Player gets booed for upholding personal convictions

[hollodero]

(06-05-2018, 08:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Being treated like everyone else just means being able to go about your business, without any special attention or recognition being drawn to the fact that you're not like most everyone else.  

As long as we, as a society, continue to draw special attention to people that are different than the majority?  No one will ever truly be "equal".  It's almost like listing them as *equal.

There's something to that. It's just, gay people aren't just different, but many still view them as inferior, or sick, or an abdomination - and act on those beliefs. Signs of tolerance for a minority (like jerseys) aren't moot as long as these treatments still prevail in a society. It's about normalization by means of special attention, not about special attention for special attentions' worth.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-05-2018, 08:58 PM)hollodero Wrote: There's something to that. It's just, gay people aren't just different, but many still view them as inferior, or sick, or an abdomination - and act on those beliefs. Signs of tolerance for a minority (like jerseys) aren't moot as long as these treatments still prevail in a society. It's about normalization by means of special attention, not about special attention for special attentions' worth.

Well, maybe.  My good friend (whom I consider my younger brother) is a black man.  Every February, when black history month happens in the US, he always says "If you really want to know black history, just hang with me for a month.".   I've known him for over 25 years, dating back to before we were teammates in Semi-Pro ball.  We still speak on at least a weekly basis.  My point about mentioning this relationship is this;  The only way to truly know the person that is different from you, is to actually get to know them.

He actually despises "Black history month",  he says "every month is black history month", and follows up with "we don't need a month of our own, we just want to share all months..

[BmorePat87]

(06-05-2018, 08:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Being treated like everyone else just means being able to go about your business, without any special attention or recognition being drawn to the fact that you're not like most everyone else.  

As long as we, as a society, continue to draw special attention to people that are different than the majority?  No one will ever truly be "equal".  It's almost like listing them as *equal.

You can’t combat inequality without acknowledging that it exists.

As long as we, as a society, do not discourage treating people differently, people will continue to treat people differently.

No civil rights movement in this country was advanced by ignoring discrimination.

[hollodero]

(06-05-2018, 10:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, maybe.  My good friend (whom I consider my younger brother) is a black man.  Every February, when black history month happens in the US, he always says "If you really want to know black history, just hang with me for a month.".   I've known him for over 25 years, dating back to before we were teammates in Semi-Pro ball.  We still speak on at least a weekly basis.  My point about mentioning this relationship is this;  The only way to truly know the person that is different from you, is to actually get to know them.

He actually despises "Black history month",  he says "every month is black history month", and follows up with "we don't need a month of our own, we just want to share all months..

I get that - I guess. I don't know anything about being black in the US or elsewhere, or about being gay. I believe I know that there's still much hatred and rejection going around for both groups. In many respects though, I think the black experience and the gay experience are quite different - starting with the obvious that no black person was ever accused of having made a life choice by being black. With being gay, there are many other battles to fight, and the battle for acceptance is not just with society, but starts within the family. Lack of acceptance has caused a lot of suffering, up to parents rejecting their gay child and other quite sad events, stemming from too little tolerance. Is my perspective.

Now I don't know if soccer jerseys do anything to build up acceptance and ease these pains. I couldn't say, and I couldn't say about black history month and whatnot. I understand the perspective of despising it, interpreting it as someone seeking special attention. The other interpretation would be that all these things can contribute their bit to a better (more understanding... and all these nice things) society that sure still has its problems. Maybe that's naive. But is it really worse than that.

And I guess that's a bit the point for me, by refusing to participate in such an attempt... I think it makes that soccer player unlikeable to me. Especially since it really wouldn't have cost her that much personally to wear them, and also it does have a touch of attention-seeking for a particular group too. But just as I'm not gay nor black, neither am I religious. 

[fredtoast]

(06-05-2018, 06:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, I've read both of those a few times and nowhere in either does it mention she is against equal protection under the law. Must have been that line were she said as a Christian we shouldn't throw a tantrum over today's ruling.

In case anyone hasn't seen the interview, The below link includes the video for which many (including a few in this forum)are vilifying the young girl and in cases of the person I just quoted; simply making things up about her:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5789881/Hinkle-says-decided-against-US-team-Pride-Month-call-up.html

(06-05-2018, 06:20 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Odd, all I saw was her writings reflecting her faith.  At no point did I see anything written that could even remotely be construed as "they shouldn't be allowed to marry", or any denial of equality.

For a guy that deals so much with cold hard facts, you sure can paint a pretty picture with colors that aren't there..

You have got to be kidding me.  She considers allowing same sex marraige to be a "corruption" bringing about a time of "trial and confusion" that requires prayer to fix.  She says the Bible is right and the current decision is wrong. 

It is 100% clear that she opposes the law and if she had her choice it would still be illegal.  That is supporting discrimination.

