Michael Sam, genuine good story, or money grab?

[monkey]

My only issue with Monkey in this whole thing, was his belief that I personally, along with many on here were going to hell for believing that tolerating our fellow man, was going to condemn us all.

Sigh...you still misunderstand.
If you go to Hell, it will be ONLY because you rejected Jesus' payment for your sins through his death and resurrection. I have no way whatsoever of knowing that about you.
See, that's the part where your earlier quote about "judge not" actually has correct meaning!
On that, I CANNOT judge, because ONLY GOD truly knows those who are His.

That is an entirely separate issue from a national judgment.
Jesus talked about a specific kind of judgment reserved for nations, when in Matthew 10:15 he said that, "Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

THAT is the type of judgment I am talking about, and that caused me to say what I did.
Again, what Michael Sam does, not my problem. He'll have to explain to his Creator.

What this nation approves of, in light of GOD'S words on the topic, VERY MUCH my concern!
As a citizen of this country, and a believer in in Christ, I would be remiss in my duties if I didn't point out what GOD says on the topic.

Don't believe that GOD judges nations for their choices? Tell that to Jesus, who CLEARLY believed it and taught it as fact. Not only claimed it as fact, but claimed to be the very one executing the judgment when he said that "Before Moses was, I AM." Thereby claiming to have been the one Moses talked to in the burning bush, as well as the one responsible for the Angel of Death which passed over those houses with lamb's blood (a "type" or model of what he himself would purchase for us in his death on the cross), which was also a national judgment, though it was aimed more at the specific god's that the Egyptian's worshiped, including Pharaoh himself, who was said to be Ra (one of their many gods) on earth.

[HumanCockroach]

Monkey you were pretty clear what my "tolerance" would bring, as well as professing to know what "morality" was. As I have told you now numerous times, I'm am secure in my faith, my belief that religion as a whole is NOT what God intended, and as always when placed in mans hands has been corrupted beyond saving. Hence, I am either damned or not, and right this second I'm not entirely sure I any longer CARE at least in this particular thread.

So sigh, pray, study your books or try to save other heathens like myself, who while being RAISED in the Church find it so distastful, that we no longer attend, and find it more repulsive as a whole than the Government, Gay marriages and a host of other sins, do to things of this very nature.I haven't the desire to continue to have you post that accepting others is glorifying them, it isn't, no matter what angle you attempt to attack it from.

I'll continue to believe what I believe, and your welcome to believe what you believe.

[monkey]

Monkey you were pretty clear what my "tolerance" would bring, as well as professing to know what "morality" was.


I haven't the desire to continue to have you post that accepting others is glorifying them, it isn't, no matter what angle you attempt to attack it from.



I'll continue to believe what I believe, and your welcome to believe what you believe.

A: The Bible teaches us what morality is. I don't claim to be any better at following it than you or anyone else, though I do happen to KNOW a great deal more about it than most people, as I have studied it extensively, graduated from Bible college, (twice actually, Victory Bible Institute and King's College) and nearly finished my masters in divinity through King's College Seminary.

B: I think that much of our arguments are coming from a failure to adequately nail down the terms we are using.
There are times in your posts when you have used one word, when the definition you seem to be implying is from another word. For example, you use the word accepting just now. Jesus accepts ALL who call on his name. There is a HUGE difference between acceptance of the person, and of the person's lifestyle. There is also a HUGE difference between the definitions of the words accepting and tolerating, or accepting or approving. We need to be precise in our uses of these terms, otherwise people think that we're talking about a specific, when we are talking about a generalization, or think that we mean accepting in the sense of inclusiveness, when we mean accepting in the sense of accepting everything a person does.

Much of the misunderstanding you are having with me, can likely be traced back to not adequately (you or me, or both of us) nailing down the precise definitions.

C: Yup.
I am all for people who dislike religion. I myself dislike much of the organized Church as it is now. (Not to be confused with the true Church, meaning the Body, or Bride of Christ! Also not an excuse to skip going, as we are told to not forsake the assembling of ourselves together.)
It was the most religious people of Jesus's day who were most directly responsible for his execution (we are all responsible for it, but you get my meaning right?)
The Pharisees, Sadducee's and other religious scribes and leaders were looking for Messiah to come as, the Messiah like David, because they wanted to be free of the Roman occupiers. They just couldn't come to grips with the fact that Jesus was a Messiah like Joseph.

In other words, He didn't fit their image of the Messiah, so they had him killed...out of religious fervor actually. They did it in the name of God, thinking they were doing His work.
Religion and the Law brings only death, the Truth makes us free.

[Futureite]

Futurite, if you really want to know, I can show you some pretty outstanding websites that can tell you.
For example, khouse.org is a fantastic teaching site. carm.org is a fantastic apologist site that has links to pretty much every frequently asked question, including the ones you just asked.
elshaddaiministries.us is a Messianic-Jewish site, which is outstanding. RZIM.org is Ravi Zaccarias' site, he's the best apologist I know of, if you watch him, I guarantee you will come away impressed with his brilliant mind.

