Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Official Seahawks Forum, for the 12th man, by the 12th man.

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Sat May 17, 2014 10:31 am

c_hawkbob wrote:The "documentary" is kiboshed now anyway (thank God), and yes I see that it was now being referred to as a reality show on the Oprah network rather than an Oprah Wintry documentary as I first saw it characterised, so apologies for that initial correction.

I think Sam needs to fire his agent. That was a terrible bit of advice! As much as I think a documentary, from an historical perspective, would have been defensah I detest the idea of a 7th round draft choice having a reality show. At least 'Hard Knocks" is about the whole team ... but an individual player, especially one that is a reasonable long shot trying to make the team, would have been a joke.


Yeah, I really had no issues with your thoughts Bob, I wasn't trying to pick nits, I was only saying that being a gay athlete wasn't "historical" in the sense that there had been a few that had come out and played professional sports ( hell Sam isn't even the first in the NFL, THOUGH if he makes a team he'll be the first "out" while playing) I HATED the idea of the TV show because of the reasons I gave, but have ZERO issue with what his preference is, I guess I simply see it as more of a boon to become a great football player and be gay, than to simply be a gay football player, you know what I mean?
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Zorn76 » Sat May 17, 2014 6:56 pm

Glad the Oprah deal is off.
It's the right move.
User avatar
Zorn76
Legacy
 
Posts: 1894
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:33 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Hawktawk » Sat May 17, 2014 6:57 pm

savvyman wrote:Looks like it was the Rams Front Office & Coaching Staff that put the Kibosh on the Sam reality show.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000351103/article/michael-sam-docuseries-on-oprah-network-postponed



I bet the Rams FO is regretting this pick already.They finally stepped up and expressed their displeasure with this self aggrandizing person who wanted to do a special with Oprah when hes never played a down in the league.Don't blame an agent, Sam knows exactly what hes doing.

When Sam came out I said he was more about the PR and the money and the movement than being a football player. When he was drafted we all got to see him in a passionate embrace with his diminutive white boyfriend, once with cake on their faces. It was totally planned and staged for maximum effect IMO. Then the guy comes out and says he should have been drafted in the 3rd round. Never mind he had one of the worst combines of any defensive player. Now Goodell is on the record saying he hopes Sam makes the cut. Watch the screaming and yelling if they dare cut him no matter how big a rag doll he winds up being.

Theres already dozens if not more gays in the league.Everyone knows and nobody cares.

This guy is annoying regardless of his sexual orientation.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 8481
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby NorthHawk » Sat May 17, 2014 8:21 pm

It's better he made the announcement before the draft so every team knew what they were in for and could make an informed decision as to whether they think the inevitable circus would be worth it. Had it come out after the draft, and we know it would have, the team would have less control and not get ahead of the message.
The NFL is many things, but media naive is not one of them.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Eaglehawk » Sat May 17, 2014 10:35 pm

Savvyman,

Thanks for the link. I have not been following this story and learned from that link that the deal is off.
I did not realize it was more reality based. I just thought it was going to be a story, documentary, boring, blah blah, but a reality series? Could you imagine what the Rams locker room would have looked like? I doubt the NFL would have played ball with that either.
Just not smart.

While I want Sam to get his money, what is even more important is that he makes the team. He needs to focus on that first.
User avatar
Eaglehawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Somewhere in China

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby monkey » Sun May 18, 2014 7:57 am

Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Answer: It is a media manufactured and hyped concoction to equate the homosexual agenda with the civil rights movement, and homosexual partnering, to marriage.
It is most definitely not a "good story", it's a story of the continued decline of morality in this country; but I am sure there are some getting rich off of it.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Futureite » Sun May 18, 2014 3:12 pm

monkey wrote:
Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Answer: It is a media manufactured and hyped concoction to equate the homosexual agenda with the civil rights movement, and homosexual partnering, to marriage.
It is most definitely not a "good story", it's a story of the continued decline of morality in this country; but I am sure there are some getting rich off of it.


If by moral decline you mean the overdramatization and intrusion by media into our daily lives, I agree. If on the other hand you are insinuating that this is "promoting" homosexuality, lol, then I disagree. Little kids are not going to decide to be gay because of Michael Sam. This just another step in promoting social acceptance of another slice of our society that has experienced a good deal.of discrimination. I can't find a thing wrong with it. Just like with blogging, if I don't like it I can choose to click away, or change the channel.
Futureite
Legacy
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Sun May 18, 2014 6:28 pm

Good post Future.
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby monkey » Sun May 18, 2014 7:23 pm

Futureite wrote: If on the other hand you are insinuating that this is "promoting" homosexuality, lol, then I disagree. Little kids are not going to decide to be gay because of Michael Sam. This just another step in promoting social acceptance of another slice of our society that has experienced a good deal.of discrimination. I can't find a thing wrong with it. Just like with blogging, if I don't like it I can choose to click away, or change the channel.