[fredtoast]

(06-05-2018, 08:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: As long as we, as a society, continue to draw special attention to people that are different than the majority?  No one will ever truly be "equal".  It's almost like listing them as *equal.

The problem is that society had already been drawing special attention to minorities like the LGBT community for many many years by discriminating against them.  If society treated everyone the same in the first place there would never be a need for any type of civil rights movement.

Therse people are not fighting for "special" treatment.  They are fighting for "equal" treatment.

[Benton]

Good for her. Another example of peacefully protesting something.

[Dill]

(06-05-2018, 10:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: He actually despises "Black history month",  he says "every month is black history month", and follows up with "we don't need a month of our own, we just want to share all months..

This is puzzling. Does he think that blacks already "share all months"?

[SunsetBengal]

(06-06-2018, 11:47 AM)Dill Wrote: This is puzzling. Does he think that blacks already "share all months"?

What's puzzling about it? 

[*PhilHos*]

(06-06-2018, 09:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: She considers allowing same sex marraige to be a "corruption" 

No she doesn't. Where does she say that?

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 12:25 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: What's puzzling about it? 

People who created and currently support a Black History Month would agree that every month should be shared history month. They created and support Black History Month because they don't think US history is currently "shared."  Every month is white history month and always has been. Hence the desire to elbow their way to some visibility.

So I can't tell from your description if your friend thinks every month is already "shared" or if he would like to see that happen. If he says every month "should" be shared then maybe he does not. Adequate representation is a goal still to be achieved.

That brings us to the puzzling part. If he thinks we "should" share then I don't see why he would object to a month which levers in some visibility for black history in the US. Is it that he really doesn't object to Black History Month; he just wishes we didn't NEED it because black history is already sufficiently woven into the fabric of US history and American life?

If he thinks black history is already covered just fine, then that is puzzling too.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-06-2018, 02:59 PM)Dill Wrote: People who created and currently support a Black History Month would agree that every month should be shared history month. They created and support Black History Month because they don't think US history is currently "shared."  Every month is white history month and always has been. Hence the desire to elbow their way to some visibility.

So I can't tell from your description if your friend thinks every month is already "shared" or if he would like to see that happen. If he says every month "should" be shared then maybe he does not. Adequate representation is a goal still to be achieved.

That brings us to the puzzling part. If he thinks we "should" share then I don't see why he would object to a month which levers in some visibility for black history in the US. Is it that he really doesn't object to Black History Month; he just wishes we didn't NEED it because black history is already sufficiently woven into the fabric of US history and American life?

If he thinks black history is already covered just fine, then that is puzzling too.

I think (and only because I've known him for almost 30 years) that what he means is no need to only think about black American history on one particular month, but to have a better representation in teachings of American History.  I also know that he doesn't like special considerations because he's black, he wants what he deserves because he worked for it and earned it.  (does that make any sense?)

[fredtoast]

(06-06-2018, 02:55 PM)PhilHos Wrote: No she doesn't. Where does she say that?

When she talks about the world becoming more corrupt when they legalized same sex marriage.

There is no way you can read her comments and think she is okay with same sex marriage being legal.  Is she has not problem with it then why does everyone need to pray harder to fix it?

[fredtoast]

Funniest thing about this thread is that the exact same posters who think it is fine for Christians to oppose same sex marriage based on "personal beliefs" are the same one who attack Muslims for the way they treat women based on their "personal beliefs".


Apparently discrimination based on religious beliefs is only okay if it is based on Christian religious beliefs.

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 09:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You have got to be kidding me.  She considers allowing same sex marraige to be a "corruption" bringing about a time of "trial and confusion" that requires prayer to fix.  She says the Bible is right and the current decision is wrong. 

It is 100% clear that she opposes the law and if she had her choice it would still be illegal.  That is supporting discrimination.

There is nothing to suggest she opposes the law; it can be assumed that she would have rather the law not be passed. But the law was passed and she appears to accept the result as she asked folks not to act out. You don't get to call everyone who believe homosexuality to be a sin a bigot (well you can, but it just shows blind irrationality). As I said this lady did nothing wrong but express the degree of her faith; yet those that hate folks that do so will boo it and make up lies about the individual. 

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 07:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There is nothing to suggest she opposes the law; it can be assumed that she would have rather the law not be passed. But the law was passed and she appears to accept the result as she asked folks not to act out. You don't get to call everyone who believe homosexuality to be a sin a bigot (well you can, but it just shows blind irrationality). As I said this lady did nothing wrong but express the degree of her faith; yet those that hate folks that do so will boo it and make up lies about the individual. 

Looks like all the "hate" and "blind irrationality" are aligned with the people who don't want to discriminate.

Whereas "this lady" has only expressed/upheld "personal convictions"; how can convictions be bigoted and hateful if they are "personal"?

But can it be my personal conviction that homosexuality is sin--AND that gays still deserve full equality before the law, the same rights as everyone else?

