Vin Scully, the greatest baseball announcer of all time has not called a World Series Game on Television since Game 5 of the 1988 World Series when his Dodgers defeated the Mighty A’s. As his career comes closer to an end, I feel that this great man and broadcaster needs to have one more chance to shine when the stage shines the brightest, The World Series. Join me in this push to have him get one more chance to crown a World Champion in the way it should always be done, with class, diginity and honor, the way he has done it for over 60 years.
AA supports this petition wholeheartedly! This is an amazing idea. Here is the link so you can sign it yourself. Please do. Nobody in broadcasting deserves one more moment on the national stage like Vin Scully. So many great broadcasters of years gone by still have prominent announcing roles - names like Brent Musberger, Dick Enberg, Dick Stockton, and Marv Albert are still at the top of the profession, why would Fox not invite a legend like Vin Scully into their broadcast booth for one World Series?
As we wrote earlier this week, Fox needs a change in their MLB coverage, even throwing out possible names that Fox could hire to improve their broadcast stable. What better addition could you make than giving a gracious cameo to the baseball's best announcer... perhaps ever. I was 2 years old when Vin Scully last announced a World Series game. Why not provide an opportunity for millions of young baseball fans that have never heard Vin Scully announce a game? Sure, it wouldn't be the typical Fox broadcast with Buck & McCarver (who have announced the World Series since 1996)... but that's probably a good thing. In fact, this petition isn't as much of a criticism of Buck & McCarver, rather a way to honor one of sports' best announcers (but I'm sure you could sign it if you just want to get rid of them too). Going old school with the broadcast may in fact be a welcome decision with old and young fans.
With Vin working at Fox Sports West calling Dodger games, I doubt the logistics would be too difficult. Please sign the petition and use Twitter, Facebook, or any means you can think of to help this petition become reality and tell Fox you want to see Vin Scully announce one more World Series.
Interesting discussion. Once again the same old shibboleths and inane logic. Simple principles:
- the fool was, in fact, presenting his employees status by showing the employer's logo in his background;
- he was, in fact, using the status gained through his employer to air his personal views publicly;
- he was, in fact, out of step with his employer's corporate principles and, therefore, "not a good fit" with his employer;
- he was, in fact, promoting disrespect of the law in Canada.
This last is a fundamental principle of life here in Canada - respect for the rule of law. Equality is law in Canada where same-sex issues are concerned. It's a non-issue. However, it becomes an issue when someone promotes disrespect of that law. He's welcome to his opinion, in private. But when he publicly promotes disrespect of the law - any law - especially one that has such emotion attached to it, he'd better be working for his dad.
Have a nice day. Greg
It's nice to see journalists are overwhelmingly opposed to the bigotry and discrimination seen in those who support the anti-gay marriage camp. While archaic religious folks support what they believe is 'traditional', the only thing that's stayed the same about marriage is the fact that it is constantly changing. The people opposed to gay marriage are the same folks who swore that inter-racial marriage would 'destroy' it.
Now that we notice Canada hasn't imploded due to gay marriage there's no reason it can't be legal in all 50 states through a Federal measure. Any law that discriminates against people who want to marry another person is clearly UNCONSTITUTIONAL. No ifs, and's or but's!
Nice to see bigots getting what they deserve and to see homophobia starting to leave the sports arena.
Should Goddard not be "applauded" for his "brave" stance on homosexual marriage? There were endless national (sports) media pundits writing how "brave" Avery was for supporting homosexual marriage and pablum about how wonderful it is for those in athletics to take positions on non-sports issues. You can't cut the hypocrisy with a knife. The "mainstream" media are such strong advocates for homosexual marriage (I believe it must be a requirement for a journalism degree, much less to be hired by a mainstream outlet). Had Goddard came out in favor of homosexual marriage, he could have been wrapped in his employers clothing, tweeting from the CEO's office, making a claim that this was the official position of his employer, etc. and the media-types would have proclaimed his bravery and no employer would dare to terminate him. That is a fact and any suggestion otherwise is purposely false.
At the time that Goddard sent his tweet, his twitter profile pic was of him sitting at the Comnected desk with the Sportsnet logo in the background. Also, his twitter bio did say that he was a Sportsnet host of Connected. It was very easy to see that he was a Sportsnet employee.
If Goddard had written a tweet expressing support for critics of interracial marriage, or racially integrated schools, etc., would you find it "troubling" for his employer to cut ties? The fact that people veil their bigotry as a "sensitive" moral or religious belief does not inoculate them from the consequences of publicly proselytizing for their ignorance. Obliquy is entirely appropriate.
I don't *agree* with either Mr. Goddard or with his firing... but I can understand the "doesn't fit" rationale. Perhaps there really are other issues; but even if not, I strongly suspect they found that as long as they kept him around they'd keep having to issue those "does not represent our views" disclaimers for one thing after another, and decided he wasn't worth it.