1. It is in fact promoting homosexuality, if you can't see that, then I am sorry for you. The media is actively celebrating this, and equating it to the civil rights movement...how could this NOT be promoting homosexuality???
2. I am all for ending discrimination, but why do we as society need to "accept" something which is morally perverse? I can find all kinds of things wrong with it.
3. When it (the homosexual agenda) is saturating the media, in the obvious attempt to influence the culture, then how can you say it's as simple as that? It is EVERYWHERE! You cannot just "turn the channel, because it's saturating the media. It's the media that is in fact, leading the charge in this.

We are told that, if you don't accept the homosexual agenda, and accept homosexual unions as being equal to marriage, then you are a bigot, and a homophobe.
It is literally EVERYWHERE, it is being force fed to our children in schools, and it is changing the culture by virtue of the threat of being called a bigot, and being shouted down by angry, intolerant liberals, rather than a morally superior argument. They don't have a morally superior argument, so they resort to shutting those who disagree up, by threatening them financially, (they'll be too happy to sue your business into the ground if you don't cater to them), and by virtue of left leaning, liberal judges who circumvent the laws to forward the agenda.
It's not just as simple as turning the channel.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Sun May 18, 2014 7:29 pm

You're right, no one should celebrate tolerance, what a stupid idea. SMH.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby monkey » Sun May 18, 2014 7:34 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:You're right, no one should celebrate tolerance, what a stupid idea. SMH.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/


I see no reason to celebrate tolerance of the perversion of human sexuality, and the continued moral decline in America.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby savvyman » Sun May 18, 2014 7:38 pm

Monkey you are right - you had better watch out - for the Homosexuals are coming and they will not quit until they have dismantled the moral fiber of the United States of America.

They have infiltrated your Work Place.

They have infiltrated your Church.

They have infiltrated your Kids Little League - have you watched the way the shortstop runs?

They have infiltrated your Bus Stop.

Shoot - have you noticed the way the Postal Lady is looking at your wife? And why is she always delivering the mail to your door when you are not home.

Hell Monkey - they are probably hiding UNDER YOUR BED right now!

You are right to be so alarmed by the Homosexual takeover of the nation. The only hope for the nation to turn back this tide of rampant homosexuality that is sweeping the nation is for moral folks such as yourself to continue to sound the panic alarms to a slumbering population.
User avatar
savvyman
Legacy
 
Posts: 2114
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:17 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby monkey » Sun May 18, 2014 7:52 pm

savvyman wrote: they will not quit until they have dismantled the moral fiber of the United States of America.

They have infiltrated your Work Place.

They have infiltrated your Church.

They have infiltrated your Kids Little League
You are right to be so alarmed by the Homosexual takeover of the nation. The only hope for the nation to turn back this tide of rampant homosexuality that is sweeping the nation is for moral folks such as yourself to continue to sound the panic alarms to a slumbering population.


That much is actually quite true...they have. They've infiltrated it with their agenda, which IS IN FACT to change the culture of this country to one which is utterly intolerant of anyone condemning the practice of homosexuality as an immoral choice and act.

Oh I can already hear your argument..."Well who are they hurting? They're not hurting anyone, so what's wrong with that?"

Let me just preemptively shoot down your argument before you bother, with a list of ways in which gay marriage (one of the stated goals of the homosexual agenda) can bring harm.

It can bring huge financial and emotional stress.

Homosexuals can sue people who are exercising their religious beliefs. For example, a heterosexual married couple with children who do not want to rent a room in their own family household to homosexuals could be sued for discrimination based on "sexual orientation." This can incur significant financial and emotional stress upon the family--not to mention the "prior restraint" effect of the fear of being sued which results in a family not renting out a room.

The health risks are enormous to themselves and others.

The fact is that homosexuals do not live as long as heterosexuals due to the health risks associated with the lifestyle, and billions of dollars are spent annually in health care for them.
But the HIV/AIDS epidemic is not only in the homosexual community. It has crossed over to the heterosexual community.

Whether or not you want to say that HIV/AIDS is a homosexual disease, the fact is that it is highly prevalent among the gay and lesbian community due to their great number of sex partners. The collateral damage to the rest of society, as far as health risks, cannot be denied.

So called "Gay Marriage" means having the morals of the minority forced upon the majority.

This can also be said in the reverse. Either way, there is a problem. Normally, morals should not be forced on anyone though there are exceptions. We force morals on others by preventing them from stealing, raping, murdering, etc. So, it is not automatically wrong to force morals on someone. But the issue then becomes what is morally right and wrong in the first place, and altering morals in a society definitely causes stress.

The percentage of homosexuals in society is less than 5%, yet it is being forced upon the other 95% of society in movies, TV, literature, and political periods.

So called "Gay Marriage" means a redefinition of sexual morality, and with it other sexually related practices will be affected, and this can be harmful.

So called "Gay Marriag"e reduces the number of children born in society, and we need a stable population base to operate properly. Therefore, society can be harmed.

The stress imposed on religious people by forcing them to "accept" and/or support homosexual practice and/or intimidate them into silence harms a person's spiritual and emotional health.