Saying that I still "love" gays or don't want to protest gay marriage laws doesn't mean that I don't think they are depraved and very unequal because of who they are.  

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 09:15 PM)Dill Wrote: Looks like all the "hate" and "blind irrationality" are aligned with the people who don't want to discriminate.

Whereas "this lady" has only expressed/upheld "personal convictions"; how can convictions be bigoted and hateful if they are "personal"?

But can it be my personal conviction that homosexuality is sin--AND that gays still deserve full equality before the law, the same rights as everyone else?

Saying that I still "love" gays or don't want to protest gay marriage laws doesn't mean that I don't think they are depraved and very unequal because of who they are.  

No indication that this lady wants to discriminate against anyone. 

I have no idea why you felt it necessary to use quotes on the words you chose (I can only assume that you are questioning whether she is a lady or her convictions are personal), but this lady did nothing bigoted or hateful. The only person she hurt was herself she displayed no intolerance or hate of anyone.

Sure it can and that is where I see this lady's comments directed. My grandma thinks drinking is a sin, but I doubt she thinks those that drink should not have the same rights as everyone else.

Once again no indication she thinks anyone is very unequal. It's just an assumption made by "people who don't want to discriminate".*

* I used quotes because you assume to classify yourself and others that would boo/slur this lady as folks that don't want to discriminate and I question that.  

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 09:15 PM)Dill Wrote: Looks like all the "hate" and "blind irrationality" are aligned with the people who don't want to discriminate.

Whereas "this lady" has only expressed/upheld "personal convictions"; how can convictions be bigoted and hateful if they are "personal"?

But can it be my personal conviction that homosexuality is sin--AND that gays still deserve full equality before the law, the same rights as everyone else?

Saying that I still "love" gays or don't want to protest gay marriage laws doesn't mean that I don't think they are depraved and very unequal because of who they are.  

No indication that this lady wants to discriminate against anyone. 

I have no idea why you felt it necessary to use quotes on the words you chose (I can only assume that you are questioning whether she is a lady or her convictions are personal", but this lady did nothing bigoted or hateful. The only person she hurt was herself she displayed no intolerance or hate of anyone.

Sure it can and that is where I see this lady's comments directed. My grandma thinks drinking is a sin, but I doubt she thinks those that drink should not have the same rights as everyone else.

Once again no indication she thinks anyone is very unequal. It's just an assumption made by "people who don't want to discriminate".*

* I used quotes because you assume to classify yourself and others that would boo/slur this lady as folks that don't want to discriminate.  

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 09:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No indication that this lady wants to discriminate against anyone. 
 

Other than the fact she refused to report to the National team because they would wear a rainbow jersey, violating her personal Christian convictions.

(06-06-2018, 09:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure it can and that is where I see this lady's comments directed. My grandma thinks drinking is a sin, but I doubt she thinks those that drink should not have the same rights as everyone else.

Does your Grandma think drinking is a choice? Before using her as an example, you might ask her if she thinks drinking should be legal. Also ask her if sinners are ok as they are or should be discouraged from sinning.

(06-06-2018, 09:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Once again no indication she thinks anyone is very unequal. It's just an assumption made by "people who don't want to discriminate".* 

Other than the fact she refused to don a gay pride jersey out of "personal convictions." 

If there is no indication that this "rational lady" thinks gays are sinners and sin degrades the world, then what is the point of refusing the jersey if gays are "ok"? 

The answer is--no point. Her personal lady conviction is that they are not ok. Because of who they are.

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 10:20 PM)Dill Wrote: 1. Other than the fact she refused to report to the National team because they would wear a rainbow jersey, violating her personal Christian convictions.


2. Does your Grandma think drinking is a choice? Before using her as an example, you might ask her if she thinks drinking should be legal. Also ask her if sinners are ok as they are or should be discouraged from sinning.


3. Other than the fact she refused to don a gay pride jersey out of "personal convictions." 

4. If there is no indication that this "rational lady" thinks gays are sinners and sin degrades the world, then what is the point of refusing the jersey if gays are "ok"? 

5. The answer is--no point. Her personal lady conviction is that they are not ok. Because of who they are.

1. So someone discriminates because they choose not to wear a piece of clothing. Thanks for letting the world know how perverted the liberal's view of discrimination has become.

2. Of course granny thinks drinking is a choice, but one some folks have a compulsion to do. I'll check with granny on if she think drinking should be legal, but I fail to see the point.

3. Once again no idea why you are using the quotes maybe someone else can explain it to me; as you have chosen not to. But for an answer see #1

4. You with the quotes again; I can only assume there is some point you think you are making in your head. There is plenty indication that this lady thinks homosexual relationship are a sin and that sin degrades the world. Much like the quotes I have no idea of the point you are trying to make here.

5. Once again you have no idea who she views as ok, your hate just leads you to make assumptions.