If you have graduated from a biblical college then your study of religion is far more advanced than mine. I grew up in very opressive religion. However, I attended sermons from infancy until about age 12. I then willingly reivested a great deal of time between age 18 and 20 attending various denominations of all kinds to find a better fit. So, I do have a good deal of experience reading, analyzing, internalizing and attempting to come to some understanding of what it all means.

After arguing with many zealots over the very definition of "god" (is Jesus separate and unique from god or god himself?) I came to the conclusion that the entire concept of religion has ulterior motive to what Jesus taught, for whatever purpose it serves for that particular group of people. I would state that Jesus was sent to abolish the 10 commandments and replace them with one commandment - to love. They would respond yes, but the definition of "love" implies that you follow rule A - Z. I would respond "what about rule A.2.1.(ii), which no one within this religion follows?" And so an endless debate would continue, on and on in a legalize fashion over the definition of words, interpretation and the level of importance placed on each.

All of this completely defeats the purpose of "god's" teachings - whomever you choose him to be. I once prayed 5 hours straight. I've spent hours upon hours meditating, trying to reach my higher self and my higher power. I have expended enough time reaching out to the seek "truth" that if your anti-homosexual view and others you hold were it, god should have reached out and proved it to me. But he did not. Quite the opposite. My search.led me to accept everyone. So you are no more right than me.

Everyone has their own separate spiritual path. And while you believe yours is right or Sam's or HC's or anyone else's is wrong, this is all uniquely personal. Nobody can prove their interpretation of life is "right" - it's impossible. It's only what is right for you.

[monkey]

I came to the conclusion that the entire concept of religion has ulterior motive to what Jesus taught, for whatever purpose it serves for that particular group of people.


I would state that Jesus was sent to abolish the 10 commandments and replace them with one commandment - to love.

May I just say that, to the first part of what you said, I agree. For the most part, like ANYTHING in life, people find ways to selfishly use everything to their own betterment, and others downfall.
It's man's fallen nature.

To the second part, I would quote what Jesus said on that subject. "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

He did not come to do away with the ten commandments, (which he himself wrote with his finger) he came to do something we never could. Obey them perfectly.

The law is still the teacher, or the "schoolmaster" to borrow the Apostle Paul's phrase, there to show you your need of a savior from the righteous demands of a perfect, Holy GOD.
But all the law can do is condemn. It cannot bring life, only death.

As Paul teaches, "Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law. But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."

The law is there to point to your need of grace, which was provided by Jesus, and can be appropriated by you through faith, and faith alone.
HE did the work, you can do NOTHING to add to it, only believe.

"if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."

And that is the Gospel.

[Eaglehawk]

Much love Monkey.
However, maybe you can help me understand something.
You mentioned that you are not in favor of the organized Church as it stands today, yet you are firm in your belief as to eternal salvation? So I just say to someone I believe in Jesus Christ and I am saved?
I don't get it.
Monkey if you want, please start a thread on the OFF TOPIC section. I find your comments interesting.

While I detest homosexuality, I respect their right to do what they do in their homes.

[Futureite]

I came to the conclusion that the entire concept of religion has ulterior motive to what Jesus taught, for whatever purpose it serves for that particular group of people.


I would state that Jesus was sent to abolish the 10 commandments and replace them with one commandment - to love.

May I just say that, to the first part of what you said, I agree. For the most part, like ANYTHING in life, people find ways to selfishly use everything to their own betterment, and others downfall.
It's man's fallen nature.

To the second part, I would quote what Jesus said on that subject. "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

He did not come to do away with the ten commandments, (which he himself wrote with his finger) he came to do something we never could. Obey them perfectly.

The law is still the teacher, or the "schoolmaster" to borrow the Apostle Paul's phrase, there to show you your need of a savior from the righteous demands of a perfect, Holy GOD.
But all the law can do is condemn. It cannot bring life, only death.

As Paul teaches, "Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law. But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."

The law is there to point to your need of grace, which was provided by Jesus, and can be appropriated by you through faith, and faith alone.
HE did the work, you can do NOTHING to add to it, only believe.

"if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."

And that is the Gospel.

John 13:34. The entire theological reasoning for Jesus coming to earth is that his death is payment for everyone's sins. There is no "but for homosexuals" clause. Anyone who accepts Jesus as the son of god is forgiven. The problem is then zealots begin to analyze whether one has "truly" accepted Jesus, thereby dismissing his teachings. In my opinion, that is exactly what you are doing. I have had this debate over, and over again. This is exactly what drive me away from religion. Some of you get more technical that the freaking federal code. Whether you are technically correct or not, the substance of what you are asserting is way off (again, in my opinion).