It forces government to get involved in changing laws which automatically affect everyone in society.

Homosexuality is being force fed to our youth via the education system.

Civil unions are being recognized by employers which effect co-workers, money payouts, work time, etc.

It exposes adopted children within potential homosexual unions to ridicule from others.

I could go on.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Sun May 18, 2014 7:56 pm

monkey wrote:
HumanCockroach wrote:You're right, no one should celebrate tolerance, what a stupid idea. SMH.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/


I see no reason to celebrate tolerance of the perversion of human sexuality, and the continued moral decline in America.


And I see no reason to accept your religions "morality" as my own, so I suppose we're even. I believe in tolerance, and not pretending to be superior to other people on this planet, you're welcome to you're own beliefs,lI'l. stick with mine. I believe GOD is the judge, you're welcome to the thought that you and you're "morally" superior brothers and sisters are. You really should check out the link I provided, it looks at what morality is ( typically it is a set of "acceptable" codes set by society, note it does not say only religion provides some form of true morality).

Look, I like you Monkey, but I'm sorry, I simply, COMPLETELY and UTTERLY disagree with the thought that Christianity holds a monopoly on what is or isn't morally acceptable, I also completely and utterly REFUSE to judge people based on what preference, color of skin, beliefs may be. God is the judge in my book, he may indeed ultimately judge them how you say ( though I would like to think God is smarter than that) but that is HIS choice. "Judge not lest ye be judged", and I will happily leave him to it.

I believe promoting tolerance in all forms is a "good" thing. I didn't like the Sam reality show and made it abundantly clear I didn't like it , that doesn't mean I'm going to all of a sudden "stand" for discrimination, or intolerance because of a fear of some sort of societal failing because there is a gay man who is playing football . It's unfortunate that you feel it necessary to continue to "prove" gayness as a choice, but ultimately that ISN'T your choice to make, it's theirs ( even IF you could somehow magically prove it),
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby monkey » Sun May 18, 2014 8:37 pm

Think what you want, it's a free country.
But why do you call me intolerant when I say what I think?
I have not stepped on anyone's rights as an American, nor have I suppressed anyone in any way shape or form.
I'm just standing against the liberal/homosexual agenda and calling it what it is.
Sin.

By the way, you don't need to judge homosexuality, GOD already did, as he made abundantly clear in the scriptures.
He's already said it's wrong, and in fact, the Apostle Paul teaches that homosexuality is itself a judgement against a nation for failing to acknowledge GOD as the creator.

In fact according to Paul in Romans 8, the sin which caused GOD to judge Sodom, wasn't the act of homosexuality itself (that was a judgment from GOD sent to get people to turn from their denial, and acknowledge HIM as the creator) it was the nations APPROVAL of homosexuality that caused GOD to judge that nation.

In other words, the greater problem isn't homosexuality, or the individual act(s) of homosexuality, it was the INSULT to GOD that we as a nation give when we APPROVE OF IT!

Bah...this is a waste.
You'll not be convinced because you yourself deny that the Scriptures are the moral compass that GOD has given us to comport ourselves by...so what's the point?
The Bible teaches clearly that GOD has judged homosexuality as a sin. Amazingly, you are saying that GOD is wrong.
I have no more to say after that...I just wouldn't want to be in your shoes on judgment day when HE asks who you think you are to tell HIM that HE is wrong to judge homosexuality.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Sun May 18, 2014 9:12 pm

And again, that would be MY choice and MY problem, so feel secure in your self, and let people make their own ways, and face their own ramifications of those choices. The hypocracy within the church is ridiculous and the thought that those that have the "moral" compass you profess, continue to break those morals repeatedly, and consistently, and then profess some sort of superiority is laughable. I choose to believe God will judge me fairly, and will approve of me living a good life, whether that be the case or not, is up to HIM not you, or me. If not , so be it.

I won't change simply to appease people that believe themselves superior.

You wonder why I turned from religion? This is a PRIME example, intolerance of others on a GRAND scale, whether it be beliefs, or choices or preferences or "morality" or any other thought process against the churches mandate ( that whether you want to admit it or not isn't strictly gods word, but interpretations by MAN, who is inherrently flawed, and what they think is best). And so I reject religion, while I continue to have faith in God.
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Futureite » Sun May 18, 2014 9:35 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:Good post Future.


Irony. I just read one of your posts and logged in to reply "great post!" when I saw scrolled up and saw this. So I responded to this one instead.
Futureite
Legacy
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Futureite » Sun May 18, 2014 9:56 pm

monkey wrote:
Futureite wrote: If on the other hand you are insinuating that this is "promoting" homosexuality, lol, then I disagree. Little kids are not going to decide to be gay because of Michael Sam. This just another step in promoting social acceptance of another slice of our society that has experienced a good deal.of discrimination. I can't find a thing wrong with it. Just like with blogging, if I don't like it I can choose to click away, or change the channel.