Mr. Goddard's Twitter profile picture is a professional picture. Those he is following on Twitter are connected to him through professional circles. If he was following his wife, or his nieces and nephews, or even CBC or the New York Times, I could buy that this is a personal matter that should remain in the personal realm. Other people who are monitored by professional organizations, such as teachers, could, in no way, express controversial personal views on an account with evident professional ties; the reality, with social media, is that people are losing their jobs, and careers, for this kind of boundary issue. Mr. Goddard might have used better judgment; his tweeting of unnecessary 'private' comments in what looks very much like a professional account, were unprofessional; a professional Twitter account is no place to disagree with colleagues in front of the world, or to air personal opinions about gay marriage, "islamic 'peaceniks'" and Osama bin Laden. Avery, I suspect, had backing from his manager behind closed doors before blitzing with a pro-gay marriage campaign. If that is so, he is intentionally acting, in that case, as a public figure. These are two very different scenarios.
@BobJudd The word "bigotry" is rooted in religious intolerance...funny coincidence since so many people use that word to attack religion/religious morality.
The same people against homosexuality are the ones against interracial marriage? Wow, HUGE assumption that is totally false. Did it occur to you that I may be the child of an interracial marriage (I am). So again, you're angry rhetoric is severely lacking any substantial factual evidence.
Any law that discriminates against people and who want to marry? Oh, okay, so since I wasn't able to marry at 14 that was unconstitutional? Yeah, that logic doesn't work.
And forcing people to financially support something they're 100% opposed to IS Constitutional? Explain that one to me. I'm still awaiting you to present some facts and logic.
Homophobia means somebody is scared of people who choose to live a homosexual lifestyle. So, on the flip side, that must make you a Christophobe? Religophobe? A bigot for being so intolerant of other people's decisions on how to live their lives and what they will/will not support? Yeah, that name calling can go both was.
You have no facts and your logic fails every time. All you have is angry and hate toward religion, that's it. Nothing to support your claims. Until you do, please stop attacking something you obviously have little to no understanding of.
@dalebowitz On second thought, perhaps I shouldn't have posted that. It's true and all, but not really on-topic any more than what it was responding to.
@dalebowitz Ollie: None of that, even if it were all true, gives anyone the right to use the force of government to impose their religious beliefs on others.
You also seem to be suffering under the delusion that all religious people, or at least all Christians, are on your side in this matter. That's far from true, and getting further every day. Praise the Lord! If you don't believe gay and Christian can coexist peacefully within one person, I suggest you Google the phrase "gay christian" and see what turns up. Or Bing; I get the idea (no telling from where) that you're more of a Bing type.
I don't believe you understand the difference between homosexuality and race. A black person is born black by no choice of their own; that is "decided" by that persons parents. The same cannot be said for homosexuality.
Homosexuality, though an unquestioned forceable "feeling", it is still a choice to embrace those feelings; black people have no choice to whether or not they want to embrace their "black urges". They're born black, with genetically predictable and scientifically deduced logic. There is no genetic ("gay gene") or scientific proof to support such a claim that homosexuality is indeed genetically inherited. It is only a lifestyle that's chosen to be embraced, though not without internal urges. Some even claim we see homosexuality in nature (highly debatable), thus making it "natural". Chickens lay eggs in nature, but that doesn't make humans "unnatural" for giving live birth. That logic doesn't work.
If individuals want to live a homosexual lifestyle, that's fine. We are America, we are a free country, and I am proud that our soliders fight for EVERYONE'S right to live and love as they please. But labeling religious people as bigots because they do not agree with homosexuality is extremely ignorant and hypocritical. If a religious person is a bigot for not agreeing with homosexuality, then by that same logic you must be a bigot for not agreeing with religious beliefs. Or if a religious person is a "homophobe" for not agreeing with homosexuality, then you must be a "Chrisophobe" for not agreeing with Biblcal principles. It's a two way street, and crying for tolerance while name calling and labeling others bigots is extremely hypocritical. No amount of big words or fancy logic can refute that. If you want tolerance, give it. TRUE religious people do not demand that you live by our moral principals, but we do expect the same tolerance you so vehemently demand.
Believe it or not, there are a number of TRULY religious people who DO NOT agree with homosexuality, but who will NEVER discriminate, hate, or mistreat a person living a homosexual lifestyle. EVER. Don't let the people holding up awful signs, slinging awful homosexual slurs, and committing terrible crimes against homosexuals be confused with REAL Christians. Christ would never allow such treatment of anybody, but that does NOT mean he condones or accepts it as perfectly okay (just for reference the Bible DOES teach against it, just like any other sin (cursing, lying, stealing, etc.). So the issue here is with God, not the people simply living by His commands: Romans 1:26-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10).
So please, do not resort to name-calling because you don't agree with religion. It makes you come across as angry, ignorant, and in direct contradiction of the tolerance the homosexuals desire. As a religious American willing to respect individuals decisions to live as they please, by whatever moral standard they choose, I ask that you show the same respects.
@EileenT You should be featured here, instead of Matt Y. Too bad he didn't bother doing the research about Goddard's twitter account (and possess your superior reasoning faculties).
@ Matt Y: When you re-read this column in about 5 years, you will hopefully recognize your faulty logic and inane analysis (driven mainly by your bias on this issue). Just sayin'.
@BobJudd And by financially support I mean tax dollars. And homophobia implies we're afraid. We're not, we simply do not agree with that lifestyle.
