerant of people criticizing homosexuality in this thread, but taking a shot at video games?

 

You're going down, sparky. 

[Coffeedrinker]

If the team signed Hernandez and Vick I would stand on my head to let management know how I felt. I would have trouble wishing either to succeed because I find their actions so offensive. I knew where you were going, that's why I mentioned them.

 

My other point wasn't bogus or nonsensical, it was simply an amusing way of pointing out that sexual orientation is a matter of genetics, not morality. Clearly you feel differently, and clearly you are entitled to your view. Debating the source or nature of your beliefs would violate forum rules. Suffice it to say that I say "live and let live" when it comes to religious beliefs as well. I don't care what you do as long as it doesn't hurt others.

 

Just some perspective though - I look at it this way. I consider "moral issues" to be pleasurable temptations that people have to willfully ignore to demonstrate good character. Fortunately I've never had any problem doing so.

 

I'm not "tempted" by homosexuality. I'd be as likely to cut off my private parts as to engage in sex with another man. The thought of either is utterly repugnant to the point of being nauseating. This thing is, common sense suggests that a gay man would feel the same way about sex with a woman. I have no right to condemn them for that - in fact it's none of my business. I'm certainly not going to stand on my head to prevent him trying to earn a living because of it.

 

 

I just wonder why that has to be homosexuality.  Look I'm a Christian and believe homosexual acts to be morally wrong but at the same time I can't understand the freakout about it.  You are far from the only person that thinks this way but at the same time I don't understand.  How come when a organization or sports team gets a bunch of different players many of whom have like 5 kids by 5 different women, it's par for the course but the moment they talk about drafting a guy that's openly gay that's when it's a problem.

 

I mean do you want to render someone who's openly guy to be completely unemployable by anyone in any industry?  Because it sounds like you think that employment is endorsement of their lifestyle and at the same time you don't want anyone to endorse that lifestyle.  

 

Gay people still have to make a living and how are they suppose to make a living if no one will employ them?

 

Personally I hope we land the guy in the late rounds or something as a steal.  Not because I want to make any sort of political point or because I want the Colts to "endorse homosexuality".  But mostly just because I want to get a draft steal and if others are gonna mark him down for that then we might as well take advantage.  

 

If I was busy caring what these guys where up to in their private lives, I would have never watched the NFL in the first place.  In fact I likely would have thrown my TV in the trash and refused to watch it or any movies ever.  

For several reasons.  I'm tired of the homosexual agenda and yes it is an agenda being forced down everyone's throats (no pun intended) and when it comes to watching a game I truly enjoy on multiple levels I am not going to support it.  If my favorite team drafts the player I will find a new favorite team, if the NFL as a whole starts to have a gay pride month to celebrate gay players in the NFL (like they have a Hispanic heritage month) then I will quit watching NFL football, now if they were to offset those items with a Normal pride month to celebrate those that are normal or white and black heritage months to celebrate those of white and black heritages I would have to examine that closer.  But the latter won't happen but there is a chance in a few years the former will.

 

Same thing with some of the other comments made on here, if the NFL has an illegitimate child month to celebrate all the players that have illegitimate children or a kill your neighbor month to celebrate those players that have killed someone or... well you get the idea, then that will also make me quit watching football.

[chad72]

Answered the best you could and thats all you need to do. Careful though, I had posts removed from this thread because I was honest about my feelings on the subject and when I asked why, well I have yet to receive an answer. I insulted nobody and made no rude or off color remarks. Just my honest feelings about this subject. I find it so hypocritical that those who claim to be so tolerent are only that way if everybody agree's with their views otherwise the intolerance flows through and their real feelings come out. Im so tolerant and open minded...as long as you think exactly as I do.(rolls eyes)!

 

I kept wondering how on earth this thread had gone so far, now I know the juicy details. Balzer40, the bolded above is how I exactly feel all the time when I listen to the media. Tolerance is a two way street. Just because you are aligned with mainstream media or side with popular vibe, it does not make you tolerant, it just makes you look like you don't want to be different and want to fit in for fear of/don't want to deal with consequences that only you can answer what they are.

 

I am really really glad both sides of the story are given a good chance to give their opinions. On the personal side, I am with Balzer40 and CD.

 

Like Jimmy Kimmel joked on late night TV "my wife got this text about a guy she never knew about being gay and asked me, what is the big deal" and the crowd on TV, and I laughed out loud.

[Jason_]

It is, as any type of discussion like this is, very complicated and I don't really know if I can answer that but I will try.