1. It is in fact promoting homosexuality, if you can't see that, then I am sorry for you. The media is actively celebrating this, and equating it to the civil rights movement...how could this NOT be promoting homosexuality???
2. I am all for ending discrimination, but why do we as society need to "accept" something which is morally perverse? I can find all kinds of things wrong with it.
3. When it (the homosexual agenda) is saturating the media, in the obvious attempt to influence the culture, then how can you say it's as simple as that? It is EVERYWHERE! You cannot just "turn the channel, because it's saturating the media. It's the media that is in fact, leading the charge in this.

We are told that, if you don't accept the homosexual agenda, and accept homosexual unions as being equal to marriage, then you are a bigot, and a homophobe.
It is literally EVERYWHERE, it is being force fed to our children in schools, and it is changing the culture by virtue of the threat of being called a bigot, and being shouted down by angry, intolerant liberals, rather than a morally superior argument. They don't have a morally superior argument, so they resort to shutting those who disagree up, by threatening them financially, (they'll be too happy to sue your business into the ground if you don't cater to them), and by virtue of left leaning, liberal judges who circumvent the laws to forward the agenda.
It's not just as simple as turning the channel.


Well I have to disagree with you. I do not believe that homosexuality can be "promoted" or encouraged any more than being black, asian or short can. I am going to guess that we have a fundamental disagreement as to Nature v Nurture on this issue. The probability that Michael Sam, Ellen Degeneres or Anderson Cooper can change anyone's sexual preference is 0% in my opinion.

I am curious as to what the homosexual agenda is that you reference. If a man kisses a woman on TV, it is fine. If a man marries a woman, it is fine. It still seems to me that homosexuals are seeking equality - not preferential treatment. Marriage, the right to fight for our military, etc. I am fine with it.

If you were to ask me which is worse - homosexuality or organized religion - I would choose the latter. I ackniwlwdge that religion does great things for a lot of people, but it is also the root cause of a whole lot of problems on this earth. But hey, I consider myself a Lutheran. We forgive and accept almost anything lol.

One question: are you ok with the christian version of god permeating every aspect of American culture? "One nation, under god". Easter is a national holiday. And the examples continue. Is this ok and if so, why? If ww really want to compare the negative impact of homosexuality v christianity (or the deconstruction of morality as you reference), let's start by comparing the number of wars fought in the name of religion to the number of wars fought in the name of homosexuality.
Futureite
Legacy
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby monkey » Mon May 19, 2014 5:40 am

Futureite wrote: It still seems to me that homosexuals are seeking equality - not preferential treatment. Marriage, the right to fight for our military, etc. I am fine with it.



Last post I will respond to in here, because this is a waste of time. You guys are arguing with me, when you ought to take it up with GOD.
First though, Human Cockroach you said that you have faith in God but apparently it's not the one who said that homosexuality is a sin.
So basically you've invented a sort of candy cane god who is there to answer all your needs and agree with your left wing politics?
That's not GOD. That's...you. That's you worshiping yourself, and your own opinions.
The one true GOD has spoken loud and clear on homosexuality. He said it's sin. So don't argue with me, go tell the King of the Universe that he's intolerant.
Of course, He'll tell you that he is intolerant of sin...completely intolerant of it. He hates it.
That's not my opinion, it's HIS.

Futurite, I will answer that first part of your post because it's factually incorrect.
Homosexuals already have the same rights as I or you do. ALL of the same rights. Who is telling them that they cannot get married? I wish they would get married. I wish all self proclaimed homosexuals would give up that perverted lifestyle, go find a member of the opposite sex, and marry them.
They have the same right to marry as everyone in this country does, what they WANT is to change the meaning of marriage, redefine it to mean something else.

They are like a person who has found a rotting-out, old boat on a beach.
He really likes the boat a lot, so much, that he wants to be in it as much as possible. So much in fact, that he wants to drive it around on the streets like an automobile.
After all he says, "I really love the boat, and boats are a form of transportation, just like automobiles, so why shouldn't I be allowed to drive it on the streets?"

So he slapped some non-working wheels on the boat (to make it look the part), and went to the courthouse to demand a motor vehicle license. When the first judge informed him that a boat is not the same as an automobile, no matter how much he loved the boat, he became angry, and formed a small (but growing) club of other boat owners who wanted to drive them on the streets.
Soon they became well organized, and learned to manipulate the mainstream media, and the government bureaucracy so well that, they got the media to proclaim their cause was just, and anyone who disagreed was a BOATHATER; and they elected judges sympathetic to their cause, who worked diligently to twist, bend and outright change existing law, until, eventually they were able to subvert the law, while the media was able to convince most people that driving boats was a moral good.

The inevitable traffic jams that soon followed were blamed on BOATHATERS who the media said, were just too unenlightened to understand, and were clinging to their old morality, which was clearly based on BOATAPHOBIA.
User avatar
monkey
Legacy
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:40 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Futureite » Mon May 19, 2014 7:32 am

monkey wrote:
Futureite wrote: It still seems to me that homosexuals are seeking equality - not preferential treatment. Marriage, the right to fight for our military, etc. I am fine with it.