And no theologian has yet to answer my question of why god himself created sin. Sin did not exist until Adam was tempted by Satan. Who created Satan?? If you cannot logically answer that question, then there is no point in justifying any moral position you have taken with scripture as the foundation of your logic.

[monkey]

The entire theological reasoning for Jesus coming to earth is that his death is payment for everyone's sins. There is no "but for homosexuals" clause. Anyone who accepts Jesus as the son of god is forgiven.

The problem is then zealots begin to analyze whether one has "truly" accepted Jesus, thereby dismissing his teachings.

A: I agree with nothing whatsoever to add. You've got it right exactly.

B: Again I agree, and must add that, when people quote the Bible saying "Judge not", this is exactly what the warning is for.
I don't know what lies in man's hearts, and I certainly cannot know who are, and who are not GOD's people.

I will point out again though, that is entirely different from using discernment to know right from wrong, and to judge a man by his works, both of which we are commanded to do.

I will further point out that there is a HUGE difference between acceptance of a person, as they are, and urging them to not stay in that fallen condition.

Jesus had a woman brought to him who was caught in the act of adultery, literally in the act. The woman could have been stoned for that sin. (BTW where was the man involved? He too should have been there... Those silly Pharisees!) When they asked Jesus what he would do, he said, "Let him without sin, cast the first stone." then stooped and began to write with his finger in the dirt. (I would love to know what he wrote!)
When he stood back up again, all the people who were accusing her had left, starting from oldest (more sin awareness) to the youngest.
He asked her where her accusers were, and she said they had left.
He said, "Neither do I accuse you, go and sin no more."

We all love the first part, the neither do I accuse you part, but the go and sin no more part we dislike quite a lot; but that latter part was a COMMAND from a HOLY GOD!

So yes, he does absolutely forgive, completely, without fail.
He loves and accepts us all AS WE ARE NOW; "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us"; but we still need to repent, (turn away from the sin) and go and sin no more.

Point is, we cannot confuse forgiveness of sin, with GOD's acceptance of the sin.
"What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means!"

As for the theological question of GOD creating sin (that's a misunderstanding actually) I won't do that justice, but I believe the answer can be found here. http://carm.org/questions/about-god/did-god-create-sin

[Futureite]

The entire theological reasoning for Jesus coming to earth is that his death is payment for everyone's sins. There is no "but for homosexuals" clause. Anyone who accepts Jesus as the son of god is forgiven.

The problem is then zealots begin to analyze whether one has "truly" accepted Jesus, thereby dismissing his teachings.

A: I agree with nothing whatsoever to add. You've got it right exactly.

B: Again I agree, and must add that, when people quote the Bible saying "Judge not", this is exactly what the warning is for.
I don't know what lies in man's hearts, and I certainly cannot know who are, and who are not GOD's people.

I will point out again though, that is entirely different from using discernment to know right from wrong, and to judge a man by his works, both of which we are commanded to do.

I will further point out that there is a HUGE difference between acceptance of a person, as they are, and urging them to not stay in that fallen condition.

Jesus had a woman brought to him who was caught in the act of adultery, literally in the act. The woman could have been stoned for that sin. (BTW where was the man involved? He too should have been there... Those silly Pharisees!) When they asked Jesus what he would do, he said, "Let him without sin, cast the first stone." then stooped and began to write with his finger in the dirt. (I would love to know what he wrote!)
When he stood back up again, all the people who were accusing her had left, starting from oldest (more sin awareness) to the youngest.
He asked her where her accusers were, and she said they had left.
He said, "Neither do I accuse you, go and sin no more."

We all love the first part, the neither do I accuse you part, but the go and sin no more part we dislike quite a lot; but that latter part was a COMMAND from a HOLY GOD!

So yes, he does absolutely forgive, completely, without fail.
He loves and accepts us all AS WE ARE NOW; "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us"; but we still need to repent, (turn away from the sin) and go and sin no more.

Point is, we cannot confuse forgiveness of sin, with GOD's acceptance of the sin.
"What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means!"

As for the theological question of GOD creating sin (that's a misunderstanding actually) I won't do that justice, but I believe the answer can be found here. http://carm.org/questions/about-god/did-god-create-sin

You know your stuff man. You'd win a religious debate with me 10 times out of 10 when it comes to scripture. I have to at least respect that .

