- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nebraska assistant football coach really really really does not like gay people
Posted on 4/26/12 at 2:55 pm to HideChaKidz
Posted on 4/26/12 at 2:55 pm to HideChaKidz
quote:He is saying they shouldn't be in a special protected class of persons. they still get the same constitutional protections everyone else gets.
So gay ppl shouldn't get constitutional protection?
quote:He doesn't believe homosexuals should be a protected class.
Why?
quote:Neither of these prevents him from sharing his opinions, nor should they.
What ever happened to separation of church and state? Shouldn't that come before what some idiot coach thinks?
quote:The Bible doesn't say that we should mistreat anyone. Including people who engage in homosexual sex.
it doesn't matter what the bible says and we should treat gay ppl as any other race/gender, no?
The question is whether engaging in homosexual sex places you in a classification that we should carve out specific protections for.
1
Posted on 4/26/12 at 2:55 pm to PortCityTiger24
quote:
I'm curious to know when disagreeing with the homosexual lifestyle became on the same level as being a racist.
When people realized that gay people are naturally who they are. They didn't choose any more than we chose to be with women.
Opposing something that is intrinsic to a person or a group of people is bigotry, whether that trait is sexual orientation, race, or gender.
Thus, being against gays is the same as being racist.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 2:58 pm to WDE24
quote:
he is saying it in this quote IMO:
Not even close.
Sure he is. He is saying gay people don't deserve protection because they haven't been discriminated against like blacks or women.
Whether or not you consider being gay acceptable any honest person should admit they have been discriminated against.
quote:
I haven't seen any evidence that he is ignoring other sins
ignoring? or not emphasizing?
if you go around saying bad things about gay people that doesn't mean you are necessarily ignoring everything else in the world - but the question should be asked why you care enough to emphasize that particular thing (and not for example working on the sabbath which the coach in question probably does routinely)
Posted on 4/26/12 at 2:58 pm to WDE24
quote:
The question is whether engaging in homosexual sex places you in a classification that we should carve out specific protections for.
This is going to blow your mind, I'm sure, but what a person DOES sexually does not determine their sexual orientation.
Think about it. If a person remains a virgin for his entire life, is that person asexual?
No. That person's sexual orientation is determined by who he is ATTRACTED TO, not by who he does or does not have sex with.
Another hypothetical. Let's say there is a couple, a man and a woman, who ONLY have sex with him fricking her up the arse or with her fricking him up the arse with a strap-on. What's the sexual orientation of the guy in that relationship?
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:00 pm to molsusports
quote:No he isn't saying that.
He is saying gay people don't deserve protection because they haven't been discriminated against like blacks or women.
quote:Did he say anything bad about gay people.
if you go around saying bad things about gay people that doesn't mean you are necessarily ignoring everything else in the world
quote:Because it is a current political hot topic. However, none of your posts answer my question, they just demonstrate why you disagree with him. I don't have a problem with people disagreeing with him. I don't agree with him.
but the question should be asked why you care enough to emphasize that particular thing (and not for example working on the sabbath which the coach in question probably does routinely)
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:01 pm to Sophandros
quote:
When people realized that gay people are naturally who they are. They didn't choose any more than we chose to be with women.
Don't mean to start a huge debate, but I don't think they chose their sexual preference either...
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:01 pm to Sophandros
quote:
When people realized that gay people are naturally who they are.
There's an alcoholism gene, a breast cancer gene, an eating disorder gene, a shyness gene, etc etc etc. But sorry, no gay gene. It doesn't exist.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:02 pm to Sophandros
quote:My mind was not blown. Nothing really revolutionary or interesting here. What is the point?
This is going to blow your mind, I'm sure, but what a person DOES sexually does not determine their sexual orientation.
Think about it. If a person remains a virgin for his entire life, is that person asexual?
No. That person's sexual orientation is determined by who he is ATTRACTED TO, not by who he does or does not have sex with.
