RuntheDamnBall Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 Jackie Robinson had to gut it out sans a huge cadre of support. It isn't that way this time. In fact, I am thinking that a vast majority of football fans either don't care at all or support him. Sam will be able to portray himself as a modern day Jackie Robinson. Good for him, but it just isn't the case imo. As for my stance on the "issue," I am glad that he is entitled to announce what he does and how he feels. Good for him. What scares me is that in a 100% hypothetical scenario, if AJ McCarron announced that he is against gay marriage because of his religion, picket lines and boycotts would not surprise me. My analogy might be bad, but my point is that I believe in people being able to express their views without being denigrated. So, congrats to Sam. Is he Jackie Robinson? I don't think so. I'm not really sure about that. I mean, Tebow is as arch-conservative religious as it gets, it was clearly defined prior to the draft, and he got drafted in the first despite the many (legitimate) concerns about his ability to become an NFL player.
benjamin Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) The tl;dr of this post is: both biology and social conditions (nature and nurture) have a very difficult time assuring outcomes in regards to sexuality. I’m not going to pretend that I’m a geneticist, so apologies. I'm a social scientist (If you want my football cred, I was in the stands *and stayed* for the Frank Reich/Greatest Comeback!). For my money (and with the respect of the social science community), one of the best studies on sexuality (in the sense of the rigorous methodology and its reproducibility) was conducted by Bailey and Pillard. I don’t think it will sway Tim, since he doesn’t seem inclined to social science methods and outcomes, but for those of you who are finding these things interesting, here goes: Bailey and Pillard examined 167 pairs of brothers and 143 sisters in which at least one of the two defined themselves as homosexual. Some of these sibling pairs were identical/monozygotic twins (i.e., they share the same genes), some were fraternal/dizygotic (i.e., sharing some genes), and there were others who were adopted but raised together (sharing no genes). Twin studies are classic in the psychological literature because they allow for the closest thing to a control as you can get when it comes to biology/genes: 99.9% of Monozygotic twins have the exact same DNA! Neat. Now, if you were a biological determinist (strong ‘nature over nurture’ folk), you would have to hypothesize that identical twins both would identify as gay, right? 100% of the time? Maybe 90%? Bailey and Pillard found that only one out of every two identical twin pairs both identified as homosexual. 52/48%. Compare that with fraternal twins, where one twin pair out of every five pairs both identified as homosexual: 22%. Then there were the adoptive siblings, where there was only one out of every ten pairs (11%) that both identified as being homosexual. They followed it up with a study of just women and found similar, although lower results (48%, 16% and 6%). The uncomfortable truth here is that these studies (and their reproduced findings) don’t really make many people happy. The results indicate that there are social and biological components. The higher the percentage of shared genes, the greater the percentage of cases in which both siblings were homosexual. And yet, biology/genetics—at best—only assures the same outcome 50% of the time. (It’s not just with homosexuality, but all sorts of things--Parkinson’s for example--where the DNA can’t determine things.) So, if you’re still reading (and at this point it might just be Tim!), this leads to some uncomfortable thoughts on both sides. If you believe it’s all DNA, this study shows that biology & genetics can’t come close to guaranteeing sexual orientation. At the same time, if you believe that it’s a choice, well, biology does seem to tug one into a certain direction. Politics and religion aside, it’s enough to give anyone pause. Instead, I think we should be sure to guarantee safe working conditions, no discrimination in the workplace, and equal rights in all matters of the state. Sorry so long, folks! Edited February 11, 2014 by Beerball
Captain Caveman Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 Real question - are there straight people who feel like they made a choice (or actively are making a choice?)
l< j Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 I don't care whether he chose to be gay or was born that way. To debate this only makes sense if you believe that being gay is a pathology that needs a medical explanation. For this young man it just is. And this was awesome. http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/02/michael-sam-gay-university-of-missouri-tribute/ kj
DC Tom Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 I really expected to sign in and see a bunch of people bashing him with they're homophobic remarks but Im pleasantly surprised. I admire you all and I am extremely proud to say Im a bills fan You should have been here earlier. The homophobic remarks have been deleted. That's the biggest issue I have with deleting such remarks. Now you can't tell who the idiots are. I have literally got tears in my eyes from laughing so hard. I never knew chaps even came with asses. Aren't all chaps assless? I have no idea. You'll have to ask someone who wears chaps. Where is T-Bone these days, anyway?