@Hyhybt @dalebowitz Also, if you're saying it's wrong for the government to force beliefs on people, how do you justify a government forcing others to accept homosexuality as a moral and legal? Is that not forcing your beliefs on others?
It absolutely is.
Your arguments are consistently defeating themselves.
@Hyhybt @dalebowitz None of what you just said is true, missed the point, and did not address anything in my statement aside from what you THINK is a kink on the argument: that Christians CAN be gay as well. A cursory search of the Bible will immediately discredit that.
You, as so many others do, seem to over look the issue, ignore what's really being said, and immediately look to attack instead of understand what religion teaches and what truly religious people adhere to.
"So the issue here is with God, not the people simply living by His commands: Romans 1:26-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10)."
Please, read those scriptures and tell me how you can still reconcile homosexuality and Christianity.
Instead of trusting whatever Google (or Bing) tells you, look up those scriptures in the Bible, where the REAL religious facts are. It's obvious after reading those scriptures, regardless of what you want them to say, that Christianity and homosexually do NOT, and regardless of "cultural shifts", NEVER will go hand in hand. A gay Christian is a contradiction, no different than saying a square circle or a dry wet spot. Please, educate yourself in true Biblical teachings before condemning them or trusting Google (or Bing) as the theological backbone for your argument.
Again, you still sound angry, intolerant, and purposely close-minded/contrarian. Please, understand the subject before making such obviously false statements about true Christianity. I'm not angry. And I'm proving I'm not ignorant, and out of respect for both parties, have done my due diligence. I again ask you to do the same.
@OllieO @dalebowitz -- You're actually very wrong about the 'choice vs genetic' thing. YES, it is true that skin color is not chosen, nor can a person change their skin color after they're born. Our sexuality however is engrained in us EVEN MORE SO than our skin color, which is yet another reason why people should not be ostracized the way the Christian community has ostracized and demonized homosexuality. Our sexuality is who we are in our SOULS, it is a much bigger part of us than our skin color. So you're totally wrong about this. Just thought you should know and learn from it.
Labeling Christians as bigots is EXACTLY what I'm prepared to do because saying someone is 'sinning' because they're gay is an act of bigotry -- it fits the very definition. Saying homosexuality is 'wrong' and voting to pass legislation that discriminates is ALSO a form of bigotry. And I realize that you may not wish to be labeled a bigot, but YOU ARE ONE through and through.
So, if the shoe fits, don't complain while you're wearing it!
@OllieO @dalebowitz Wow Ollie, you sure don't know a whole lot about homosexuality or even HUMAN sexuality to suggest that being gay is a 'choice'. Do you actually think that a kid would CHOOSE to be bullied at school, harrassed throughout classroom ultimately to commit suicide because of a 'choice'? You seriously need to learn more about homosexuality because there IS evidence that it is a condition we are born with. Knowing this, the most blasphemous thing a gay person could do is go against the way God made them and try to pretend to be something they're not.
And while I don't personally live by your 'good book' because I find it archaic and in many parts downright GENOCIDAL, I do live by moral standards that FAR EXCEED those that any 2000 year old biblical author could ever begin to write.
And so do many of the Americans you criticize for openly supporting gay marriages and gay families.
I would just like to see the look on your face when the first gay family moves in next door to you. I wonder if your child saw 2 men kissing if you would teach them to hate, or teach them that love and affection is ordained by God?
@TruthSeeker i knew there would be at least one comment like this... I don't know how many times I can say that this is an unbiased analysis... just bringing light to the firing and the dangers of using Twitter and the Pandoras Box opened by this case.
Eileen's comment is very thoughtful, but I don't think you can classify personal/professional Twitter account based on who you follow or don't follow. In fact, it's the blurring of that line that makes this story so complex. Unless there was a disclaimer saying that Goddard's account was an extension of Rogers Sportsnet or his employment there, I don't think you can say for certain that it was a "professional" account. Otherwise, wouldn't Rogers have done something after he continually tweeted controversial things about Osama bin Laden death and burial and Islamic "peaceniks?"
@OllieO @TruthSeeker -- EVERY Christian describes himself as a 'True Christian'. I rarely hear True Christian described in any other way than 1st person, so for you to be the one to decide who is the True one and who is not is 'placing yourself as deity' just as you accused another poster, so thanks for the glowing hypocrisy! HYPOCRITE!
Also, you can try and excuse the Bible's encouragement of slavery any way you like, but the Bible still very readily accepts slavery just as clearly as it instructs parents to stone their children to death, or men to rape virgin slaves. I would question the morality of anyone who claims to live by such a genocidal book just as I've questioned yours.
It's sad to see how people limit their understanding of God by erroneously linking the Bible to God or Christianity to God. To me, God couldn't be FURTHER removed from religion.
What Christians like you often forget is the FACT that both the Bible and Jesus are 100% MAN-MADE inventions! And since man created God AND the Bible, it is you who are worshipping the work of a bunch of old men, hardly deities.
@OllieO What you mean is that my answer isn't satisfactory for your bigoted and hate-filled position. And that was intentional. Despite what you and other bigots say, homosexuality is very much NOT a preference. Read what TruthSeeker and many others have said. Read what doctors, scientists and the medical community say about it before making such inane observations that you neither can prove, nor have ANY link to Truth or reality.