[obiken]

I hope I don't step in it here but its both. Yes he's the first gay, however, 7th rounders almost never make it. So if he can get Oprah to give him 500k before he goes out the door than more power to him. Talk to guys that were 5th, 6th, or 7th rounders, they get treated like crap in the NFL unless they make the team. I don't think he will make it. Moreover, and this is the step in part, its an anti-homo culture. (Homo, just being short for homosexual, not a derogatory term I hope.) But especially on both sides of the line, its all they talk about: "punking" or getting punked. I don't see NFL players just welcoming him with open arms. Maybe my pessimistic persona is coming out without giving the locker room the benefit of the doubt. I think some guys will accept him, but most wont talk to him. So if he can cash in before the ax comes down on his career, then I salute him. However, the Rams did this for publicity, period.
I admire him for his courage of coming out before the draft, not waiting till a team had no choice in the matter if he made it.

[NorthHawk]

I think if he shows he can play in the NFL, and makes the Rams which will be the hardest part considering the talent they already have on their DL, the vast majority of his teammates will accept him. There's always some in any group that can't accept someone different so I'm sure he won't be accepted by all.
He might not get much attention from veterans until he makes the team as because of all the cuts to come, they tend not to make friends with rookies.

I'm with you, Obi. It was good for the teams considering him to know ahead of time instead of it leaking out later, and I don't blame him for cashing in when he gets a chance because of the low probability of making the team.

[Eaglehawk]

Rams had their reasons for putting the kabash on the Oprah thing. But I don't blame Sam for trying to get his cash as fast as possible.

Hope he makes the team.

[Hawk Sista]

Wow! Can't say I read all of that, but can say one thing for sure. This debate looks a lot different than it did just 10 years ago. I remember being so conflicted that I quit the PI for a bit; the ignorance combined w/ hate-speak & vitriol were the NORM and not the exception. It seems rather reversed now, and the debate is fairly level headed in here today by comparison.

For those making assumptions about what the discrimination against gays was/is like, I suggest you ask some people who have experienced very real discrimination in advance of reporting out how it is/was. In just my own personal experiences, I've seen families abandon their sons/daughters, home purchases voided (happened to us), job loss for NO other reason, Ope teasing & purposeful embarrassment (the least of it), fires set in gay establishments, burning crosses in yards, a neighbor telling me everything about me disgusted her. I can really report, however, that this too has changed for the better in just the same last 10 years. For every one of my gay brothers and sisters who offed themselves in the 70s & 80s for the shame, disenfranchisement, torture, etc... There are 100s who live happily in American neighborhoods, families, churches, little leagues w/ @ least superficial acceptance & support.

I respect religious differences. I really do... But there is no other argument one can make against equality for all Americans on this issue...which means arguing for less than equal treatment is to say you don't accept the concept of separation of church/state. I'm glad that day by day more people are realizing that the gays (their own neighbors, sons, pharmacists, etc....) are not the boogie men once believed. We are earners (look it up, more than most), moral, tax-paying community members who believe that the "land of the free" is just that and who is free cannot be decided by cut and pasted versions of ONE religion.

I'm not a very good lezbo, though. I'll admit to not owning a copy of "the gay agenda." Maybe I'm more wrong than I know.

[Futureite]

Wow! Can't say I read all of that, but can say one thing for sure. This debate looks a lot different than it did just 10 years ago. I remember being so conflicted that I quit the PI for a bit; the ignorance combined w/ hate-speak & vitriol were the NORM and not the exception. It seems rather reversed now, and the debate is fairly level headed in here today by comparison.

For those making assumptions about what the discrimination against gays was/is like, I suggest you ask some people who have experienced very real discrimination in advance of reporting out how it is/was. In just my own personal experiences, I've seen families abandon their sons/daughters, home purchases voided (happened to us), job loss for NO other reason, Ope teasing & purposeful embarrassment (the least of it), fires set in gay establishments, burning crosses in yards, a neighbor telling me everything about me disgusted her. I can really report, however, that this too has changed for the better in just the same last 10 years. For every one of my gay brothers and sisters who offed themselves in the 70s & 80s for the shame, disenfranchisement, torture, etc... There are 100s who live happily in American neighborhoods, families, churches, little leagues w/ @ least superficial acceptance & support.

I respect religious differences. I really do... But there is no other argument one can make against equality for all Americans on this issue...which means arguing for less than equal treatment is to say you don't accept the concept of separation of church/state. I'm glad that day by day more people are realizing that the gays (their own neighbors, sons, pharmacists, etc....) are not the boogie men once believed. We are earners (look it up, more than most), moral, tax-paying community members who believe that the "land of the free" is just that and who is free cannot be decided by cut and pasted versions of ONE religion.

I'm not a very good lezbo, though. I'll admit to not owning a copy of "the gay agenda." Maybe I'm more wrong than I know.

And you keep up your properties well! . Funny story; I was driving with my GF exploring diff areas of SF. We get to this lively area. Cool restaurants, coffee shops. Everyone out and about laughing and having a good time. We look at the houses. Well manicured lawns, beautiful well maintained houses. I said "we have to come back and hang out here". Turns out we were in the Castro.

