Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Brendon Ayanbadejo tackles the subject of gay marriage

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#21 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,229 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 09:07 AM

The amendment doesn't change a thing in reality. If the pro rights side is going to hurt Republicans chances of winning elections by stereotyping them as anti gay while not pointing out other groups that nearly always oppose their rights it won't be nearly as easy to vote my convictions.


I don't know about "nearly always oppose their rights". There are Democrats against gay marriage, sure. Thankfully, that number is dropping (I'm sure it is in the Republican camp as well but those candidates have a tougher road to admitting it because of the GOP's policy). Either way, I don't know how that changes what you believe to be the right thing. Just because both sides have their examples of douchebaggery doesn't mean that it's suddenly okay to act that way.

And the "sounds like you're" stuff can end now buddy. You've crossed the line with me one to many times.


I'm not the one waffling on personal conviction because politicians across the aisle say stupid things. And I don't even know how I've "crossed the line" but that's not a debate to be made on the forums. If you have issues with my past moderation, PM me (or another admin) about it. Thinly veiled threats aren't going to score you points with anyone.

#22 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 6,411 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:25 AM

dunno, its got over 2 million reads now, I'm sure there are plenty of people on the "fence" about Gay marriage. Who knows if this Ayanbadejo/Kluwe thing is tipping point for some of those folks.


Cockmonsters and the rest of his verbage is not the means to change minds. In fact, I'd argue this sort of thing is highly counter productive compared to letting someone's attempt to squelch free speech stand for the offensiveness that it is. Now that is lost in the shuffle of this gag, hilarious as it may be.

#23 fatbeer

fatbeer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 147 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 01:17 PM

[quote name='Brock Beauchamp'][quote name='fatbeer'] Thinly veiled threats aren't going to score you points with anyone.[/QUOTE]

I never make threats I simply state my opinion. I've learned from you that when there is an issue we post it from within the threads, and I happen to have an issue with you are statements that insult me.

As for the specific issue that opposes gay rights it's African Americans and it's way worse then Republicans, and if we can't have the discussion about black people who hate gays we have a problem.

Edited by fatbeer, 10 September 2012 - 01:26 PM.


#24 fatbeer

fatbeer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 147 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 01:22 PM

My big problem is this is Kluwe, and his complete lack of the ability to make a point without being an idiot and offending people. This amendment will pass this fall in large part because those in favor of it are unwilling to fight for the support of Republicans. If this was simply about gay rights then the vote would be simple, but the pro no side has made it about so much more. As a Republican who wants to vote no (again on something that will not result in any change), I need to know that the other side is not trashing Republicans in the process. You can't trash everything I believe in and get my vote. Politics is way to important to let the other side get away with this crap.

Edited by fatbeer, 10 September 2012 - 01:33 PM.


#25 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,229 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 01:46 PM

Chris Kluwe is freaking HILARIOUS. Big thumbs up to this follow-up post about his letter:

http://blogs.twincit...pawing-at-yarn/

#26 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,229 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 01:48 PM

As for the specific issue that opposes gay rights it's African Americans and it's way worse then Republicans, and if we can't have the discussion about black people who hate gays we have a problem.


The fact that the black vote heavily favors bans on gay marriage saddens me to no end. It's so hypocritical that I sit there in stunned silence every time I see an example of it. I don't know how to describe it beyond that.

#27 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,607 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 02:49 PM

It sounds to me like you're making up excuses to vote "yes". Since when does "media bias" change your personal conviction? Are you that easily swayed by what others have to say that you take umbrage over the fact that a rant by a football player didn't address party affiliation?


Do you really even need to ask that?
Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

#28 fatbeer

fatbeer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 147 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 03:36 PM

It sounds to me like you're making up excuses to vote "yes". Since when does "media bias" change your personal conviction? Are you that easily swayed by what others have to say that you take umbrage over the fact that a rant by a football player didn't address party affiliation?


Do you really even need to ask that?


Is he just a football player the same way Sandra Fluke was just a college student? First of all Kluwe is a punter not a football player, second of all he's been a loudmouth jerk for years now. I'll vote no because it's the right thing to do, but Yes will win because of people like Kluwe who want to throw it in peoples faces. By the way Kluwe might want to learn what the 1st amendment means. If I was the NFL I'd start finning Kluwe until he learns how to make his point in a PG 13 way.