Last post I will respond to in here, because this is a waste of time. You guys are arguing with me, when you ought to take it up with GOD.
First though, Human Cockroach you said that you have faith in God but apparently it's not the one who said that homosexuality is a sin.
So basically you've invented a sort of candy cane god who is there to answer all your needs and agree with your left wing politics?
That's not GOD. That's...you. That's you worshiping yourself, and your own opinions.
The one true GOD has spoken loud and clear on homosexuality. He said it's sin. So don't argue with me, go tell the King of the Universe that he's intolerant.
Of course, He'll tell you that he is intolerant of sin...completely intolerant of it. He hates it.
That's not my opinion, it's HIS.

Futurite, I will answer that first part of your post because it's factually incorrect.
Homosexuals already have the same rights as I or you do. ALL of the same rights. Who is telling them that they cannot get married? I wish they would get married. I wish all self proclaimed homosexuals would give up that perverted lifestyle, go find a member of the opposite sex, and marry them.
They have the same right to marry as everyone in this country does, what they WANT is to change the meaning of marriage, redefine it to mean something else.

They are like a person who has found a rotting-out, old boat on a beach.
He really likes the boat a lot, so much, that he wants to be in it as much as possible. So much in fact, that he wants to drive it around on the streets like an automobile.
After all he says, "I really love the boat, and boats are a form of transportation, just like automobiles, so why shouldn't I be allowed to drive it on the streets?"

So he slapped some non-working wheels on the boat (to make it look the part), and went to the courthouse to demand a motor vehicle license. When the first judge informed him that a boat is not the same as an automobile, no matter how much he loved the boat, he became angry, and formed a small (but growing) club of other boat owners who wanted to drive them on the streets.
Soon they became well organized, and learned to manipulate the mainstream media, and the government bureaucracy so well that, they got the media to proclaim their cause was just, and anyone who disagreed was a BOATHATER; and they elected judges sympathetic to their cause, who worked diligently to twist, bend and outright change existing law, until, eventually they were able to subvert the law, while the media was able to convince most people that driving boats was a moral good.

The inevitable traffic jams that soon followed were blamed on BOATHATERS who the media said, were just too unenlightened to understand, and were clinging to their old morality, which was clearly based on BOATAPHOBIA.


I don't think god gives a s--t about homosexuality. Really. And I pray all the time. To the same god that you do. I have never understood why some christians are so fixated with this issue. Some of god's favorite people had 1,000's of wives in the Old Testament. But that is NEVER discussed by Christians that rail against homosexuality. Lol of all the things to get upset about in this world. My uncle is gay but somehow I managed to straight. Crazy, isn't it?

But this is the great thing about America. You get to passionately voice your opinion and Michael Sam does the same with his.

Cmon September, get here already!
Futureite
Legacy
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Mon May 19, 2014 8:06 am

It's man not God that put a rating system on God's "sins", if it IS a sin, it matters NOT for God loves ALL of his children EQUALLY, and will forgive those that seek forgiveness for their sins. Which INCLUDES homosexuals. So if you think I am worshiping my "left wing politics" which is a HUGE assumption by you since I disdain both parties equally, and have made clear my issues are that people can't simply accept that everyone isn't exactly like them, and can't seem to grasp that it ISN'T their right to judge others that value other peoples beliefs and opinions ( something you are doing here). I don't vote by party, and I could give a Sh!t about whether that professional lier is right or left wing or what their religious views are one way or the other( you might call them politicians), I vote for the people I believe to be lying least, whether they be Republican, or Democrat, I don't care.

God ALSO teaches tolerance, love, understanding, it is MAN not God that has decided some sins are no big deal, while others are something to crusade against. Pick and choose what lessons you want to learn, what passages you choose to pay attention to and how vehemently you choose to stand for them, that is YOUR choice, and I'll leave you to it, the way I choose to worship is MY choice and I will continue to do so the way I choose, what other people do with THEIR choice is theirs, and I will leave them to it as well. If that means I am "worshipping myself" then I will pay for it, not you, and as such, maybe you should BACK OFF.
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby Futureite » Mon May 19, 2014 8:20 am

HumanCockroach wrote:It's man not God that put a rating system on God's "sins", if it IS a sin, it matters NOT for God loves ALL of his children EQUALLY, and will forgive those that seek forgiveness for their sins. Which INCLUDES homosexuals. So if you think I am worshiping my "left wing politics" which is a HUGE assumption by you since I disdain both parties equally, and have made clear my issues are that people can't simply accept that everyone isn't exactly like them, and can't seem to grasp that it ISN'T their right to judge others that value other peoples beliefs and opinions ( something you are doing here). I don't vote by party, and I could give a Sh!t about whether that professional lier is right or left wing or what their religious views are one way or the other( you might call them politicians), I vote for the people I believe to be lying least, whether they be Republican, or Democrat, I don't care.

