General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFive Tampa Bay Rays players refuse to wear LGBTQ+ univorm patch for Pride Month
Adam was selected by the organization to speak on behalf of the players who opted out, and called it a "faith-based decision" and that the decision wasn't "judgmental," per the Times:
"So it's a hard decision. Because ultimately we all said what we want is them to know that all are welcome and loved here. But when we put it on our bodies, I think a lot of guys decided that it's just a lifestyle that maybe not that they look down on anybody or think differently it's just that maybe we don't want to encourage it if we believe in Jesus, who's encouraged us to live a lifestyle that would abstain from that behavior, just like [Jesus] encourages me as a heterosexual male to abstain from sex outside of the confines of marriage. It's no different."
Manager Kevin Cash said the players' decision not to wear the pride caps and patches -- which the team described as something players could choose to opt-in to -- didn't create any division in the clubhouse. "I think what it has created is, like, what you've heard -- a lot of conversation and valuing the different perspectives inside the clubhouse but really appreciating the community that we're trying to support here," Cash said.
https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/five-tampa-bay-rays-players-decline-to-wear-lgbtq-logo-on-uniform-during-pride-night-celebration/
PortTack
(32,766 posts)JanMichael
(24,886 posts)...from both sides of the plate and probably love "fag" jokes.
CurtEastPoint
(18,643 posts)Maybe it's because it's their employer making them do this?
Walleye
(31,022 posts)LonePirate
(13,420 posts)You can debate whether they possess deeply held religious beliefs. However, using religious beliefs for this action speaks to how they do not wish to be associated with, let along confused for, supporting equality for all. It's a couple inches of fabric on a jersey and a hat which they only wear for 2-3 hours. They don't even need to comment on it and remained agnostic on it all, except they chose to speak out against the clothing. It's bigotry and nothing more.
MotorCityBeard
(201 posts)I'm also agnostic and a recovering Catholic.
To my knowledge, Jesus never gave his opinion one way or the other about homosexuality.
At least be an adult and say why you're really doing this.
CurtEastPoint
(18,643 posts)Sympthsical
(9,073 posts)It's compelled speech, so I don't care if they wear it or not. I'm gay. If that's their decision, big shrug.
fishwax
(29,149 posts)That means upwards of 80% of the roster chose to opt-in to the message of inclusiveness. I mean, it would be lovely if they *all* did, but (a) the fact that a few didn't proves that it isn't compulsory and therefore that it actually means something for those who opted in and (b) I think having 80% of the roster saying yes to to endorsing a message of inclusivity is a higher percentage than many might expect from a major league team (or, frankly and sadly, for many other workplaces).
Walleye
(31,022 posts)They dont want to encourage it? Like people decide to be gay? What a bunch of morons.Why do people say faith-based instead of religion. Are they ashamed to be religious. Tired of it
MLAA
(17,288 posts)orleans
(34,051 posts)it's just that maybe we don't want to encourage it if we believe in Jesus, who's encouraged us to live a lifestyle that would abstain from that behavior, just like [Jesus] encourages me as a heterosexual male to abstain from sex outside of the confines of marriage.
is he talking about the same guy who hung out with 12 other guys all the time and never got married or had kids?
MotorCityBeard
(201 posts)but I have read more than one theories of Jesus' sexuality.
nolabear
(41,962 posts)orleans
(34,051 posts)jason using jesus as an excuse or incentive is just a cop out.
(god, i haven't used that phrase in years and years! i feel like such an old hippie! lol)
nolabear
(41,962 posts)orleans
(34,051 posts)nolabear
(41,962 posts)The Magnificent Foo Bird becomes the focus of a cult, and should you have the honor of having it choose you as it circles overhead, you cannot wipe off the result. In other words
😃
Its really a shaggy dog story but thats the condensed version.
NCLefty
(3,678 posts)Ferrets are Cool
(21,106 posts)Iggo
(47,552 posts)Not just homophobes, but cowards.
KentuckyWoman
(6,679 posts)I'm not a big supporter of having players wear anything to support anything unless it is directly team related. If the team owners really want to make a difference I am pretty sure there are better ways to spend the money.
If you want to make it part of the game for media purposes then pop in highlights of LGBTQ+ struggles and/or accomplishments to educate the watching public. Something tangible like supporting shelters for teens and young adults kicked out of the house by hateful parents or in abusive situations - or how about getting people in the organization to go to local high school to speak against bullying and for acceptance...
Initech
(100,070 posts)vercetti2021
(10,156 posts)Stfu and quit using religion as an excuse to justify your homophobia
msongs
(67,405 posts)werdna
(467 posts)Not really. The only passage in the NT used to support the claim is Mark 10: 6-8 - But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.
However, as is usually the case, the quote is cherry picked out of the context of the entire passage. This quote is a direct response to Mark 10: 2 - Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"
3 "What did Moses command you?" he replied. 4 They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away." 5 "It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6 "But at the beginning of creation God `made them male and female.' 7 `For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh. 'So they are no longer two, but one. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
This has nothing to do with a person's gender identity. Jesus references Mosaic Law, the only law that would matter to the Pharisees, in his response. He also begins with "But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female." Which appears to imply that at the time of this exchange they were well past the beginning of creation and perhaps, since then, God, through the agency of evolution, had expanded on the nature of genders of humanity. Genesis describes all of god's creative performances in terms of opposites; heavens and the earth, light and dark, night and day. Yet there are gradients existent between these opposites. So it follows that if we accept these gradients between night and day as being dusk and dawn, for example, it should only follow that we should accept that there are gradients between male and female as well.