You couldn't be more WRONG on your understanding of homosexuality. Not that it is surprising. I haven't spoken to a hate-monger who doesn't have the EXACT same beliefs as you, so THANK YOU for helping us categorize you people in a more generalized way.
Calling yourself a Christian is also patently untrue. A True Christian would never present such heresay as evidence, just as any doctor would laugh you out of his office.
Despite your ignorance, your arrogance has still gotten the best of you. Thank you for making it so clear how anti-Christian your beliefs truly are!
"You can decide what Biblical texts are genuine." So, we can decide where God is right and God is wrong?
Explain that one without placing yourself as deity or a hypocrite.
Also, provide the context around those scriptures before you speak on them. And read about the slavery in the Bible. The Greek texts reveal something like endured servitude where people OFFERED themselves for 7 years to pay off huge sums of debt, and commanded those who hire those "slaves" to treat them respectfully. Do some research before spouting off scripture.
Again, offer proof for homosexuality being genetic. I'm still waiting for it. You're making claims with no proof.
Sexual orientation is an innate trait—similar to left-handedness. Science has not (yet) discovered a genetic marker for such innate traits. Just as a person doesn't learn to be left-handed, a person doesn't learn their sexual orientation. It is likely determined by hormonal variations during pregnancy, but there has not been a genetic marker yet identified. Talk with any gay person though, and nearly all will tell you they were born that way. Also, see comments/ web posts by Dr. Kate O’Hanlan, MD for the latest scientific studies.
A person's race IS an inherited trait and can be traced through one's biological parents. Science has discovered a gene that determines your dominant racial characteristics.
However, a person's religion is not inherited. It is a belief—chosen and learned by a person. It is not able to be proven scientifically. But you can choose what supreme being, if any, that you worship and you can decide what biblical texts are genuine. Some people ignore Bible passages like Genesis 38: 8-10; Deuteronomy 23:1 or 25: 11-12; or those pesky slavery passages in Exodus 21 or 1 Timothy 6:1-5 or Titus 2:9-10.
Some people focus on the eight so-called "clobber" texts against gay people in their Christian Bible.
Many, many Christians however believe that the Bible says something quite different about gay people—and are welcoming and accepting of gays and lesbians. In the U.S. that includes members of Presbyterian Church (USA), Episcopal Church (U.S. Anglicans), Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Metropolitan Community Churches and numerous United Church of Christ congregations. Within these denominations, many congregations also welcome gay and lesbian clergy.
Go here for a discussion about the biblical “clobber” passages and see why these Christians don’t believe the way others might: http://www.gaychurch.org/gay_and_christian_yes/calling_the_rainbow_nation_home/7_gac_the_clobber_passages.htm
PS: I'm sorry you (Ollie) and so many others missed out on Saturday's Rapture, please let me know when Judgment Day has been rescheduled.
@BobJudd You answered nothing from the above arguments, but that's fine.
Homosexuality is a PREFERENCE. It's not genetic and you cannot PROVE that it is. If we legalize homosexuality, what's to stop us from legalizing bestiality? Who are we to say who can or can't have sex with animal? That's a slippery slope, one that you have no way of recovering from once you TRULY follow that logic.
I'm not trying to outlaw anything it's already against the law. We the people, who vote, wish to keep it that way since we DO have a say so, even it's not the say so you want it to be.
@OllieO Homosexuality is a type of human sexuality that about 10% of the world's population are blessed with. It's hardly a 'lifestyle'. Eating healthy or clubbing on the weekends are lifestyles.
If you don't agree with it, then don't ENGAGE in it. Or, if you don't like gay marriage DON'T HAVE ONE! Whether you agree with it or not is IRRELEVANT. I don't particularly agree with pickled beets, but only a beet-ophobic would go to the trouble to protest beet farmers, just like only a homophobic would seek to outlaw gay marriage.
Perhaps even YOU can see my point.
@OllieO @Hyhybt @dalebowitz -- The government hasn't forced anyone to accept homosexuality as moral. Govt isn't in the business of defining morality. You can whine and bitch about your own archaic morality till you're blue in the face and still have legal gay marriage in your state. Therefore, no one has forced you to accept anything. And saying they have and calling it 'forcing beliefs' is patently false and I think you know it.
My, the slippery slopes Conservatives are willing to climb....
The one who's been consistently DEFEATED is your bogus, false and laughable arguments. You expect everyone to follow the same archaic and broken morality you follow, without realizing how IMMORAL they are!
The reason I don't accept Biblical morality is because I believe them to be MUCH too permissive. My own morals FAR EXCEED yours and I can prove it.
Ollie, you're losing it. How is it YOUR judgement call to tell another Christian how they're lacking?! Isn't that proclaiming yourself a deity? All the other Christian said is that there are more and more gay Christians that are JUST as much True Christians as you who openly practice gay sex. Please do not judge others unless you're prepared to be judged. I don't even know you and could make a long list of ways in which you behave EXTREMELY non-Christian. The biggest flaw of yours is your incredible lack of humility and glowing ARROGANCE. The kinds of things you've said in hear are the kinds of things I would expect from someone who's SPIRITUALLY BANKRUPT. Do you really expect homosexuals to stop being gay because you or the Bible say it's wrong? Do you realize how ridiculous that is? And why aren't you guys out trying to ban hot dogs?! Right in the same place Leviticus discusses 'homosexuality', it says pork is an abomination? How many times has your OWN FAMILY eaten hot dogs yet you allowed the abomination to continue?