Another hypothetical. Let's say there is a couple, a man and a woman, who ONLY have sex with him fricking her up the arse or with her fricking him up the arse with a strap-on. What's the sexual orientation of the guy in that relationship?
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:02 pm to PortCityTiger24
quote:
Don't mean to start a huge debate, but I don't think they chose their sexual preference either...
Well then we agree.
I think that your choice of words "the gay lifestyle" threw me off.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:04 pm to genro
quote:
There's an alcoholism gene, a breast cancer gene, an eating disorder gene, a shyness gene, etc etc etc. But sorry, no gay gene. It doesn't exist.
You realize that your assumption that people choose their sexual orientation implies that YOU made a choice between being gay and straight, right?
So when, exactly, did YOU decide YOUR orientation?
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:04 pm to PortCityTiger24
Can a man get a man pregnant? NO!
Can a woman get a woman pregnant? NO!
Can a woman get a woman pregnant? NO!
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:04 pm to WDE24
quote:
He is saying gay people don't deserve protection because they haven't been discriminated against like blacks or women.
No he isn't saying that.
then what is the logic in this statement?
quote:
He said gays and lesbians do not deserve the same protections as groups that historically have been discriminated against, such as blacks and women.
he has to either be arguing they have not been discriminated against (which IMO is patently false) or arguing that his religious belief (gays are sinners) justifies them not being protected like any other minority group.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:04 pm to WDE24
quote:
My mind was not blown. Nothing really revolutionary or interesting here. What is the point?
The point is that part of your argument was that someone is gay based on who they have sex with. I contend that it is not, and provided two examples of why that is the case.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:05 pm to Sophandros
quote:It doesn't really, but why are we getting off topic. I thought the topic was whether this coach should be fired for expressing his opinions (which demonstrated no hate or bigotry, IMO).
You realize that your assumption that people choose their sexual orientation implies that YOU made a choice between being gay and straight, right?
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:07 pm to Sophandros
quote:Not really part of my argument at all.
part of your argument was that someone is gay based on who they have sex with.
My argument is that the coach didn't say anything mean spirited, hateful or bigoted. He simply expressed his views (informed by his religious beliefs) that the law shouldn't be changed to create another protected class.
I just defended his right to say that without being terminated by a state university.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:08 pm to genro
quote:
There's an alcoholism gene, a breast cancer gene, an eating disorder gene, a shyness gene, etc etc etc. But sorry, no gay gene. It doesn't exist.
Just because they haven't found a common gene doesn't meant it doesn't exist.
You have also way over simplified human genomics.
This post was edited on 4/26/12 at 3:21 pm
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:08 pm to WDE24
quote:
It doesn't really,
Yes, it necessarily implies that.
quote:
I thought the topic was whether this coach should be fired for expressing his opinions (which demonstrated no hate or bigotry, IMO).
Personally, he should only be fired if and only if the expression of his opinions hurts Nebraska in a material manner.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:10 pm to WDE24
quote:
My argument is that the coach didn't say anything mean spirited, hateful or bigoted.
if you say a group of people is immoral (or sinful) you are making a judgement on that entire group of people on the basis of their existence
I'm not sure how saying you think that being gay is sinful can not be construed as bigotry or prejudice. You can agree with the opinion but certainly you have judged a whole group of people on the basis of nothing other than their sexual orientation
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:10 pm to HT713
quote:
U of N is a state institution.
that doesn't mean shite.
Posted on 4/26/12 at 3:10 pm to WDE24
quote:
My argument is that the coach didn't say anything mean spirited, hateful or bigoted.
But he did.
quote:
He simply expressed his views (informed by his religious beliefs) that the law shouldn't be changed to create another protected class.
And he's wrong.
quote:
I just defended his right to say that without being terminated by a state university.
And I agree with that UNLESS Nebraska loses money because of this (which I seriously doubt will happen, BTW).
We also have to realize that he's an ASSISTANT football coach, not the head coach. Not the school president. Not the dean of one of the colleges. He won't get fired.
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News