[c_hawkbob]

Wow! Can't say I read all of that, but can say one thing for sure. This debate looks a lot different than it did just 10 years ago. I remember being so conflicted that I quit the PI for a bit; the ignorance combined w/ hate-speak & vitriol were the NORM and not the exception. It seems rather reversed now, and the debate is fairly level headed in here today by comparison.

For those making assumptions about what the discrimination against gays was/is like, I suggest you ask some people who have experienced very real discrimination in advance of reporting out how it is/was. In just my own personal experiences, I've seen families abandon their sons/daughters, home purchases voided (happened to us), job loss for NO other reason, Ope teasing & purposeful embarrassment (the least of it), fires set in gay establishments, burning crosses in yards, a neighbor telling me everything about me disgusted her. I can really report, however, that this too has changed for the better in just the same last 10 years. For every one of my gay brothers and sisters who offed themselves in the 70s & 80s for the shame, disenfranchisement, torture, etc... There are 100s who live happily in American neighborhoods, families, churches, little leagues w/ @ least superficial acceptance & support.

I respect religious differences. I really do... But there is no other argument one can make against equality for all Americans on this issue...which means arguing for less than equal treatment is to say you don't accept the concept of separation of church/state. I'm glad that day by day more people are realizing that the gays (their own neighbors, sons, pharmacists, etc....) are not the boogie men once believed. We are earners (look it up, more than most), moral, tax-paying community members who believe that the "land of the free" is just that and who is free cannot be decided by cut and pasted versions of ONE religion.

I'm not a very good lezbo, though. I'll admit to not owning a copy of "the gay agenda." Maybe I'm more wrong than I know.

Love ya Sis, and who needs 'very good'? I imagine you're a spectacular lezbo

[burrrton]

Am I the only one that didn't know Sis was gay??

Damnit- was holding onto the hope I had a chance if I ever got down to CA.

Hope you're well, Sis. Love ya, too.

[burrrton]

Rams had their reasons for putting the kabash on the Oprah thing. But I don't blame Sam for trying to get his cash as fast as possible.

^^This.

[RiverDog]

Wow! Can't say I read all of that, but can say one thing for sure. This debate looks a lot different than it did just 10 years ago. I remember being so conflicted that I quit the PI for a bit; the ignorance combined w/ hate-speak & vitriol were the NORM and not the exception. It seems rather reversed now, and the debate is fairly level headed in here today by comparison.

For those making assumptions about what the discrimination against gays was/is like, I suggest you ask some people who have experienced very real discrimination in advance of reporting out how it is/was. In just my own personal experiences, I've seen families abandon their sons/daughters, home purchases voided (happened to us), job loss for NO other reason, Ope teasing & purposeful embarrassment (the least of it), fires set in gay establishments, burning crosses in yards, a neighbor telling me everything about me disgusted her. I can really report, however, that this too has changed for the better in just the same last 10 years. For every one of my gay brothers and sisters who offed themselves in the 70s & 80s for the shame, disenfranchisement, torture, etc... There are 100s who live happily in American neighborhoods, families, churches, little leagues w/ @ least superficial acceptance & support.

I respect religious differences. I really do... But there is no other argument one can make against equality for all Americans on this issue...which means arguing for less than equal treatment is to say you don't accept the concept of separation of church/state. I'm glad that day by day more people are realizing that the gays (their own neighbors, sons, pharmacists, etc....) are not the boogie men once believed. We are earners (look it up, more than most), moral, tax-paying community members who believe that the "land of the free" is just that and who is free cannot be decided by cut and pasted versions of ONE religion.

I'm not a very good lezbo, though. I'll admit to not owning a copy of "the gay agenda." Maybe I'm more wrong than I know.

Nice to see ya, sis! I was becoming a bit concerned.

[Hawk Sista]

I'm doing well, RD. Or maybe it's better to say as well as I can right now. My long term prognosis is really good... Still on chemo once a week which is tough, but bearable. I'm working 30-35 hours a week and staying mentally busy. Thanks for your concern.

Thanks too Burrrton and Bob; you guys made me laugh.

[FolkCrusader]

The question we are all wondering, sis is are you a member of the gay mafia?

Glad to hear you are doing ok. Had two friends go through chemo and chemo + rad last year, I know it is not easy to take. Working nearly full time while doing that speaks to just how much perseverance you have. I think of you often and pray for you along with my other friends recovering from this effed up disease.