Are you starting to recognize why non-believers view the anti-gay crowd with such disgust? It's your very obvious hypocrisy, coupled with your OWN PATTERN OF SIN that makes us laugh at you.
Perhaps now you'll understand why no one takes you or the Bible seriously.
@Hyhybt @dalebowitz Again, you're interpretations and understandings of the Bible and Christianity, with all due respect, are severely lacking. There is absolutely an inherent contradiction between a Gay Christian.
If you're a follower of Christ you obey ALL of His Word, not just parts of it. You can't call yourself a Christian if you're purposefully living in blatant contradiction to Christ's teachings and Gospel. That's like saying I'm a Civil Rights activist, but I hate black people. You can call your self a Civil Rights activists but leave out ethnicities you support. It's all or nothing, either you're a Christian obeying ALL of the commands or you're not. There's no way you can interpret the above quoted scriptures any other way than condemning homosexuality, even from the original Greek texts. Add in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the contradiction is even more apparent.
There is absolutely a contradiction in professing to being a Gay Christian. No amount of backwards logic or over simplification can or will ever change that.
I'm done here as well, and you are very right sir, this isn't the forum for this. I simply felt compelled to defend a very wrong accusation and perception toward loving, truly religious people since some found this the appropriate forum to do so.
@OllieO @dalebowitz Again, this really isn't the place, as it's not the topic of the thread. I was suggesting you run a search, not to find a substitute for the Bible, but to find other interpretations of it, and particularly those passages purported to condemn homosexuality, than the one you yourself hold, because although I could go through them, again this is not the place. As a starting point, though, let's look at a couple of definitions. CHRISTIAN: one who has accepted Jesus as savior. GAY: attracted to members of the same sex (men to men, women to women). See? No contradiction. You can argue either way about what expressions, if any, of that attraction are permitted; you can argue over what recognition, if any, relationships between such people should get. But there is no *inherent* contradiction between "gay" and "Christian." If you really want to continue this further, I'm a gmail user under this same name.
@OllieO @dalebowitz -- No, it's YOU who have resorted to name-calling by even insinuating that there's something wrong with a person's god-given sexuality. You don't insult me, it's God you're blaspheming when you insult his creations and for that you'll end up having to pay the consequence, which is pretty harsh from what hysterical fear-mongering Christians have explained. Are you prepared to spend an eternity frying in Hell?
Please give Satan a 'thumb's up' from me, when you get there and be sure and write and tell us what it's like...
@BobJudd @dalebowitz The bottom line is this: true Christianity doesn't hate homosexuals. I don't hate homosexuals. I simply do not agree with the life style because the Bible does not allow me to. True Christians treat homosexuals NO different than any other person they meet. Why? Because it'd be un-Christ like to do so.
Call me a bigot if you want, actions and FACTS speak far louder than your angry words. You have presented ZERO facts so far to support your case. I only the other hand, have.
You have resorted to name calling and belittling. I on the other hand, have not.
Provide some facts, then we'll talk.
@OllieO @dalebowitz -- Now you're saying you like the act of homosexuality, so I can't keep up with your hysterical rantings. It would probably be a good idea for you to at least arrive at a position before arguing about it. You first say homosexuality is 'sin' or equate it with sin, and now you say you 'like the act' of homosexuality.
"You'd PAY to know what you REALLY think!" -- JR 'Bob' Dobbs, 1961
@OllieO @dalebowitz -- All you proved is that the Bible did NOT add 'homosexual' to that scripture. Homosexuality has NOTHING in common with murderers, drunkards, covetous, revilers, swindlers, etc ad nauseum. So, even in those very disturbing times, people didn't lump homosexuals in with criminals and thieves, just like we don't today. A lot of Christians WANT to lump us in with them, but rewriting the Bible to fit your particular hatred of a specific group is dishonest. You could just as easily replaced homosexual with 'nigger' and you'd be labeled a racist and rightly so. Your decision to add homosexual shows you are a bigot to the core.
So, ONLY A FOOL, liar, hate-monger or just total moron would equate homosexuality with criminal activity as if there's something wrong with it. Time for you to join the 21st Century. Besides, if you eat hot dogs or shrimp, you're just as much an 'abomination' as any homosexual you accuse. Bet you didn't even know that simple fact, did you?
@OllieO @dalebowitz -- The word homosexual wasn't even around when the BIble was written, and isn't even in the King James version, which is proof that morons like you put it in the BIble. There are many Christians who also disagree vehemently with your quotations to the point of saying it's been re-written. On the other hand, why would I be surprised that anti-gay Bible's have been produced? Hell, there's a Bible for every TYPE of hate-monger. I'm sure the KKK and Neo-nazi groups have produced their own bible that hates all of the same people as them as well, which is proof that people create God in their OWN image. This is only one of the many reasons why the Bible is irrelevant in today's society and why civilized humans should do everything in their power to make sure the genocidal and hate-mongering language within it STAYS WITHIN THE CONFINES OF CHURCH WALLS!