#29 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,229 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 04:08 PM

Is he just a football player the same way Sandra Fluke was just a college student?


I have no idea what that even means.

First of all Kluwe is a punter not a football player, second of all he's been a loudmouth jerk for years now. I'll vote no because it's the right thing to do, but Yes will win because of people like Kluwe who want to throw it in peoples faces. By the way Kluwe might want to learn what the 1st amendment means. If I was the NFL I'd start finning Kluwe until he learns how to make his point in a PG 13 way.


I'm pretty sure Kluwe knows what the First Amendment means. He wasn't saying that the Ravens (the employer) couldn't tell Brendon to be quiet, he said that it was inappropriate for an elected official to tell a citizen to sit down and shut up just because he's a football player. There's a significant difference between those two things.

And I think Minnesota is going to vote this amendment down. The polls are showing a significant reversal on gay marriage in the past year.

And I love the "throws it in peoples' faces" line. As if the Religious Right isn't "throwing it in peoples' faces" by making gay marriage Double Secret Illegal in Minnesota or by routinely telling gay people that they're abominations and that they're going to hell. Nope, that's not inflammatory at all.

#30 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,607 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 04:26 PM

Is he just a football player the same way Sandra Fluke was just a college student? First of all Kluwe is a punter not a football player, second of all he's been a loudmouth jerk for years now. I'll vote no because it's the right thing to do, but Yes will win because of people like Kluwe who want to throw it in peoples faces. By the way Kluwe might want to learn what the 1st amendment means. If I was the NFL I'd start finning Kluwe until he learns how to make his point in a PG 13 way.


Kluwe is a football player who also is vocal about a cause he believes in. If you want to equate that to Sandra Fluke, then sure, he's more than "just" a football player, and thank God he is! Too many football players attempt to fit to the thug, womanizing, uneducated stereotype that many have of professional football players.

Kluwe is a punter AND a football player. One of the best athletes on the Gophers when I was part of the squad was Preston Gruening, who happened to be a punter. I had a high school teacher who went to three training camps as a punter before being cut each time, and he was one of the most athletic men I've ever met. Most special teams guys put in as much practice or more than any other player on the team to master their craft of the game. Calling Kluwe a punter, not a football player would be akin to saying Peyton Manning is a thrower, not a football player. It shows incredible ignorance of what goes into the game.

Kluwe's language would barely get bleeped on network TV most evenings, so before you go high and mighty about the language, evaluate the point behind the comment. And he had no violation of the first amendment, so you may want to brush up on the amendment yourself.
Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

#31 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 6,411 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 04:56 PM

Chris Kluwe is freaking HILARIOUS. Big thumbs up to this follow-up post about his letter:

http://blogs.twincit...pawing-at-yarn/


Yeah, it's hilarious. But giving the middle finger to people who think discourse > insults is astonishingly stupid. His dad is right - it is much more effective to discuss things like you aren't a thirteen year old.

Many of us who watch South Park, laugh at stupid humor, appreciate follow language, make fun of Chuck Norris for his hypocrisy, and all of that still have the maturity to see that his response was not productive. His pre-message misses the point some were trying to make to him. Sometimes it's glorious to be a dick (we built BYTO on that concept) - but don't pretend you're doing anything more than that.

#32 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,546 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 10 September 2012 - 05:04 PM

My big problem is this is Kluwe, and his complete lack of the ability to make a point without being an idiot and offending people. This amendment will pass this fall in large part because those in favor of it are unwilling to fight for the support of Republicans. If this was simply about gay rights then the vote would be simple, but the pro no side has made it about so much more. As a Republican who wants to vote no (again on something that will not result in any change), I need to know that the other side is not trashing Republicans in the process. You can't trash everything I believe in and get my vote. Politics is way to important to let the other side get away with this crap.


