Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ex Lurker

(3,813 posts)
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:37 PM Jun 2022

Five Tampa Bay Rays players refuse to wear LGBTQ+ univorm patch for Pride Month

Pitchers Jason Adam, Jalen Beeks, Brooks Raley, Jeffrey Springs and Ryan Thompson were among the players who did not wear the patch on their uniforms and chose to wear the team's standard caps for the June 4 home game.

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/
26 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Five Tampa Bay Rays players refuse to wear LGBTQ+ univorm patch for Pride Month (Original Post) Ex Lurker Jun 2022 OP
Professional sports...so overrated PortTack Jun 2022 #1
gycfctthchgvj,j'p. That means their excuse sucks. Not judgmental? Just be honest. They don't swing.. JanMichael Jun 2022 #2
for some odd reason, I'm not bothered by their decision, and I'm gay. Help me verbalize why... CurtEastPoint Jun 2022 #3
I don't think the team made it mandatory? Walleye Jun 2022 #5
They are using religion to hide their bigotry. LonePirate Jun 2022 #7
I'm gay also MotorCityBeard Jun 2022 #8
I agree with that! CurtEastPoint Jun 2022 #10
Who will not wear the ribbon?! Sympthsical Jun 2022 #11
perhaps because it's optional, and 21 out of 26 players on the roster opted in fishwax Jun 2022 #13
It's not a fucking lifestyle! totally judgemental Walleye Jun 2022 #4
Ignorance on display. MLAA Jun 2022 #6
when jason adam said: orleans Jun 2022 #9
I wasn't going to go there MotorCityBeard Jun 2022 #12
Jesus never said a word about it but I guess it's their right. nolabear Jun 2022 #14
the phrase "cop-out" comes to mind orleans Jun 2022 #15
If the foo shits... nolabear Jun 2022 #22
lol -- that expression of yours i have never heard before. nt orleans Jun 2022 #25
It's the punchline to a very old joke. nolabear Jun 2022 #26
"Love the sinner, hate the sin" - I have never felt loved by a single one of these dolts. NCLefty Jun 2022 #16
Fucking asswipes and hypocrites. Ferrets are Cool Jun 2022 #17
Blame Jesus. Iggo Jun 2022 #18
It doesn't bother me in the least. KentuckyWoman Jun 2022 #19
Well so much for "love your fellow man". Initech Jun 2022 #20
Yes we picked a lifestyle that has gotten us killed for decades vercetti2021 Jun 2022 #21
maybe religion is the cause of their homophobia nt msongs Jun 2022 #23
"if we believe in Jesus...abstain from sex outside of the confines of marriage." werdna Jun 2022 #24

JanMichael

(24,886 posts)
2. gycfctthchgvj,j'p. That means their excuse sucks. Not judgmental? Just be honest. They don't swing..
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:42 PM
Jun 2022

...from both sides of the plate and probably love "fag" jokes.

CurtEastPoint

(18,643 posts)
3. for some odd reason, I'm not bothered by their decision, and I'm gay. Help me verbalize why...
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:43 PM
Jun 2022

Maybe it's because it's their employer making them do this?

LonePirate

(13,420 posts)
7. They are using religion to hide their bigotry.
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:53 PM
Jun 2022

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)
8. I'm gay also
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:54 PM
Jun 2022

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.

Sympthsical

(9,073 posts)
11. Who will not wear the ribbon?!
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 10:08 PM
Jun 2022

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)
13. perhaps because it's optional, and 21 out of 26 players on the roster opted in
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 10:25 PM
Jun 2022

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)
4. It's not a fucking lifestyle! totally judgemental
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:46 PM
Jun 2022

They don’t 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

orleans

(34,051 posts)
9. when jason adam said:
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:55 PM
Jun 2022

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?

orleans

(34,051 posts)
15. the phrase "cop-out" comes to mind
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 10:37 PM
Jun 2022

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)
26. It's the punchline to a very old joke.
Mon Jun 6, 2022, 04:05 PM
Jun 2022

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…😃

It’s really a shaggy dog story but that’s the condensed version.

Ferrets are Cool

(21,106 posts)
17. Fucking asswipes and hypocrites.
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 11:20 PM
Jun 2022
"it's just that maybe we don't want to encourage it" Once again pretending its a fucking choice.

KentuckyWoman

(6,679 posts)
19. It doesn't bother me in the least.
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 11:31 PM
Jun 2022

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...

vercetti2021

(10,156 posts)
21. Yes we picked a lifestyle that has gotten us killed for decades
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 11:34 PM
Jun 2022

Stfu and quit using religion as an excuse to justify your homophobia

werdna

(467 posts)
24. "if we believe in Jesus...abstain from sex outside of the confines of marriage."
Mon Jun 6, 2022, 01:21 AM
Jun 2022

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.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Five Tampa Bay Rays playe...