[Hawktawk]

Boy has this thread gotten far afield from the actual topic"Genuine good story or money grab". I'm a guy who was born in the late 50's, raised in a holy roller church etc at a time when America was seriously bigoted.So Ive had to make a few adjustments. Without making this a novel I have a couple points to make. First about the religious or bible angle. I believe the bible is a message from God to mankind. But I also believe its a lot more complex than someone pulling this or that passage out to support their world view about anything. Gays are a hot button issue. But the same bible says drunkenness, gluttony, jealousy, promiscuity, adultery, using the lords name in a curse etc you get the point, well its all sin. Which IMO is why we needed Jesus. Because we all sin repeatedly and we don't stop. As for actively practicing a homosexual lifestyle Jesus is the ultimate judge, not you or I. I am former pastoral major who has preached from the pulpit numerous times and read the bible cover to cover several times. But Ive become what I call a "Seven day absentist" IE I don't go to church except for weddings and funerals. Not judging those who do, but I just don't think God fits in some churches little restrictive dogmatic boxes.

Now about Sam. He comes out ahead of the draft, ostensibly to get ahead of the story. He says that he just wants to be known as a football player, all the while he is announcing his sexual preference. Then he absolutely stinks up the combine, one of the worst individual performances. When he is drafted he engages in a very passionate lip-lock with his boyfriend on national TV then repeats the performance with cake smeared on his face for the social media to pick up on. Call me homophobic or whatever but Ive heard from people who are completely pro gay rights who were disgusted and thought it was over the top, staged and completely sensationalized. Then he comes out and says he should have been a 3rd rounder, a status nobody thought he deserved BEFORE his announcement he was gay. And then of course the Oprah thing where the red faced Rams finally stood up and realized they were a pawn in a money grabbing I'm here, I'm queer, and I'm in your face sideshow. They were playing the game too, IMO the only reason they drafted Sam was BECAUSE they would make history. But I don't think they thought he would come in the door the way he did and their kibosh of the Oprah thing demonstrated their alarm at how they were losing control of the situation.

Its a calculated money grab by Sam.

[NorthHawk]

I'm of the opinion that we should let people live their lives however they were born.
If it conflicts with your religious beliefs, let god sort it out. After all, we were all supposedly made in his image.
There are too many other issues to worry about that we CAN or should try to control than what our neighbors are doing in their private lives.

[Hawk Sista]

Agreed North. Well said.

Thanks Folks Crusader...I really appreciate it. One day at a time. I have surgery and radiation upcoming too - so it'll be a long road, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel for sure.

"When he is drafted he engages in a very passionate lip-lock with his boyfriend on national TV" - Hawktawk........you were making sense until you said this. I understand why people are uncomfy..........but you lead a boring life if you really thought that was a "very passionate lip lock". Even if it were, saying it was staged is silly. He had a TON of pressure on him. A nation was watching. He kissed his partner of two years. Many people kissed that day. Many people kissed on TV to celebrate. You are right, it is homophobia to suggest it was over the top or staged as if he kissed a woman, it woulda been NO DEAL at all. To say gay advocates say so too discredits you. A). there is homophobia amongst the gays too, and B). where? who?

I really do understand people's discomfort with it, but it was not staged or in your face - it was a natural reaction.

Him thinking he shoulda been drafted higher is not a feeling that just he had. Lots of players think they were not drafted high enough and they set out to prove people wrong. AND, if you also happened to be gay, one might assume they were overlooked because of it. How many in here said even if he were great, it would not be worth the distraction to draft him? He's a borderline type guy. He could make it or not make it. If he doesn't and it is blamed on his sexuality - I think that is where some harm will come. I understand why people think it might be true, but he really just might not make a roster. and being close, such as he is, teams are less likely to take a risk on the "distraction"" on him then they would on Andrew Luck. It is just the way it is.

[burrrton]

I really do understand people's discomfort with it, but it was not staged or in your face - it was a natural reaction.

This and this.

It's perfectly natural to not want to watch something that isn't your bag, but it's also perfectly natural to kiss your partner in a situation like that.

[HumanCockroach]

I really do understand people's discomfort with it, but it was not staged or in your face - it was a natural reaction.

This and this.

It's perfectly natural to not want to watch something that isn't your bag, but it's also perfectly natural to kiss your partner in a situation like that.

I never had an issue with Sam's initial reaction, and admonished the media for latching onto it like some sort of must see moment. It didn't in the least make me uncomfortable, until the "replay" with the cake. Never seen ANYONE lick cake off their partners face before to celebrate, straight or gay, and I did have an issue with that particular moment. It felt staged and in poor taste to me.

I don't know, seen a LOT of guys have their dreams fulfilled in the decade plus I've been watching drafts, and don't recall seeing anything more than hugs, quick kisses, and certainly NOT out of a 7th round fringe player, that was selected with a compensatory pick. The Media played it for all they were worth, which personally I thought was poor taste on their part ( after all he is SUPPOSED to be another football player trying to make it, just like the other 200+ players selected or signed, I thought the idea was to treat him like everyone else, isn't THAT what the goal is?) So I was dissapointed in them, then Sam "mugged" for the camera's, which made me dissapointed in HIM.