Boo f'ing hoo on this. If the Republicans didn't pass this in the first place to have a vote for a constitutional amendment to protect a law that was already on the books none of this would be an issue. The Republicans were as cynical as anyone putting this on the ballot in an attempt to drive turnout for the election to possibly beat Obama (no chance now) and to hopefully bolster their own chances to maintain control of the Minnesota congress. I have no sympathy that it is turning around on them and they are being called out. It was partisan as soon as it passed along almost entirely party lines and was done as a run around the governor.

#33 fatbeer

fatbeer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 147 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:08 PM

[quote name='biggentleben'][quote name='fatbeer']

Kluwe's language would barely get bleeped on network TV most evenings[/QUOTE]
My point has been made. The guy has no restraint.

#34 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,680 posts

Posted 11 September 2012 - 11:37 AM

That was a brilliant exchange between the three of them, topped off by Kluwe's awesome smackdown. It will be strange to cheer for the punter this year . . . but I have to.

#35 freshinthehouse

freshinthehouse

    Member

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 11 September 2012 - 12:28 PM

My big problem is this is Kluwe, and his complete lack of the ability to make a point without being an idiot and offending people.


The irony here is astounding.
BYTO R.I.P.

#36 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,607 posts

Posted 11 September 2012 - 02:49 PM

my big problem is this is kluwe, and his complete lack of the ability to make a point without being an idiot and offending people.


the irony here is astounding.


potd
Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

#37 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,634 posts

Posted 11 September 2012 - 07:41 PM

As a Christian, I find myself rather dismayed with my Christian brothers and sisters on this one. To be clear, I believe homosexuality is wrong, just as divorce, pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, lust etc. is wrong. Homosexuality fits into those categories as well, and Biblically speaking, you see it as the result of God giving man over to man's own depravity, and not the cause of man's depravity.

But...

We also have to reconcile the fact that we do not live in a theocracy and that we live in a country where people are free to make decisions that are wrong so long as those decisions do not infringe on the freedoms of others. I fail to see how two homosexuals choosing to get married somehow infringes on my rights as a Christian. I still have the first ammendment right to say it's wrong. I still have the first ammendment right to refuse to recognize/perform gay marriages, and quite honestly, we can coexist peacefully with gays under these circumstances. The problem as I see it is that each side has a very loud vocal minority that tends to drown out the more reasonable folks. This really shoudln't be much of an issue at all.

Oh, and if you want some more things to chew on, look up how marriage licenses came to be. Perhaps the church should have told the government to go screw itself back in the Jim Crow days. Had it done so, this would not be an issue at all today.

#38 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,680 posts

Posted 12 September 2012 - 12:29 AM

How on earth can one legitimately claim that homosexuality is morally wrong?

Apply reason, please.

#39 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,634 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 04:45 PM

How on earth can one legitimately claim that homosexuality is morally wrong?

Apply reason, please.


I think you know where I'm coming from. I don't expect you to agree with it. But there are a lot of sin tendancies about people that are very much who they are yet still morally wrong. As an example, I'm on the other side of the spectrum. I like women... way too much. And my struggles are no more or less a sin than the homosexuals. Each of us struggles with something that is integral to our very nature, yet our nature is sinful at its core. I can cop out and simply say "this is the way God made me," but that is an excuse that ignores the fundamental nature of mankind.

That said, as I said earlier, despite my opinion on homosexuality, I don't see why homosexuals cannot live freely in this country just as I can.

#40 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,680 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 04:59 PM

How on earth can one legitimately claim that homosexuality is morally wrong?

Apply reason, please.


I think you know where I'm coming from. I don't expect you to agree with it. But there are a lot of sin tendancies about people that are very much who they are yet still morally wrong. As an example, I'm on the other side of the spectrum. I like women... way too much. And my struggles are no more or less a sin than the homosexuals. Each of us struggles with something that is integral to our very nature, yet our nature is sinful at its core. I can cop out and simply say "this is the way God made me," but that is an excuse that ignores the fundamental nature of mankind.

That said, as I said earlier, despite my opinion on homosexuality, I don't see why homosexuals cannot live freely in this country just as I can.


Fair enough. Usually if I am morally opposed to something (say like torture, for instance) I want an end to it! Haha. Thanks for the reasonable reply.