God ALSO teaches tolerance, love, understanding, it is MAN not God that has decided some sins are no big deal, while others are something to crusade against. Pick and choose what lessons you want to learn, what passages you choose to pay attention to and how vehemently you choose to stand for them, that is YOUR choice, and I'll leave you to it, the way I choose to worship is MY choice and I will continue to do so the way I choose, what other people do with THEIR choice is theirs, and I will leave them to it as well. If that means I am "worshipping myself" then I will pay for it, not you, and as such, maybe you should BACK OFF.


+1!
Futureite
Legacy
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby NorthHawk » Mon May 19, 2014 8:48 am

The Pope was asked what he thought of homosexuals and his response was something along the lines of who am I to judge?
If the man who is probably the most pious and devout Christian alive can accept gays, it confuses me as to why lay people can't.
Do those Christians and their Pastors/Reverends know more about the teachings of Jesus and the Bible than the Pope?
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Mon May 19, 2014 11:01 am

Yep...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... riage.html

Guess the Pope is one of us without morality.
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby RiverDog » Tue May 20, 2014 1:40 am

I don't have a problem with homosexuality. It doesn't effect any part of my life so who gives a rip what hole someone wants to stick their crank shaft in...so long as it isn't mine.

About the only thing I have against the current movement is the gay/lesbian crowd's insistence of being able to marry vs a civil union that would bestow the very same legal rights that married couples have. It would seem to be the perfect compromise, gay couples being treated by the law exactly the same as heterosexual couples, yet those that hold to the principle that a marriage being exclusively between a man and woman could keep their institution intact.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby FolkCrusader » Tue May 20, 2014 5:29 am

RiverDog wrote:I don't have a problem with homosexuality. It doesn't effect any part of my life so who gives a rip what hole someone wants to stick their crank shaft in...so long as it isn't mine.

About the only thing I have against the current movement is the gay/lesbian crowd's insistence of being able to marry vs a civil union that would bestow the very same legal rights that married couples have. It would seem to be the perfect compromise, gay couples being treated by the law exactly the same as heterosexual couples, yet those that hold to the principle that a marriage being exclusively between a man and woman could keep their institution intact.


You misunderstand the issue RD. Civil Unions are not equal to marriage in law and it would take many many more years to update all of the laws in the land to make it so. As an example, back in the sixties the feminist movement pushed for laws to be updated to be gender inclusive or gender non-specific. This took many years and lots of time and money. It does not make sense to expand a new class definition in the law when a perfectly acceptable one already exists.

The fact is churches gave up the right to oversee marriages during the reformation. When you get a marriage license you go through the state to do so. You can then choose a spiritual adviser, justice of the peace, ship's captain, pretty much anyone who has applied for a license to officiate a ceremony. Catholics will still get married by priests, Baptists will still get married by Pastors, LGBT people of faith have churches that will accept them, people of all orientations that are non-believers have many many options to be married as well.

If I passed a law that called me a "man", and you for what ever reason a "lesser man." Promised you that some laws currently make you equal in the eyes of the law to me, but some still need to be updated, oh and some states say they will never pass those laws so don''t move. Is that something you would be likely to accept? Of course not. It is the right to marry that is desired, with all the laws and protections that class provides. It makes no sense to keep updating a relatively new definition when the correct one already exists.
FolkCrusader
Legacy
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:51 am

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby nlbmsportin » Tue May 20, 2014 6:48 am

Was going to post a very...very long response, but instead:

Image
Image
User avatar
nlbmsportin
Legacy
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby kalibane » Tue May 20, 2014 7:04 am

Just as an aside... AIDS/HIV did not spread faster through the Gay Community because of promiscuity. It spread faster among gay men because anal sex is the easiest method of transmission. The anal membrane allows bioorganisms to pass through it at a much easier rate, and anal tears provide direct contact with blood. HIV also came on the scene at a time when by far the primary reason to use condoms was birth control, not STI prevention. So obviously with no risk of pregnancy, condoms weren't being used and thus faster spread of the virus.

I'm sure some people might react to this fact by saying it proves the point. The problem is anal sex is not a strictly gay act. There are a lot of completely straight men who engage in, desire and even prefer anal sex to vaginal sex. There are also women who actually want anal sex (even though it's not my thing, I know this first hand).

Additionally, Lesbians are just as gay as homosexual men, but Lesbians have the lowest rate of HIV infection of any group (aside from those who are celibate). So if it's a "gay" disease it doesn't make sense that half of the gay people out there almost never get it (and when they do it's usually as a result of being infected before they came out as gay).

:lol: @ NLBM
Last edited by kalibane on Tue May 20, 2014 7:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
kalibane
Legacy
 
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:42 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby nlbmsportin » Tue May 20, 2014 7:22 am

kalibane wrote:Just as an aside... AIDS/HIV did not spread faster through the Gay Community because of promiscuity. It spread faster among gay men because anal sex is the easiest method of transmission. The anal membrane allows bioorganisms to pass through it at a much easier rate, and anal tears provide direct contact with blood. HIV also came on the scene at a time when by far the primary reason to use condoms was birth control, not STI infection. So obviously with no risk of pregnancy, condoms weren't being used and thus faster spread of the virus.