What's interesting though is how often the Bible contradicts itself, even in your example, it says that people who kill family members won't 'inherit the Kingdom of God' (whatever hell-hole that has got to be) yet it also instructs parents to kill their children or slaves.
@BobJudd @dalebowitz d) I never said some of my best friends. Now you're just making stuff up. I said some gay individuals were VERY helpful to me at a new job and to this day, we're still having friendly conversation. It's the ACT of homosexuality I agree with, I don't hate the person. Just like someone who is a liar won't get mistreated, neither will a homosexual. Try again. False accusations won't work.
Morality is a thing of past? Okay, if that's the case, then let's have another Holocaust! Because it's no longer immoral right? Because there are no morals!!! Let's loot and steal and pillage and rape! False. Terrible argument. And even the most rookie of scientist will tell you time is not an inherent measure of accuracy.
Have nothing to do with the Bible? Fine. It's your life. But understand it before you condemn. You've obviously gotten all of your information from hear-say and Christian hate sites. It's all been wrong and I've PROVEN that. So we should be able to marry dogs? And cats? And cattle? Hey, maybe 60 year old men should be able to marry 5 year olds and try to have babies with them? Is that what you're saying? I'm just making sure. Because if so, you've officially lost all credibility. And yeah, that's what you're saying. Who's business is it, right?! I don't hate. I simply don't agree with their lifestyle as a) natural (it's not, science proves that) b) it's a DECISION. What if I decided I ONLY want to have relations with animals? Should that be legal too? Should I support that?
Oh, and faith is believing what you do not know? False. Tell me, do you have faith that you're mother, father, friends, partner love you? Do you have faith that, barring any miraculous event, that the sun will come up tomorrow? Sure you do. Why? Because there's evidence to support that faith just like there's evidence to support MY faith. YOU have mastered the art of lying and your above post proves it. Best of luck "slaying" that because you failed to do so the first time.
@BobJudd @dalebowitz 3) Westboro Baptist IS WRONG. They may CLAIM to be Christians but they're actions are NO supported by the Bible. I condemn ALL of their hate, signs, slurs, and pure filth. They are NOT living according to the Gospel Christ delivered REGARDLESS of that they claim or who they claim to be. That's irrelevant because they are WRONG to act in the manner they do. WRONG.
a) SHOW ME the PROVEN facts that being GAY is BIOLOGICAL, hereditary, and GENETIC. I'm out of gas? PROVE IT THEN. Show the universally accepted, peer-reviewed FACTS then. SHOW ME PLEASE. Best of luck, because they don't exist. YOU are out of gas.
b) Read the above about God. Do your research first. Evolution is FAR from a fact and Nobel Prize Winners will tell you that. Again, do some research. You're ignorant in this matters and you're proving it.
c) It's easy to know much of the mind/will of God. After all His mind did inspire the Bible. And prove that, here's proof right from his Word: Ephesians 3:8-10 (New American Standard Bible) 8To me, the very least of all saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ, 9and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things; 10 so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places. THAT THE MANIFOLD WISDOM OF GOD MIGHT BE KNOWN THROUGH THE CHURCH. It is known, his Word reveals it. HE inspired THE BIBLE. You should really crack that thing open before making ignorant assessments of it.
@BobJudd @dalebowitz And the Bible DOES condemn homosexuality OPENLY. Let me show you (and I use the NASB because it's regarded as one of the most accurate translations from the Greek/Hebrew texts available): Romans 1:26-32 (New American Standard Bible) 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (New American Standard Bible) 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Timothy 1:8-11 (New American Standard Bible) 8But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted. You're doing a terrible job of slaying my argument.
Slay my argument? With ZERO facts and angry rhetoric? Sure.
Let me once again be the one with the facts, logic, rational, and to prove who's more informed here.
1. Homosexuality is NOT a civil right because it is NOT genetic nor inherited, it is a DECISION to act on urges. Again, provide some facts. Until then you have ZERO basis to claim civil rights. You can keep yelling, but the facts yell louder.
Plus, TRUE Christians following God's word, know that God is no respecter of person's or color or race (or a mix there of). Do me a favor, do a cursory reading of the Bible and prove yourself wrong for me.
2. "To me, God..." I stopped there. Your opinion means nothing. The FACTS do. READ the Bible. Check out the Warren-Flew debate. Read about why the Nazi war criminals were tried by a "law that transcends all mankind". Why do you think that is? Where did that law come from? That's the BASICS of evidence of moral code and God that is evidence based. Not even the TIP of the ice berg. Do your due diligence as I've done mine before you make completely false statements.
And I DARE you to say that science has PROVEN evolution in front a panel of NOTED scientist. Dr. John Lennox, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Michael Behe, etc. etc. would LAUGH in your face.