 

A combination of both actually.  First and foremost, I think homosexuality is wrong.  That being said, I don't really care what someone does in the privacy of their home as long as it's not hurting someone.  And I am almost positive there have been homesexuals in a Colts uniform in the past and perhaps even now.  I just make it a point to not support organizations that openly and overtly support homosexuals.  And his declaration means that any team that drafts him will be openly and overtly supporting that lifestyle choice.

 

IMO, being a homesexual is not news worthy, yet people want to act like this kid is some kind of hero because he admits he does something wrong.  Yet the same people that claim Sam is a hero chastised Tebow because he believes that unborn babies should not be killed.

 

Again it's a complicated subject and would take a lot more than this to fully explain it.  But you asked, what I believed to be a sincere question, so I wanted to try to answer it.

 

 

And I appreciate that.  

[Nadine]

You are being a tad bit over dramatic here.      If the player just "plays football" and leaves all the other junk alone it can work.

 

BUT, will this guy have a Tim Tebow type following?   I guarantee you all that is the great fear of NFL teams.      They will NOT TOLERATE that kind of circus.     For "that" individual.    Right or wrong?   I promise you all, they will not want it.

 

I said it 6 or 7 years ago..  the internet will destroy our society.    Facebook and Twitter are the worst things to ever happen to modern society...  next to video games...  

 

JMO

 

will it be like a zombie apocalypse?

 

As a moderator, I have to say that the whole Tim Tebow thing generated relentless fighting here on the forums.

 

So far, this topic has been handled mostly with civility.  But I agree, that when Sam is in the NFL, just like Tebow, it will be continuously discussed..........regardless of what he says or does.

 

Unless the media learned their lesson about talking about one person endlessly.

 

I never saw why everyone was so hard on Tebow.  He seems like a nice guy and never did anything to hurt anyone.

 

Same kind of thing with this guy.

[chad72]

For several reasons.  I'm tired of the homosexual agenda and yes it is an agenda being forced down everyone's throats (no pun intended) and when it comes to watching a game I truly enjoy on multiple levels I am not going to support it.  If my favorite team drafts the player I will find a new favorite team, if the NFL as a whole starts to have a gay pride month to celebrate gay players in the NFL (like they have a Hispanic heritage month) then I will quit watching NFL football, now if they were to offset those items with a Normal pride month to celebrate those that are normal or white and black heritage months to celebrate those of white and black heritages I would have to examine that closer.  But the latter won't happen but there is a chance in a few years the former will.

 

Same thing with some of the other comments made on here, if the NFL has an illegitimate child month to celebrate all the players that have illegitimate children or a kill your neighbor month to celebrate those players that have killed someone or... well you get the idea, then that will also make me quit watching football.

 

I agree.

 

Acceptance is not something that happens by having something shoved down your throat. Tolerance is the most you are going to get with someone who does not see eye-to-eye with you. No matter how hard we try, if the Iraqis do not want to embrace democracy and prefer to kill each other, we cannot shove democracy in their society, period. Same thing with people everywhere. Education and awareness is different than politically correct overkill in mainstream media with an agenda.

 

I wonder when people will get that.

[Coffeedrinker]

You are being a tad bit over dramatic here.      If the player just "plays football" and leaves all the other junk alone it can work.

 

BUT, will this guy have a Tim Tebow type following?   I guarantee you all that is the great fear of NFL teams.      They will NOT TOLERATE that kind of circus.     For "that" individual.    Right or wrong?   I promise you all, they will not want it.

 

I said it 6 or 7 years ago..  the internet will destroy our society.    Facebook and Twitter are the worst things to ever happen to modern society...  next to video games...  

 

JMO

On the bolded part, how am I being a bit over dramatic here.  If the player just played football and left all the other junk alone then we would not be having this discussion.

 

The non bolded part I pretty much agree with.  Look what happened Collins, he "came out" was praised by the media, was traded and then released.  Some will say it's because his career was on a downward trend and it was but that is not the reason the Wizards released him.

[Jason_]

For several reasons.  I'm tired of the homosexual agenda and yes it is an agenda being forced down everyone's throats (no pun intended) and when it comes to watching a game I truly enjoy on multiple levels I am not going to support it.  If my favorite team drafts the player I will find a new favorite team, if the NFL as a whole starts to have a gay pride month to celebrate gay players in the NFL (like they have a Hispanic heritage month) then I will quit watching NFL football, now if they were to offset those items with a Normal pride month to celebrate those that are normal or white and black heritage months to celebrate those of white and black heritages I would have to examine that closer.  But the latter won't happen but there is a chance in a few years the former will.

