Player gets booed for upholding personal convictions

[Dill]

(06-02-2018, 01:13 AM)hollodero Wrote: OK, there's still a clear intention behind using those jerseys in the first place, why they were used, and it was not to promote sin, but to ask for equality for gays (etc.) and an end to discrimination. Because of course it is about that. And not about being so proud of one's gayness that it amounts to a deadly sin. That sounds a bit absurd. 

Now if she views it differently, ok. I'd still think that's a bit self-centered and ignorant to only think one own's interpretation is relevant, and that the intentions of the people behind it can't alter that; and for sure many people will view her actions as being against tolerance and pro discrimination. Which is not an outlandish interpretation of her refusal to play in such jerseys. And then people boo. I wouldn't, but I don't take issue with that.

I don't think it's that a little pride in one's gayness is ok but a LOT is bad because too much pride is a sin.  I think Hinkle and others would say that being gay is already a sin, and having any degree of pride in sin is terrible. Pride is sinful, but in this case it is compounded as PUBLIC pride in/endorsement of sin. Flaunting it with rainbow numerals. Way over the top for that group.

You and I don't walk around imagining that God is recording our actions and someday we'll be facing him or an angel who will ask "What about the day they asked you to don a sin jersey for your team and you did it because you were afraid to stand for God's truth?"  People like Hinkle do walking around imagining how God will judge this or that action.

S0 I doubt Hinkle and friends would have much interest in discerning an intended meaning. You explaining that very public meaning, correctly, would not change a thing. Equality in sin does not trump God's law; that's all she needs to know. Hinkle would see her interpretation as not personal but as following God's interpretation/law. Her church/prayer group would likely agree.

For those of us outside her group, it is of course not outlandish to see her interpretation as discriminatory, since we think equality trumps bigotry.