Evolution can't explain a) how the world happen (just dozens of theories) b) how "natural selection" works (just dozens of theories) c) how bacterial flagellum evolved (it's irreducible) d) evolutionary explanations of biochemical, cellular systems, etc. e) how we have morals at all if we're just functioning as "science made us" f) how we could have evolved consciousness g) the eye, the respiratory system, complex reproductive organs h) the MILLIONS possibly BILLIONS of intermediary fossils that do not exist
AND THE LIST GOES ON. It is HARDLY a fact, which is why THOUSANDS of scientist REFUTE IT. Your foremost atheist, Richard Dawkins, thinks aliens could have put life on this planet. Your other one, Stephen Hawking, believes in "M Theory", aka "every universe that can exist, does exist, therefore we have earth." So, the planet exists where your king and Obama is your step child according to theory. Oh, but evolution is fact!
FALSE. Do your research and you will find EASY proof that a) evolution is NOT fact and b) that science has NOT proven God doesn't exist. In fact, the evidence supports a God, an intelligent creator that DESIGNED our world to work with laws of science.
Do your research, you sound incredibly ignorant.
@OllieO @dalebowitz -- You seem to think that I think God has anything to do with the BIble. She does not. And for me to read the BIble, I'd first have to own one or look though all the garbage in my basement to find the one I trashed years ago.
I will continue to make any statement I want, whether you like it or not. Maybe you should examine your OWN arrogance and try to learn that people all have different ideas of what God is. Christianity doesn't own the word God. My idea of God is just as valid and correct as yours, despite what you may believe.
If you disagree. TOO BAD!
@OllieO @dalebowitz -- The EPITOME of arrogance is to say that God supports the Bible or even to suggest God exists, when there's not a shred of evidence for either ignorant assumption. Not that it matters at all because in the US, we don't make laws based on what the Bible says which is why I'm so happy I live in the US which has a very clear separation of church and state.
And now to SLAY your arguments:
1. You DO hate gay people, because if you didn't, you would have no reason to grant them the same EQUAL right to marry like the one your inter-racial parents had. And you're absolutely wrong about inter-racial marriage. Perhaps you should study the Loving vs. Virginia case to refresh your memory. Church groups swore allowing inter-racial couples would 'destroy' marriage but it only made it stronger.
2. God is a multi-interpretational word. To me, God is Nature and since homosexuality NATURALLY occurs in most all animal species and doesn't harm anything or anyone, it is very natural and normal and so is eating shrimp, which the Bible also calls an 'abomination'. Saying homosexuality is wrong is like saying being left-handed or red-headed is wrong. The Bible doesn't even mention homosexuality ANYWHERE, though it discusses men raping men in Leviticus, which has nothing to do with gayness.
3. You can rest assured someone's created God in their own image when they hate all the same people their God hates -- Westboro Baptist Church comes to mind not to mention the MILLIONS of dollars the Catholic and Mormon church's spent at their member's expense to legislate morality and hate. Discrimination is one of the most visible forms of hatred. If you support laws that support discrimination like prop 8 in CA and the many other states who have introduced legislation like it (which were introduced SOLEY by religious groups I might add), then you support hate. Merely saying you don't hate, doesn't make it so.
a. There are plenty of scientific studies that point to homosexuality being genetic, not to mention the MILLIONS of gay people who never made the choice of being gay yet are. You're TOTALLY out of gas on this one.
b. What you believe God is, and what you believe God has created couldn't be more IRRELEVANT. Especially since there's no evidence or proof that God even exists. Science HAS proven God dodesn't exist when evolution was proven. People create Gods to PLEASE THEMSELVES. The fact that there are hundreds of different religions on the planet is proof of this simple fact.
c. Please don't pretend to think you know what your non-existent God's intentions are. Even your own Bible cautions it's readers not to do this. Besides, you'd first have to prove that the Bible is the word of God and to prove that you'd first have to prove there's a God, which you cannot do.
d. 'Some of my best friends are' is the lamest argument that every racist uses, now that you've proven homophobes use it as well, stfu!
What Christians fail to learn from these discussions is that Christian morality is becoming a thing of the past, and is not something that modern civilized society accepts. The Bible is more often equated with hate-mongering and war than it is equated with peace and harmony and all it takes is a good look at the average Christian for me to see I don't want anything to do with it, just as the average and reasonable person.
So, you've decided to follow the Bible? Do you want a medal of honor for it? Do you actually think it matters to anyone except maybe your own family? What business is it of yours if I decide to MARRY A DOG! It's MY life, you're living in a FREE country, so if you want to put limits on what people can and can't do with their freedom of choice, I suggest you move to Afghanistan or Iraq and make sure it's a ONE-WAY ticket you purchase because the way you think is unpatriotic, unamerican and FAR from moral!
So, if you're a True Christian and you do NOT hate homosexuals, why not vote to give them the EQUAL right of marriage? Anything other than marriage is DISCRIMINATION and it's UNconstitutional. And I think even you know this, but like the reality that there's no God, you have trouble admitting it to yourself.
Faith is believing what you KNOW is not true, and when people have mastered the art of lying to oneself so totally and completely that they BELIEVE in those lies, they start to call themselves faithful Christians.
Read these: Romans 1:26-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10.
It doesn't. Love IS ordained by God, it's the greatest command, but homosexuality is also CONDEMNED by God. We love the PERSON, but not what they do. God LOVES that person but will NOT accept a homosexual lifestyle. Love and affection between two members of the same sex is NO ordained by God.
