Wizards' Jason Collins

[StrangeSox]

Again, do you have a code somewhere for the ultimate definition of what being a Christian is/isn't? That's been debated for thousands of years. One guy saying something definitive isn't representative of the entire religion. People in this very thread identify as Christian and totally disagree with him.

 

Yeah, I know, I've pointed that out myself several times. Perhaps you should stop reflexively defending Broussard and recognize that he implicitly claimed authority to declare that Collins isn't a Christian.

 

Again I'm not sure where you're going with this because it doesn't change the bigotry.

[StrangeSox]

His statements don't do this. He's condemning them in the context of his personal religion and he's not excluding Collins or gays from anything. This is a serious stretch.

He is attempting to exclude Collins for Christianity.

 

Falling back on "but it's my religion!!!" isn't an impenetrable shield for accountability. This is something Broussard believes, and it's a bigoted belief. Plenty of other Christians do not share his bigotry. Your logic here would mean that it isn't bigoted to accuse Jews of blood libel or to argue that blacks are racially inferior because of the mark of Ham because, hey, it's "personal religion!"

 

Bigotry (or racism or sexism or any other discrimination) isn't about actively excluding people or burning crosses. A whole lot of it is 1) s*** exactly like Broussard and 2) soft, indirect and even subconscious prejudice. This is pretty similar to the guy in the news recently for calling something "n*****-rigged," then 'correcting' it to "African-Americanized" and then claiming that there's not a racist bone in his body! It's just an expression!

 

 

[cabiness42]

Bigotry doesn't mean "actively exclude somebody from something." His views on LGBT are bigoted, full-stop. I'd argue that you're the one stretching by making an incredibly narrow definition for bigotry.

 

I don't buy that holding a religious belief that homosexuality is wrong automatically makes one bigoted. I think a lot of people who do hold that religious belief do also happen to be bigoted, but the two are not one and the same. You can hold the belief that being an unrepentant homosexual will condemn you in the afterlife yet treat them exactly the same as any other people because it's God's job to judge and not ours. Yet at the same time not judging a person is not the same thing as not believing that they are doing something that is wrong.

 

The difference is subtle, which is why I think Christians are best served keeping these discussions within their own churches and not in public.

[StrangeSox]

When this country finally gets around to banning discrimination against homosexuals in everyday life like it has most other minorities, then we'll stop connecting these type of comments to the fact of legally enforced discrimination.

 

[StrangeSox]

I don't buy that holding a religious belief that homosexuality is wrong automatically makes one bigoted. I think a lot of people who do hold that religious belief do also happen to be bigoted, but the two are not one and the same. You can hold the belief that being an unrepentant homosexual will condemn you in the afterlife yet treat them exactly the same as any other people because it's God's job to judge and not ours. Yet at the same time not judging a person is not the same thing as not believing that they are doing something that is wrong.

 

The difference is subtle, which is why I think Christians are best served keeping these discussions within their own churches and not in public.

FWIW I don't think this is actually possible. You might try to work against them, and you might try to treat everyone equally, but everyone always has prejudices. It might not even show up on the individual level, but it would show up systemically.

[RockRaines]

I'm not aware of any religious authority that Broussard has. This wasn't Collins' priest saying it, it was some other guy who also happens to be a Christian claiming that someone else can't be a Christian because they do something Broussard believes to be a sin.

I dont buy that anyone has religious authority over someone else. Its YOUR beliefs. A great deal of those false "advisors" are complete phonies. How about the millions people donated to the Baker family in the 80's, nice job.

[StrangeSox]

I dont buy that anyone has religious authority over someone else. Its YOUR beliefs. A great deal of those false "advisors" are complete phonies. How about the millions people donated to the Baker family in the 80's, nice job.

Well that's a big part of it: who the f*** is Chris Broussard to be making religious proclamations? Is he a theologian in his spare time?

[illinilaw08]

I don't buy that holding a religious belief that homosexuality is wrong automatically makes one bigoted. I think a lot of people who do hold that religious belief do also happen to be bigoted, but the two are not one and the same. You can hold the belief that being an unrepentant homosexual will condemn you in the afterlife yet treat them exactly the same as any other people because it's God's job to judge and not ours. Yet at the same time not judging a person is not the same thing as not believing that they are doing something that is wrong.

 

The difference is subtle, which is why I think Christians are best served keeping these discussions within their own churches and not in public.

 

Wasn't the above argument also made in favor of continuing bans against interracial marriage, the practice of slavery, and the massacre of the Native Americans (Manifest Destiny!)? Using religion to defend discrimation or intolerance doesn't make the discrimination or intolerance right.

[Jenksismyhero]

He gave his personal views on Collins and more specifically whether he's a Christian. I'm not defending what he's saying, i'm defending his right to speak his opinion. He's saying I think it's a sin and he's not a Christian. That has nothing to do with whether he can play basketball or should play basketball. The idea that he should be fired for that is ridiculous. That's discrimination based on religious beliefs, which you guys should be supporting the hell out of.

[StrangeSox]

He gave his personal views on Collins and more specifically whether he's a Christian. I'm not defending what he's saying, i'm defending his right to speak his opinion. He's saying I think it's a sin and he's not a Christian. That has nothing to do with whether he can play basketball or should play basketball. The idea that he should be fired for that is ridiculous. That's discrimination based on religious beliefs, which you guys should be supporting the hell out of.

I pointed out pages ago that ESPN likely would have a 1A lawsuit on its hands while explicitly firing someone for being LGBT isn't illegal.

 

edit: would it be ridiculous to fire someone on ESPN for saying that blacks aren't smart enough to play QB even though that's protected speech?

Edited April 30, 2013 by StrangeSox

[illinilaw08]

He gave his personal views on Collins and more specifically whether he's a Christian. I'm not defending what he's saying, i'm defending his right to speak his opinion. He's saying I think it's a sin and he's not a Christian. That has nothing to do with whether he can play basketball or should play basketball. The idea that he should be fired for that is ridiculous. That's discrimination based on religious beliefs, which you guys should be supporting the hell out of.

 

He has his right to speak his opinion. Just like ESPN has the right to decide Broussard no longer has a platform with which to make his statements. In addition, just because he has the right to speak his opinion doesn't mean people shouldn't point out the intolerant nature of his position.

[Soxbadger]

No it isnt.

 

You dont get to say stupid s*** and say "Oh its my religion"

 

Do you think it would be okay for Chris Berman to ask Ryan Braun "What do you think about the Jews killing Christ?"

 

Hes not being discriminated against, its not because hes a Christian, its because hes an idiot who did something stupid.

 

Religion is not a blanket get out of jail free card.

[cabiness42]

FWIW I don't think this is actually possible. You might try to work against them, and you might try to treat everyone equally, but everyone always has prejudices. It might not even show up on the individual level, but it would show up systemically.

 

I think in this particular country it is difficult because of the way the rhetoric has gone, but it's certainly possible. I have a couple relatives, a former roommate and several other close friends who are gay and I would like to think none of them feel like I discriminate against them or treat them differently than my straight friends.

 

[CrimsonWeltall]

The idea that he should be fired for that is ridiculous.

 

It's excessive. I wouldn't say ridiculous. Saying stupid s*** on air should get you in trouble. Of course, since ESPN employs Skip Bayless, it's hard for them to fire anyone on those grounds.

 

That's discrimination based on religious beliefs, which you guys should be supporting the hell out of.

 

So you can say anything you want as long as it's based on religion? Why?

[CrimsonWeltall]

Religion is not a blanket get out of jail free card.

 

It often is in this country. Just declare something "sacred" and you shield it from criticism.

[cabiness42]

Wasn't the above argument also made in favor of continuing bans against interracial marriage, the practice of slavery, and the massacre of the Native Americans (Manifest Destiny!)? Using religion to defend discrimation or intolerance doesn't make the discrimination or intolerance right.

 

Well, believing that interracial marriage is a sin and banning it are two different things. In America, Christians have to understand that their religious beliefs do not give them the right to infringe on the rights of others. Believing that interracial marriage is a sin is not infringing on the rights of others--using the state/federal legislature to ban it is.

 

Believing that Jason Collins is sinning is not infringing on his rights. Going on ESPN and saying so is not infringing on his rights (though I think it was not a good thing for a Christian to do). Telling him that he can or can't do something that all other Americans can do is infringing on his rights.

[Jenksismyhero]

I pointed out pages ago that ESPN likely would have a 1A lawsuit on its hands while explicitly firing someone for being LGBT isn't illegal.

 

edit: would it be ridiculous to fire someone on ESPN for saying that blacks aren't smart enough to play QB even though that's protected speech?

 

Protected speech and religious beliefs are different though. There's no protection for being racist.

 

Obviously ESPN CAN fire him, I just think he's got a decent discrimination case. He's putting it out there what his beliefs are and if he suddenly gets fired for saying that, how is his termination not based on his religion?

[Jake]

No it isnt.

 

You dont get to say stupid s*** and say "Oh its my religion"

 

Do you think it would be okay for Chris Berman to ask Ryan Braun "What do you think about the Jews killing Christ?"

 

Hes not being discriminated against, its not because hes a Christian, its because hes an idiot who did something stupid.

 

Religion is not a blanket get out of jail free card.

 

Yes it is. That's what Jesus came for

[Jenksismyhero]

No it isnt.

 

You dont get to say stupid s*** and say "Oh its my religion"

 

Do you think it would be okay for Chris Berman to ask Ryan Braun "What do you think about the Jews killing Christ?"

 

Hes not being discriminated against, its not because hes a Christian, its because hes an idiot who did something stupid.

 

Religion is not a blanket get out of jail free card.

 

Well, in the context of employment it absolutely is. You cannot be terminated for your religious beliefs. If Broussard was fired yesterday/today, it's obvious it was based on his statements relating to his religious beliefs. It had nothing to do with his actually employment. That's a good discrimination case from his side.

 

Edit: I don't think this is absolute, but I think here, within the context of his statements, it would be.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[cabiness42]

I dont buy that anyone has religious authority over someone else. Its YOUR beliefs. A great deal of those false "advisors" are complete phonies. How about the millions people donated to the Baker family in the 80's, nice job.

 

If you join an established denomination with an established hierarchy, then you are submitting that some person or persons in some capacity do have religious authority over you. However, I find it very unlikely that Broussard and Collins are under that kind of arrangement, and even if they are, television is the wrong venue for that discussion.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

It's excessive. I wouldn't say ridiculous. Saying stupid s*** on air should get you in trouble. Of course, since ESPN employs Skip Bayless, it's hard for them to fire anyone on those grounds.

 

 

 

So you can say anything you want as long as it's based on religion? Why?

 

 

I don't think you can say ANYTHING and just blame it on religion and be ok. But in this case I think there would be a good argument.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Protected speech and religious beliefs are different though. There's no protection for being racist.

 

Simply claim your racism is based on religion. Win.

[StrangeSox]

I think in this particular country it is difficult because of the way the rhetoric has gone, but it's certainly possible. I have a couple relatives, a former roommate and several other close friends who are gay and I would like to think none of them feel like I discriminate against them or treat them differently than my straight friends.

I think what I said applies much more broadly than to just sexuality and that it applies to basically everybody. I'm never going to be gay, so I'll never know what it's really like to be in those shoes, to see things from their daily perspective, to notice some things that are harder in their lives (even if just a little bit). There's going to be issues I don't even notice because I'm straight and things I take as given that they might not be able to. That includes cultural acceptance, for example I just recently noticed that one of the new Outlook commercials features a lesbian wedding; it would be completely routine for my sexuality to be reflected in the culture around me, but not so much for LGBT people. Despite being a vocal proponent for LGBT rights, I'm sure there are subtle ways that my interactions with my gay brother differ slightly from with my straight brother if only because I'm not gay myself. This applies to any group like that that you're not a part of. I won't ever live life from a woman's perspective, or as a black person etc.

 

That said, the more you interact with people who aren't the same as you, the more likely you are to be aware of these potential biases, to recognize and to work to correct them. When I said that I don't think it's possible to live without bias, I didn't mean intentional or mean-spirited bias, that you can't be a great person and fully accepting of your friends and family. But I don't think it's possible, psychologically, to eliminate them entirely. There was a recent study I was reading about last week that examined this:

 

http://www.boston.com/news/science/blogs/s...aXC1K/blog.html

 

One of the examples they highlight is that the professor was asked for an interview, turned it down, but then changed her mind when she found out the interviewer also went to Yale. That's not even a racial, sexual, etc. prejudice, but it got her thinking about "why did I make this exception for a Yale grad?"

 

That study was a seed, which grew into an idea in psychology that has become transformative: everyone carries with them implicit biases that may change how people perceive or interact with others. Doctors, judges, police officers, teachers—even Banaji herself—are all subject to these biases, which can lead people to inadvertently act in ways that may be discriminatory or are influenced by stereotypes that people would consciously reject.

[StrangeSox]

Well, believing that interracial marriage is a sin and banning it are two different things. In America, Christians have to understand that their religious beliefs do not give them the right to infringe on the rights of others. Believing that interracial marriage is a sin is not infringing on the rights of others--using the state/federal legislature to ban it is.

 

Believing that Jason Collins is sinning is not infringing on his rights. Going on ESPN and saying so is not infringing on his rights (though I think it was not a good thing for a Christian to do). Telling him that he can or can't do something that all other Americans can do is infringing on his rights.

Fun fact: it wasn't until the mid-1990's that a majority of Americans approved of interracial marriage. Compare that with how quickly views have shifted on marriage equality for LGBT.

[Soxbadger]

Well, in the context of employment it absolutely is. You cannot be terminated for your religious beliefs. If Broussard was fired yesterday/today, it's obvious it was based on his statements relating to his religious beliefs. It had nothing to do with his actually employment. That's a good discrimination case from his side.

 

Edit: I don't think this is absolute, but I think here, within the context of his statements, it would be.

 

And he wouldnt be terminated for his beliefs.

 

Hed be terminated for his actions on a tv show that were in conflict with his employment agreement.

 

Just because a statement has "religion" in it, does not mean your employer all of a sudden cant do anything.

 

If I walk up to my secretary and say "My religion says I can put my dick in your mouth because Im a man and your my inferior"

 

Do they just sit on their hands and say:

 

"Well s***, its his religion, guess we gotta let him rape a ho."

 

Its absolutely ludicrous that you can not differentiate between "being fired because you are a Christian" and "being fired because you happened to say/do something stupid but had a "religious" context."

 

This is pretty basic. The actual reason why you dont fire Broussard is because a good portion of ESPN's viewers are idiots and this type of controversy drives ratings.