It's unfortunate, that we as a society, can't just learn to ACCEPT things equally, it either is descrimatory one way or the other, and that ultimately makes me sad. Have NO problems with Sam's preference, but would have much preferred the attitude that this wasn't "unique" and that he was the SAME as all the other players selected.

The media is going to do what they do, but Sam didn't need to "play along" IMHO.

[Hawktawk]

Agreed North. Well said.

Thanks Folks Crusader...I really appreciate it. One day at a time. I have surgery and radiation upcoming too - so it'll be a long road, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel for sure.

"When he is drafted he engages in a very passionate lip-lock with his boyfriend on national TV" - Hawktawk........you were making sense until you said this. I understand why people are uncomfy..........but you lead a boring life if you really thought that was a "very passionate lip lock". Even if it were, saying it was staged is silly. He had a TON of pressure on him. A nation was watching. He kissed his partner of two years. Many people kissed that day. Many people kissed on TV to celebrate. You are right, it is homophobia to suggest it was over the top or staged as if he kissed a woman, it woulda been NO DEAL at all. To say gay advocates say so too discredits you. A). there is homophobia amongst the gays too, and B). where? who?

I really do understand people's discomfort with it, but it was not staged or in your face - it was a natural reaction.

Him thinking he shoulda been drafted higher is not a feeling that just he had. Lots of players think they were not drafted high enough and they set out to prove people wrong. AND, if you also happened to be gay, one might assume they were overlooked because of it. How many in here said even if he were great, it would not be worth the distraction to draft him? He's a borderline type guy. He could make it or not make it. If he doesn't and it is blamed on his sexuality - I think that is where some harm will come. I understand why people think it might be true, but he really just might not make a roster. and being close, such as he is, teams are less likely to take a risk on the "distraction"" on him then they would on Andrew Luck. It is just the way it is.

First of all Sista I want you to know I love you. Your one of my old friends Ive never met but we've talked football etc for ten years. But come on cake on your face as a 7th round pick.A complete lack of respect for the organization that took a chance on him. I don't tongue lock my wife in public. I don't want to see anyone else do it either.I think the phrase is "get a room" I'm on the record as saying I don't want to hear about any player sexual exploits. Its football, not TMI. We all obviously knew Sam was gay. But its the NFL. He showed no sensibility for the complicated environment he was going into. His pursuit of a reality show demonstrated that he is an agenda driven person, unlike his original comments that he only wanted to be seen as a Football player. He clearly wants to be seen as the first openly gay player. Sorry the dude rubs me the wrong way. Gay or not hes a jackass IMO.

[RiverDog]

He clearly wants to be seen as the first openly gay player. Sorry the dude rubs me the wrong way. Gay or not hes a jackass IMO.

Dave Kopay was the first openly gay player in the NFL.

[NorthHawk]

Agreed North. Well said.

Thanks Folks Crusader...I really appreciate it. One day at a time. I have surgery and radiation upcoming too - so it'll be a long road, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel for sure.

"When he is drafted he engages in a very passionate lip-lock with his boyfriend on national TV" - Hawktawk........you were making sense until you said this. I understand why people are uncomfy..........but you lead a boring life if you really thought that was a "very passionate lip lock". Even if it were, saying it was staged is silly. He had a TON of pressure on him. A nation was watching. He kissed his partner of two years. Many people kissed that day. Many people kissed on TV to celebrate. You are right, it is homophobia to suggest it was over the top or staged as if he kissed a woman, it woulda been NO DEAL at all. To say gay advocates say so too discredits you. A). there is homophobia amongst the gays too, and B). where? who?

I really do understand people's discomfort with it, but it was not staged or in your face - it was a natural reaction.

Him thinking he shoulda been drafted higher is not a feeling that just he had. Lots of players think they were not drafted high enough and they set out to prove people wrong. AND, if you also happened to be gay, one might assume they were overlooked because of it. How many in here said even if he were great, it would not be worth the distraction to draft him? He's a borderline type guy. He could make it or not make it. If he doesn't and it is blamed on his sexuality - I think that is where some harm will come. I understand why people think it might be true, but he really just might not make a roster. and being close, such as he is, teams are less likely to take a risk on the "distraction"" on him then they would on Andrew Luck. It is just the way it is.

First of all Sista I want you to know I love you. Your one of my old friends Ive never met but we've talked football etc for ten years. But come on cake on your face as a 7th round pick.A complete lack of respect for the organization that took a chance on him. I don't tongue lock my wife in public. I don't want to see anyone else do it either.I think the phrase is "get a room" I'm on the record as saying I don't want to hear about any player sexual exploits. Its football, not TMI. We all obviously knew Sam was gay. But its the NFL. He showed no sensibility for the complicated environment he was going into. His pursuit of a reality show demonstrated that he is an agenda driven person, unlike his original comments that he only wanted to be seen as a Football player. He clearly wants to be seen as the first openly gay player. Sorry the dude rubs me the wrong way. Gay or not hes a jackass IMO.