If you'd read the Bible, that'd be abundantly clear in the Old AND New Testaments. So if you think the Bible is so "archaic" and ridiculous, that's on you, but you have your facts correct before making such an uniformed statement.
Before we begin, here are three mistakes you've made:
1. Assuming I hate gay people. Wrong.
2. Assuming God makes people gay. Wrong.
3. Equating disagreement with hate.
Now, here is where your argument falls short, and looks much less like an argument and more than an angry-filled rant.
A) Show me the peer-reviewed, irrefutable scientific FACTS that homosexuality is genetic. Best of luck, because it doesn't exist. It's not hereditary or genetic and thus not a civil issue like being born of one ethnicity. "Evidence" chosen to be interpreted solely from one stand point justifies nothing, proven FACTS do.
B) God doesn't make people gay. You have no scientific or Biblical basis to defend that. I again ask for your FACTS to justify your statement, not just angry rhetoric and anecdotes.
C) That's pretty arrogant to think you're way is better than God's. Very, very arrogant. Plus, learn you history about the Bible. It's a "2,000 year old Biblical author" there are numerous authors who recorded the inspired Word of God, aka that's God's word, not man's. Again, you're extremely arrogant to think you have it figured out better than God does. Where do you people's transcedent morality comes from (research the Nazi war trials and the Warren/Flew debate BEFORE you make ridiculous statements as you have). Get the FACTS first.
D) Gays move in next to me? Fine, free country. I worked with 3 gays that were SUPER helpful in getting me acquainted with a new job; I actually spoke to one not long ago at my old job, had a nice conversation, and he gave me a free fax that I needed. Hate does NOT equal disagreement with, though the left-wing LOVES to try and make that an equal thing to push their propaganda. And I would never teach my kids to hate gays, I don't hate gays and hating them is not Christian at all. I would treat a gay no different than other person. Their lifestyle is simply a sinfully lifestyle according to the true moral standard, the Bible, just like living a life of lying or stealing is.
So, once you have some facts and not angry rhetoric and popular politically-correct buzz words and "theory", maybe we can get somewhere.
Oh, and no, no kid chooses to be bullied at school. Of course not, and kids that bully kids struggling with homosexual URGES, not some inherent GENETIC issue, do not deserve to be mistreated EVER.
Again, stop making assumptions, get your facts straight, then come talk to me.
1.) We all have biases—it is part of human nature.
2.) Your second sentence contains your (incorrect/biased) conclusion that the reason for Goddard’s firing was because of his marriage tweet. You should have indicated that the company claims otherwise, “Mr. Goddard was a freelance contractor and in recent weeks it had become clear that he is not the right fit for our organization."
3.) Goddard’s Twitter profile picture has him sitting at his desk in front of the company logo for most tweets. However, your attempt to split hairs over whether it was a private or public communications account is irrelevant when it concerns someone who is part of the COMMUNICATIONS industry. Professionals in the communications business know how to keep things private (and how to generate a story). Similar to politicians and celebrities, a TV personality/sportscaster’s life is in the public eye. Goddard can’t be that naive about the first rule of journalism: Things are never “off-the-record” --even if they you think they are. Goddard knew or had to believe that his tweets would be for public consumption. Otherwise he wouldn’t have sent them. Unfortunately (in my opinion), both you and I have taken the bait and are furthering his goals by engaging in this exchange and publicizing his opinions.
4.) Finally, you omitted from your initial story the complete history of Goddard’s controversial tweets, which quite likely DID produce responses from Sportsnet (they just weren’t made public). In addition to the ObL tweets (May 2nd), there was his “What a load of b-s” tweet on May 10 about Peter Vidmar’s resignation, which took place just before Goddard began his series of tweets about Reynolds and marriage.
Goddard's complete feed (including his profile pictures) is here: http://twitter.com/#!/heydamo
and a closer examination reveals gems like these on May 10th:
...and hear [sic] comes the storm... er, I mean the little ripple in the ocean. To all those name-callers... God bless you. And I mean that!
@Room40 @uptownhockey Hey bud. I know exactly what you meant. Trust me. What Todd said stands like the Rock of Gibraltar.
Reynolds... Peter Vidmar... coming under the attack of the so-called 'tolerant liberal left'. http://tinyurl.com/3qrghmb
@room40 @EricGagetweet @uptownhockey No, Todd doesn't need any help. No, we're not in the 1500's. And no, WE don't hate.
[Retweeted Reynold's May 9th uptownhockey Uptown Sports] Very sad to read Sean Avery's misguided support of same-gender "marriage". Legal or not, it will always be wrong.
I completely and whole-heartedly support Todd Reynolds and his support for the traditional and TRUE meaning of marriage.
… … …
So if you examine his entire sequence, it seems clear that Goddard isn’t tweeting to personal friends, but that he didn’t mind fueling the controversy and stoking animosity. Hopefully Goddard will better observe the boundaries required by his employer in the future. I’m not countin’ on it.
@Hyhybt Excellent point. I think that adds to the complexity and the questions about Goddard's Twitter account and the involvement of Rogers in the whole episode.