I'm sure some people might react to this fact by saying it proves the point. The problem is anal sex is not a strictly gay act. There are a lot of completely straight men who engage in, desire and even prefer anal sex to vaginal sex. There are also women who actually want anal sex (even though it's not my thing, I know this first hand).

Additionally, Lesbians are just as gay as homosexual men, but Lesbians have the lowest rate of HIV infection of any group (aside from those who are celibate). So if it's a "gay" disease it doesn't make sense that half of the gay people out there almost never get it (and when they do it's usually as a result of being infected before they came out as gay).

:lol: @ NLBM


The conclusion is obvious: we should just all be lesbians. You know, the group of people that are only deemed tolerable in fundamentalist circles if they are attractive and let you join in! :roll:
User avatar
nlbmsportin
Legacy
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby c_hawkbob » Tue May 20, 2014 7:49 am

I've always considered myself a lesbian ...
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 7439
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Tue May 20, 2014 8:10 am

c_hawkbob wrote:I've always considered myself a lesbian ...


Yep, trapped in a mans body ( or at least that is how I used to describe it).... :D
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby burrrton » Tue May 20, 2014 8:24 am

"Why do you say you feel 'trapped' in a man's body?"

"Well, sometimes I get the menstrual cramps real hard..."
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby PasadenaHawk » Tue May 20, 2014 8:41 am

nlbmsportin wrote:
kalibane wrote:Just as an aside... AIDS/HIV did not spread faster through the Gay Community because of promiscuity. It spread faster among gay men because anal sex is the easiest method of transmission. The anal membrane allows bioorganisms to pass through it at a much easier rate, and anal tears provide direct contact with blood. HIV also came on the scene at a time when by far the primary reason to use condoms was birth control, not STI infection. So obviously with no risk of pregnancy, condoms weren't being used and thus faster spread of the virus.

I'm sure some people might react to this fact by saying it proves the point. The problem is anal sex is not a strictly gay act. There are a lot of completely straight men who engage in, desire and even prefer anal sex to vaginal sex. There are also women who actually want anal sex (even though it's not my thing, I know this first hand).

Additionally, Lesbians are just as gay as homosexual men, but Lesbians have the lowest rate of HIV infection of any group (aside from those who are celibate). So if it's a "gay" disease it doesn't make sense that half of the gay people out there almost never get it (and when they do it's usually as a result of being infected before they came out as gay).

:lol: @ NLBM


The conclusion is obvious: we should just all be lesbians. You know, the group of people that are only deemed tolerable in fundamentalist circles if they are attractive and let you join in! :roll:


Easily the most disturbing post I have ever started to read
PasadenaHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:44 am

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby RiverDog » Tue May 20, 2014 8:49 am

FolkCrusader wrote:
RiverDog wrote:You misunderstand the issue RD. Civil Unions are not equal to marriage in law and it would take many many more years to update all of the laws in the land to make it so. As an example, back in the sixties the feminist movement pushed for laws to be updated to be gender inclusive or gender non-specific. This took many years and lots of time and money. It does not make sense to expand a new class definition in the law when a perfectly acceptable one already exists.

The fact is churches gave up the right to oversee marriages during the reformation. When you get a marriage license you go through the state to do so. You can then choose a spiritual adviser, justice of the peace, ship's captain, pretty much anyone who has applied for a license to officiate a ceremony. Catholics will still get married by priests, Baptists will still get married by Pastors, LGBT people of faith have churches that will accept them, people of all orientations that are non-believers have many many options to be married as well.

If I passed a law that called me a "man", and you for what ever reason a "lesser man." Promised you that some laws currently make you equal in the eyes of the law to me, but some still need to be updated, oh and some states say they will never pass those laws so don''t move. Is that something you would be likely to accept? Of course not. It is the right to marry that is desired, with all the laws and protections that class provides. It makes no sense to keep updating a relatively new definition when the correct one already exists.


I understand that the laws that do recognize civil unions still do not cover all of the same things as they do for marriages, but the most important aspects, such as access to health care insurance and community property purchases, is granted to participants in a civil union. The only real problem that I can see with the difference between unions and marriages is the federal government's treatment of civil unions for tax and social security purposes, and as you have noted, the fact that there's such a discrepancy between the various states on what they recognize and what they don't, and that's no different than the current problem of some states accepting same sex marriages where others don't.

It's a pretty complicated issue and I don't pretend to understand half of it, but I do feel that civil unions, if crafted so that they offer ALL of the same legal consideration as marriage, is a reasonable compromise.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby kalibane » Tue May 20, 2014 9:05 am

Not exactly the same Riv. Even though Gay Marriage isn't legal in Alabama, they are supposed to recognize a marriage that took place in Washington, just like even though you can't get married until 17 (with parental consent) in Washington, the State is supposed to accept a marriage from Georgia where one of the parties was 15 (with parental consent). Now they may push back against it, but if they do they open themselves up to a lawsuit. With Civil Unions they don't have to worry about that at all they can just categorically tell people it doesn't mean anything within their borders.