 

Same thing with some of the other comments made on here, if the NFL has an illegitimate child month to celebrate all the players that have illegitimate children or a kill your neighbor month to celebrate those players that have killed someone or... well you get the idea, then that will also make me quit watching football.

 

interesting choice of words

[Nadine]

I kept wondering how on earth this thread had gone so far, now I know the juicy details. Balzer40, the bolded above is how I exactly feel all the time when I listen to the media. Tolerance is a two way street. Just because you are aligned with mainstream media or side with popular vibe, it does not make you tolerant, it just makes you look like you don't want to be different and want to fit in for fear of/don't want to deal with consequences that only you can answer what they are.

 

I am really really glad both sides of the story are given a good chance to give their opinions. On the personal side, I am with Balzer40 and CD.

 

Like Jimmy Kimmel joked on late night TV "my wife got this text about a guy she never knew about being gay and asked me, what is the big deal" and the crowd on TV, and I laughed out loud.

 

Again, I'm going to remind people that it is not ok to to take shots veiled or otherwise at anyone 

So when you say things like bolded, you are inviting argument because essentially you are calling people who disagree with you ........sheep...........while you hold yourself up as a free thinker.  This is not discussion

 

Don't stereotype people...........you are incorrect to do so just as you would feel were you on the receiving end.

[Nadine]

I agree.

 

Acceptance is not something that happens by having something shoved down your throat. Tolerance is the most you are going to get with someone who does not see eye-to-eye with you. No matter how hard we try, if the Iraqis do not want to embrace democracy and prefer to kill each other, we cannot shove democracy in their society, period. Same thing with people everywhere. Education and awareness is different than politically correct overkill in mainstream media with an agenda.

 

I wonder when people will get that.

 

Again............ease up on the name calling.  When you say that other people only have a view because it is 'politically correct' you demean them by implying that they've been fed their opinion, whereas your opinion is well thought out by a clear mind.

[Warhawk]

I think it's a little bit insulting to suggest (a) that the opposite of "gay" is "normal", and (b) that a gay pride celebration is no different than a "kill your neighbor" celebration.

[Balzer40]

I kept wondering how on earth this thread had gone so far, now I know the juicy details. Balzer40, the bolded above is how I exactly feel all the time when I listen to the media. Tolerance is a two way street. Just because you are aligned with mainstream media or side with popular vibe, it does not make you tolerant, it just makes you look like you don't want to be different and want to fit in for fear of/don't want to deal with consequences that only you can answer what they are.

I am really really glad both sides of the story are given a good chance to give their opinions. On the personal side, I am with Balzer40 and CD.

Like Jimmy Kimmel joked on late night TV "my wife got this text about a guy she never knew about being gay and asked me, what is the big deal" and the crowd on TV, and I laughed out loud.

You are exactly right Chad. Agreeing with everything main stream media and the PC world forces down our throats all the time is not tolerance. It's not being man(or woman) enough or smart enough to form your own opinion. Im sick to death of the PC crap that people think you should automatically fall in line with and if you don't you're an intolerant and ignorant @#$%&. I call B-S on that line of thinking, IMO it just means you can't think for yourself and give an honest opinion.

[pacolts56]

It's not a theory, it's a question. After Te'o's "dead girlfriend", Martin's "harassment" I wonder is it possible for Sam to take such a gamble. I am from the outside of the US so I don't know how your society will react and would Sam try to find out it.

Elvis and Jim are dead, right?

I must admit....those were/are peculiar situations, but I just don't think Sam calculated anything further than the reaction we are seeing.

 

And public opinion in American society will run the full spectrum you see expressed here on the Forum....with, of course, an untethered measure of free speech. (ahem)

 

I happen to be conservative and agree with neither Sam's homosexual lifestyle OR the media-hyped manner with which he shared his sexual preference. Others obviously disagree with me and approve with everything he's done....and he does indeed enjoy the same free speech.

 

However, my personal beliefs aside and as a Colts fan, my main concern is the media firestorm that will follow....which is the same reason I prefer we not pursue Jonathan Martin or Richie Incognito, and the same reason I opposed any suggestion of signing Tim Tebow or drafting Manti Te'o.

 

Boring as it seems, the more that media coverage of the Colts is about the product on the field and nothing else....the better I like it.

 

And yes....Elvis and Jim are dead.