He's a young man drafted late at a position his new team is real strong at.
He took the reality show, but I suspect his agent had a lot of influence in that decision and I would guess he would have pointed out the possible income opportunity. I'm not sure I blame him completely for that decision as judging from the sideline is easier than being in the position of having to decide for yourself.

As far as the lip lock, a lot of people lack restraint in public. It's something that is becoming all too common for many of us more conservative citizens, but we seem to be a dying breed.

Agenda driven? He might think he has to be out front. I think he should stick to football, but we will never know what if any pressures from the gay community he is receiving. He might just have received bad advice or made a bad decision. After all, he is setting the precedent, not following a trail.

[HumanCockroach]

He clearly wants to be seen as the first openly gay player. Sorry the dude rubs me the wrong way. Gay or not hes a jackass IMO.

Dave Kopay was the first openly gay player in the NFL.

David came "out" in 75', retired in 72'. So While he is the first player to come out, he did so after he was done playing in the NFL. Kwame Brown is the closest player to playing while being openly gay ( as he was still attempting to latch on somewhere when he "came out") but to date, Sam is the first player to be "out" while on a roster, much less before being on one.

That isn't to say team mates and other players didn't know ( in fact I'm sure many did, and am just as sure that there has been NUMEROUS such players that are "known" amongst players, coaches and FO personnel) just that common knowledge amongst fans and media, was limited.

[Hawk Sista]

Again, if we are talking about Sam's girlfriend - it's a different story. Many gay players have played in the NFL. Likely even Seahawks. What's different here is that Sam is saying you can't shove me in a closet. I'm me, I'm celebrating like I choose to celebrate, like all the other players. I love you too HT, but he didn't tongue kiss the guy. That's how you see it as you have your built-in bias. I'm not a fan of PDA, straight or gay. Is it his fault that of the 200+ kisses that day, the media has boo to say about any of them but Sam's. He is a young guy who was scared shiteless he wasn't getting drafted at all. When he did, he was so relieved and reached out to his love for comfort & love. I get it that makes you uncomfy...doesn't make him an ass. He seems sweet to me.

He seems like a young man with a lot of attention on him. He's had some missteps, no doubt. He's gotta do a lot more than a little PDA to be considered an ass in my book, though. I get it that the nation may not be ready to see it. But he is who he is. A LOT of people still can't stand to see inter-racial couples have an intimate moment.

[kalibane]

I don't know, seen a LOT of guys have their dreams fulfilled in the decade plus I've been watching drafts, and don't recall seeing anything more than hugs, quick kisses, and certainly NOT out of a 7th round fringe player, that was selected with a compensatory pick. The Media played it for all they were worth, which personally I thought was poor taste on their part ( after all he is SUPPOSED to be another football player trying to make it, just like the other 200+ players selected or signed, I thought the idea was to treat him like everyone else, isn't THAT what the goal is?) So I was dissapointed in them, then Sam "mugged" for the camera's, which made me dissapointed in HIM.

Google Jan Vesely. His draft night kiss is practically all he's known for at this point.

The only difference I see with regards to actual draft night is that the media was not at all interested in catching anything but the immediate reaction for other draft choices. For any players of interest that don't go to the Green Room at Radio City but have media in their house for draft night, as soon as they get drafted they show the immediate reaction then pull up stakes and hit the road. But I find it hard to believe, given the circumstances (dreams fulfilled et al), there aren't all kinds of gratuitous exhibitions of affection that just don't make air. With Sam the media is going to stick around to work whatever angle of this story they can to fill up hours in the news cycle.

The only real problem I had in this entire Sam saga is the Rams having a press conference. If the team sees fit to make Sam available to the media and Sam wants to talk so be it, but the press conference for a 7th round pick is a bit much.

[NorthHawk]

I think the press conference for Sam was because of demands from the media.
He might as well get it over with in one conference than continually answer the phone all day and night.
If the media didn't want it, I doubt the Rams would have had one.

[HumanCockroach]

Wow, over a thousand views with what feels like 12 members sometimes .... lol.... this evens out my running top 50 thread with 12

[RiverDog]

Wow, over a thousand views with what feels like 12 members sometimes .... lol.... this evens out my running top 50 thread with 12

Yea, not unlike the Tim Tebow threads, these subjects with the social or political twists are the most popular and have the most diverse opinions. No wonder my old man told me about not talking about one of the three taboo subjects on a first date.

[Eaglehawk]

I'm of the opinion that we should let people live their lives however they were born.
If it conflicts with your religious beliefs, let god sort it out. After all, we were all supposedly made in his image.
There are too many other issues to worry about that we CAN or should try to control than what our neighbors are doing in their private lives.

Amen NH!

Glad to see prognosis is good Sis!