I think the idea of civil unions is fine if executed properly but think about it this way. We all complain about how much time our law makers waste on meaningless stuff right? Is it really worth the legislature's (and by extension our) time to rewrite countless federal and state laws so they can be inclusive of civil unions all just because some people don't like calling them "marriages"?

I'd rather our elected officials concentrate on bigger issues. It seems much more productive for gay people to just get married under the laws already on the books. Civil unions are are lot of wasted energy on what boils down to pure semantics.
kalibane
Legacy
 
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:42 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby nlbmsportin » Tue May 20, 2014 10:46 am

PasadenaHawk wrote:Easily the most disturbing post I have ever started to read


Well alright.

"I have no more to say after that...I just wouldn't want to be in your shoes on judgment day when HE asks who you think you are to tell HIM that HE is wrong to judge homosexuality."

I'd say that's a bit more disturbing. But, maybe you didn't read that one.

monkey,

Might makes right and throw away your humanity in favor of a jealous, bloodthirsty, and capricious dictator that:

Allows and sets the rules for slavery
Places women lower than men
Makes deals involving child sacrifice
Makes death by bear the punishment for ridiculing a prophet
Commands genocide and the taking of virgins as spoils of war
Doesn't send word of germ theory or vaccines to avoid countless millions from dying of disease for centuries
Values credulity over good deeds
Allows a faithful man to be broken to just prove a point and show off in front of the devil
Creates a universe that's sole purpose is to stroke his ego

On and on...and on...and on

While we're on the subject of damning homosexuality:

"Witch"? Die
Unruly child? Die
Infidel? Die
Handicapped? Get away from the alter
I burned your sons for my glory. If you mourn: Die.
Men wear your clothes, women wear yours. No exceptions
Work on the sabbath? Die
Beat your slaves as long as they don't die right away

And spare me the "out of context" or "free will" trash
User avatar
nlbmsportin
Legacy
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby HumanCockroach » Tue May 20, 2014 11:11 am

burrrton wrote:"Why do you say you feel 'trapped' in a man's body?"

"Well, sometimes I get the menstrual cramps real hard..."


Something I said when I was undoubtably feeling bullet proof as a 20 something, and it stuck. Not much thought process in it, don't try to over analyse something that doesn't need to be analysed in the first place.
User avatar
HumanCockroach
Legacy
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: Woodinville, Wa

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby RiverDog » Tue May 20, 2014 12:40 pm

kalibane wrote:Not exactly the same Riv. Even though Gay Marriage isn't legal in Alabama, they are supposed to recognize a marriage that took place in Washington, just like even though you can't get married until 17 (with parental consent) in Washington, the State is supposed to accept a marriage from Georgia where one of the parties was 15 (with parental consent). Now they may push back against it, but if they do they open themselves up to a lawsuit. With Civil Unions they don't have to worry about that at all they can just categorically tell people it doesn't mean anything within their borders.

I think the idea of civil unions is fine if executed properly but think about it this way. We all complain about how much time our law makers waste on meaningless stuff right? Is it really worth the legislature's (and by extension our) time to rewrite countless federal and state laws so they can be inclusive of civil unions all just because some people don't like calling them "marriages"?

I'd rather our elected officials concentrate on bigger issues. It seems much more productive for gay people to just get married under the laws already on the books. Civil unions are are lot of wasted energy on what boils down to pure semantics.


I like to think of it this way: Politicians are going to be doing something meaningless and arbitrary with their time anyway. They can't help themselves. So rather them spending their time writing legislation on some stupid law that's going to have a major impact on my life, I'd rather they spend 10 years or so devoting 100% of their time on something like civil unions that has absolutely no affect on me whatsoever.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby kalibane » Tue May 20, 2014 1:02 pm

Well look I know it's quite in vogue to tear down both sides of the aisle, decry the spectre of big government interfering with our lives and champion individual liberties, I think the phrase, be careful what you wish for applies here.

I totally chuckled when I read your reply Riv because there is a kernal of truth in there. But the best lies contain a kernal of truth and while almost no one is happy with the way governent is going these days regardless of their personal views, I can guarntee you wouldn't be happy with the results if what you just typed came to pass. It would not be a good thing to clog the legislature with this kind of ridiculousness.
kalibane
Legacy
 
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:42 pm

Re: Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

Postby burrrton » Tue May 20, 2014 1:10 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:
burrrton wrote:"Why do you say you feel 'trapped' in a man's body?"

"Well, sometimes I get the menstrual cramps real hard..."


Something I said when I was undoubtably feeling bullet proof as a 20 something, and it stuck. Not much thought process in it, don't try to over analyse something that doesn't need to be analysed in the first place.


Not analyzing anything, HC. It's just a funny quote from a movie.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 4213
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

PreviousNext

Return to Seahawks Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests