Dante Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Let's see - you believe in the 1st Amendment, but want to materially punish those that use it in a fashion disagreeable to you. You'd fit right in, in 1917 Moscow and 1933 Munich... Solution to silence LJ is much worse than the problem. Not saying what LJ wrote is right. It might make him a ahole but not a criminal. If someone feels so strongly about what he said email the guy and tell him so. Benching him is great for bleeding hearts feelings but not so good for the Chiefs who are paying the guy. Easy to waste other peoples money I guess.
todd Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Let's see - you believe in the 1st Amendment, but want to materially punish those that use it in a fashion disagreeable to you. You'd fit right in, in 1917 Moscow and 1933 Munich... Think before you post. Is that difficult for you? Everyone has every right to say what they want. But they also should deal with the repercussions for what they say. Quite simple, for those with an objective brain. There is no law prohibiting anyone from being a bigot, nor should there be. Doesn't take much of a brain to deal with that logic. Think for a second before you start calling people a commie or a nazi. Please, attempt to understand what free speech and accountability for your words really mean. You do realize you called me a nazi and communist, right? You know, the people who murdered jews, and the government (stalin) who committed mass genocide. You do realize how !@#$ing retarded your analogy is, right? The foolishness of associating someone who advocates free speech and personal responsibility for that speech with those who restrict it and commit murder because of their others beliefs? Please tell me you aren't that narrow and stupid. It is quite simple. Say what you want, and deal with the reprocussions. Man up, in other words. If Larry Johnson was a real man, he'd own his hate and what he said about gay people.
Alaska Darin Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 almost fascist I loved that movie - especially the scene where they all sang "Tiny Dancer" on the bus.
evilbuffalobob Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 What? There's Fags in K.C.? How unfashionable.
Conch Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Can't we all just get along? Nah, what fun would that be. OJ needs to pulled from the wall and the hall and I hope he dies while still in jail real soon. he's a low life scum. I can't stand the media for even mentioning his name because attention is all he craves and they give it to him. Every wife/girlfriend beater and steroid user in the nfl and there are plenty of both should also rot right next to OJ. Bunch of overgrown, overpaid babies.
stevestojan Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I'm offended by people who start petitions against freedom of speech. Since I'm offended, should I start a petition?
RyanC883 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Its America, he can say fag if he wants. Its America, you can be offended if you want. Now stop interfering with each others lives. Good call!
Mickey Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Agreed. It's scary that people think that someone has to be punished for speaking. Do people realize it's almost fascist? He is perfectly free to say "fag" all he wants and other people are free to use their feedoms to react how they wish. Fascists killed about 13 million innocent people in concentration camps not to mention the millions more who died on the battlefield. Do you really think that a few fans ticked off by a football player, not for his mere use of a word but the bigotry his use of that word revealed, is "almost fascist"? Not for nothing but homosexuals were sent to the camps too, probably called "fags" on their way in by real fascists. Kinda sucks when perpetual victims stand up for themselve doesn't it?
Big Turk Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Fans in KC are petitioning to bench Johnson for using "fag" and generally being a PIA--the urgency of the benching is that he's about to become the team's all-time leading rusher passing Priest Holmes. Seems foolish but at least some fans are trying to hold their team accountable. Too bad more fans like this aren't in Buffalo petitioning to remove a double-murdering woman-beater from the Wall. A friend of mine went to a game this season and was floored to see OJ's name still up. He mocked every fan around him for that blight, and of course, no one had anything to say. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4622503 Waiting for the hollow "It's for what he did on the field" arguments. Must be a lot of fags in KC.... I am sure they are getting lots of support from their friends in San Francisco, Rochester, and of course Columbus, or as they refer to it "Gay"lumbus...
Mickey Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I'm offended by people who start petitions against freedom of speech. Since I'm offended, should I start a petition? You are free to do so, that's how it works.
Mickey Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Must be a lot of fags in KC.... I am sure they are getting lots of support from their friends in San Francisco, Rochester, and of course Columbus, or as they refer to it "Gay"lumbus... Yeah, because you have to be gay if you think that kind of language is abusive and dehumanizing. Only a fag would care about that stuff right?
Mickey Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Solution to silence LJ is much worse than the problem. Not saying what LJ wrote is right. It might make him a ahole but not a criminal. If someone feels so strongly about what he said email the guy and tell him so. Benching him is great for bleeding hearts feelings but not so good for the Chiefs who are paying the guy. Easy to waste other peoples money I guess. Fans call for benching of players all the time. I think its a useless effort but benching a guy doesn't quite equate with being made out to be a criminal. Thats a bit of an overstatement. If instead of an email they want to express their view by calling for his benching, why not? They can express opinions if they want. No one is putting a gun to the owner's head. Its his call. I don't see the problem here. Jackass bigot says something mean and stupid and gets called out for it. If his boss wants to bench him for it, that's his business.
Mickey Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 My dear friend, I am thinking that saying "fag" is not akin to murdering someone. This being said. I have no issue with gays and hetros petitioning for action against this long term moron. PLEASE be advised that I think that he is a proven p.o.s., but I do have issues wrt rights/freedom as you well know. I guess I need to think your post over just a bit more. Bill, who the heck are "hetros"?? Is that a new sexual orientation? Can't keep it all straight.
DC Mom Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Another phony controversy to give the talking heads something to talk about. Who cares.
Brandon Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I think he should be banned for life. He's such a terrible, terrible example for those other guys in the NFL.
Guest dog14787 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 If being called a fag is so traumatic and damaging to someone, they are in trouble to start with. They are way too weak to survive happily in this life. Better sort their **** out soon so they can deal with real problems when they arise. Everyone gets called names in life. Fat, ugly, dumb (recalling all these instances from puberty lol) and yes, fag. It's called getting a little toughness. Dealing with adversity. Not running to mama crying like a little fag, err i mean little girl, err I mean wimp! I'm not saying you don't have the right to call someone a Fag, I'm saying when you do you should face the consequences when the accusations prove to be false and you just slandered someones name, now doesn't that make sense to you. In other words you get your lying, dumb arss that can't control your temper took to court and sued, that's what I'm saying.
Big Turk Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Yeah, because you have to be gay if you think that kind of language is abusive and dehumanizing. Only a fag would care about that stuff right? If someone called me a fag I would probably laugh to be honest with you. Its always a little bit humorous to me to see what people get bent out of shape about... I've always wondered why noone seems to get bent out of shape by things such as Affirmative Action which basically approves and in some cases forces companies to hire less qualified candidates for jobs based on their race(I would honestly be pretty insulted if I was a minority). Don't get me wrong---I understand why its there, but I am pretty sure in many cases a company is not hiring the best person for a job. And then the US wonders why its falling behind the world in virtually every category...To me, you hire the best person for the job period...black, white, women, man, 70 year old, 20 year old...doesn't matter...to be forced to promote someone who is 20th on the list is not only not helping anyone at the company other than the less qualified candidate who hit the jackpot that only a select few were eligible for, it probably causes that company to lose higher qualified candidates who aren't trying to hear that nonsense from their boss as to why they got passed on a promotion they and everyone else there knew they deserved... Something a little closer to home is women who always cry about "equal opportunity" in the workplace, who really only want that when its convenient for them. As soon as physical lifting gets involved, many play the "I can't do that, I'm a woman...that's a man's job" card. Well its either one or the other---you either want to have equal opportunity, which means "equal", meaning all duties are shared the same and all employees are expected to perform the same job functions equally, or you don't. You can't have "selective equality". Still confused how some companies are forced to hire women for positions they can't possibly hope to perform 100% due to the physical requirements, yet are highly offended when you tell them they are paid equally, you expect equal performance. Before someone cries I am sexist, I am merely stating the obvious. Yes there are some women who are built like linebackers who can handle the physical requirements of such a job(moving merchandise that often weighs 150-200+ lbs), but its like looking for a needle in a haystack. For every one of those that get hired, another 50 women get hired who are trying to lift merchandise that weighs more than they do---common sense tells you that is a physical impossibility---I am a pretty strong guy, I weigh more than 200 lbs...if I feel something is heavy, how is a female who has less muscle mass and weighs 80 or 90 lbs less than me supposed to carry this? Its not possible, yet companies are forced to employ women in these positions when they apply because of these "equal opportunity" laws and the threat of lawsuits, and then almost without fail, waste 2 or 3 months of the companies time and resources to end up having to hire a new employee when they fully realize what they have gotten themselves into, and the other employees get tired of having to do their jobs for them 70% of the time---and that's not even mentioning how many times a guy ends up getting hurt because he is forced to carry 90% of the load when lifting something like a heavy dresser up a flight of stairs. But somehow injuring an employee by forcing them to lift with someone who is incapable of physically performing their job functions is a better option? It has nothing to do with "equality". It has to do with the fact there are obvious physical differences between men and women. If you can't physically handle the job, then how is it fair to the people working there who can physically handle the job that you get paid the same to basically become a glorified secretary and wiper downer, while they have to go lift stuff all day for you? Then there are these commercials that I cringe every time I hear on WBLK...McDonalds runs a commercial that goes something like "Three Hundred Sixty five days of the year....365 BLACK!" Personally I take no offense to the commercial...but what I do take offense to is what the reaction would be if McDonalds played the same commercial but instead said: "Three Hundred Sixty five days of the year....365 WHITE!" 5 seconds after that commercial aired you would have Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and all the other minority leaders and activists up in arms calling for Boycotts of McDonalds, firing of people and how they are racists and bigots and everything else...Exactly how does that work?? Now those are some things that are much more offensive to me than some guy calling another guy something that 95% of us have either said or been called by high school...lets be real, and stop the "Oh my god---I can't believe he said that" fake reaction and talk about stuff that is probably politically incorrect but equally offensive to people on the real if we are gonna go down the road...
Booster4324 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Who was against the Dixie Chicks and boycotted them for their unpatriotic stance and thinks LJ should be left alone? Anyone?
Rayzer32 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 This is gay. Someone needs to ban this homo!!! j/k
Recommended Posts