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 I have no idea. You'll have to ask someone who wears chaps. Where is T-Bone these days, anyway? I think Prince wears them, and heels, and gets more tail than just about anybody.
Prickly Pete Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 Haven't read the thread (I don't care that he is gay), but as was just mentioned on a talk show, this is a coordinated announcement that the NFL is involved in, not just some guy deciding to come out.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 I don't care whether he chose to be gay or was born that way. To debate this only makes sense if you believe that being gay is a pathology that needs a medical explanation. For this young man it just is. And this was awesome. http://ftw.usatoday....ssouri-tribute/ kj I'm on the same page. When we make the implication that homosexuality is alright, but only if the person had no choice, then we continue to demean the person and their actions. My personal feeling is that the vast majority of homosexual people never make a choice. Some combination of pre-natal environment, post-natal environment and genetics are at play.
Tipster19 Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 We can debate this all we want but the bottom line is this country is built on freedom. This guy has the right to choose whatever lifestyle he wants, regardless who likes it or not. He is a football player, that's the only thing he should be judged on and that is if he can play or not. I'd like to think that that this country and our society has moved forward enough to be open minded about something like this.
Beerball Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 I'd like to think that that this country and our society has moved forward enough to be open minded about something like this. One would hope. As others have said it will be a very good day when an announcement like this isn't news.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 I am not going to get into name calling or derision because I feel bad about it when I do, but I am going to take issue with the notion that any one poster here speaks for "most people," especially when they don't cite any statistics on the matter. Furthermore, you can go back in time to plenty of abhorrent perspectives that "most people" were OK with at one point or another. Many people, if not most, evolve - especially when they get to know more people from different backgrounds, worldviews and life situations. Oh crap, sorry everyone It's not your fault, the man was born this way.
sodbuster Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 It's not your fault, the man was born this way. Disagree. He chose this lifestyle.
boyst Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 Ok this is getting ugly and I am going to not reply any more in this, at least on the aspects of homosexuality. But this guy plays football. Who cares abiut the rest? Who are anyone of us not to be happy for him? For anyone else, for that matter, in this world? Celebrate life but live your own! Good for him and I hope he is as happy as the rest of the world.
Beerball Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 Please stop replying to posts that you know will be deleted. You're doubling our work, we have to delete the original and any posts that quote it. Give a mod a break.
Prickly Pete Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) I'm happy that this "issue" has taken it's first step, just so it becomes a non-issue sooner. Jeezus, look at the environmental problems happening all around us (and much worse throughout the world). Things that effect everyone (and their progeny) DIRECTLY. Edited February 11, 2014 by Marauder'sMicro
BillsRUs Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 I happy that this "issue" has taken it's first step, just so it becomes a non-issue sooner. Jeezus, look at the environmental problems happening all around us (and much worse throughout the world). Things that effect everyone (and their progeny) DIRECTLY. Wait...was Sam also born on a landfill?? Hmmm. That might explain both the genetic and environmental pressures behind his homosexuality. J/k
PromoTheRobot Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 Leviticus tells us homosexuality is a sin, as is touching the skin of a pig. Exodus tells us working on Sunday is a sin. Man, that's three for three. If he gets drafted, this guy would be the sinniest football player that ever sinned. Does he have a tattoo? Does he eat shrimp cocktail? PTR
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 11, 2014 Posted February 11, 2014 As a Roman Catholic (former altar boy, Jesuit educated), I don't get where religion makes some people so closed minded. My understanding of religion is to treat everyone with respect and live your life the best you can. Jesus stood with the people who were discriminated with the most. Some people use religion as a way to oppress others. How is commending another person's sexuality different than Muslims oppressing women? People just need to worry about their own lives.
Recommended Posts