Junior Wouldn't Object to a Gay Teammate

[Hap]

If you agree with the stat that 10% of the population is homo, then we can conclude that about 75 MLB players (three entire rosters) are homo.

I, personally, have the opinion, that the 10% estimation is too low as it pertains to the entire population. I have no empirical data to back this up, it is just my opinion. I went to Ohio University, I've lived in Columbus, and I've lived in Washington, DC (Georgetown, which, of course, is near DuPont Circle). All three of these locations have huge populations of smart successful homosexual people. The percentages in locations such as this might even approach 30 or 40 percent.

I am currently employed at Ohio Northern University (3300 students) in Ada, Ohio (pop. 5000). Every single day, I see a good number of gay people (professors, students and other employees). Even in the rural Midwest flatlands, the percentage of gays is well over 10%.

Getting back to the topic, I will just say that there have been gays in pro sports for as long as there have been pro sports. Some of them (Eric Dickerson, for example) enjoyed long successful careers. I do not understand why it has become such a hot topic.

[Bobcat J]

Originally Posted by smith288

Why is there this NEED to be recognized and put into some group regarding how you like to have sex? Religion, race and sex is the only real statuses people are placed into. Why the necessity to be placed in a box based on how you score? Give me a break.

Its not about being recognized for "how you like to have sex." Its about recognition and respect for the individual. Its about recognition and respect for that person's relationships, which you may be surprised to find out are important and meanigful beyond the bedroom.

Seriously, for all the hate that Junior receives he is one good, good guy. Great quote by Junior, a feeling probably shared by most of the team.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by smith288

He swung and missed because he misunderstood me...

I understood you perfectly. You believe if a player came out of the closet, his teammates would feel uncomfortable. And I'm not saying you are for or against it. And you said it yourself that players in 1947 had problems with integration. But they got over it once they found out that these players were good and they could help them win. If players came out of the closet it would be a problem for a while but, like Jr. said, if the guy can play no one is going to care.

[smith288]

Originally Posted by Chip R

I understood you perfectly. You believe if a player came out of the closet, his teammates would feel uncomfortable. And I'm not saying you are for or against it. And you said it yourself that players in 1947 had problems with integration. But they got over it once they found out that these players were good and they could help them win. If players came out of the closet it would be a problem for a while but, like Jr. said, if the guy can play no one is going to care.

Which is what I said...It sounded like your post targeted me as some homophobe or akin to the racists of the 40-50's.

Im not "scared" of any homosexual...I just dont like their game, if you get my drift (i have been hit on by enough of them to know).

The uncomfortable factor players would have is a different factor than with race in my opinion. A homosexual player is attracted to men (duh...). An athlete may find this to be repugnant and rather unpleasurable to be the target of a homosexual's desires.

I have known a many homosexuals through my career and they do not hide their desires after they storm out of their closet. At least the ones who would continue to pester me. I had to threaten one with physical violence. They thought it was fun and games until I had to resort to that even though I respectfully and repeatidly requested them to lay off.

Im suprised I wasnt taken straight to diversity camp for not toeing the "acceptance" line but fortunately, I wasnt and I was left alone after that.

Its those types of scenarios that are far different than how a racist ball player viewed a person of color in those days.

Currently, in my opinion, respect is guaranteed for the homosexual community through public programs and corporate environments and that is fine. Also anyone who disagrees with their push for societal acceptance of their lifestyle is either a homophobe or a backwater redneck who hates. I don't think the same can be said for religious differences, be it Jewish, Muslim or Christian. I am often ridiculed for my faith. I dont care because I am a big boy. Which is why the programs probably arent necessary to me.

This arguement is beyond racism and is breeching religion and family values. We can all agree to respect one another and our principals but when one side thinks pride parades is a right and the other side thinks marriage is outsides the bounds of their lifestyle, common ground will probably never be reached.

Unless people throw out their religion, this debate will continue on. There is only one group of people who think this is similiar to segregation and that is the gay community and those who support its cause.

I would consider it a slam to every slave who fought tooth and nail to remove the shackles to compare the two.

[TeamBoone]

Originally Posted by redsrule2500

An openly gay athelete would hurt the team, no doubt about it.

Junior is just not trying to cause any controversy - he has learned something in dealing with the media.

And perhaps, just perhaps, this is the way Jr really feels and merely answered the question truthfully.

[johngalt]

Originally Posted by smith288

(oh, and comparing race and sexual preference is apple and oranges, FYI)

No, it's not. Sexual ORIENTATION is no different than race. Just like people didn't choose to enter a life of slavery and lynching in the past, gays and lesbians don't choose to be ridiculed and condemned by society.

Bible thumping is more of a sin than sexual orientation.

[The Baumer]

Originally Posted by johngalt

Bible thumping is more of a sin than sexual orientation.

I'm fairly certain most of your qualms about "bible thumping" have little to do with the Bible. You are probably referring to people's actions.

[smith288]

Originally Posted by johngalt

No, it's not. Sexual ORIENTATION is no different than race. Just like people didn't choose to enter a life of slavery and lynching in the past, gays and lesbians don't choose to be ridiculed and condemned by society.

Bible thumping is more of a sin than sexual orientation.

Bible thumping? Where did I thump a Bible? Since you disagree with me, im the Bible thumper? Lol. I have plenty of atheist friends who think like me, are they "Bible thumpers"?

You give me concrete proof sexual orientation is a born trate similiar to being born a slave and ill be the first to shake your hand and agree with your view. But you cannot.

I can just as simply say its a psychological imbalance or a result of a persons environment while gorwing up and you can offer no proof otherwise.

[johngalt]

Originally Posted by The Baumer

I'm fairly certain most of your qualms about "bible thumping" have little to do with the Bible. You are probably referring to people's actions.

That's why I said Bible thumping - not the Bible.

Read before replying.

[The Baumer]

Originally Posted by johngalt

That's why I said Bible thumping - not the Bible.

Read before replying.

This reply tells me you're just trying to start an arguement.

[johngalt]

Originally Posted by smith288

You give me concrete proof sexual orientation is a born trate similiar to being born a slave and ill be the first to shake your hand and agree with your view. But you cannot.

There's plenty of documented studies out there. Feel free to get with the 21st century and you'll find the evidence fairly easily.

I can just as simply say its a psychological imbalance or a result of a persons environment while gorwing up and you can offer no proof otherwise.

Even if either of those scenarios was a "cause" - which they aren't - then the person's "sin" wouldn't really be their fault anyway now would it?

Try and rationalize it however you want, but it still comes out the same vitriol we've heard from Falwell and others for years.

[johngalt]

Originally Posted by The Baumer

This reply tells me you're just trying to start an arguement.

No, I'm trying to make sure you understand what's being said before there's an argument.

[rdiersin]

Originally Posted by johngalt

Try and rationalize it however you want, but it still comes out the same vitriol we've heard from Falwell and others for years.

That's got to be the most ridiculous comment I have heard. So someone who doesn't believe in a lifestyle is automatically a hatefull person? Come on.

[johngalt]

Originally Posted by rdiersin

That's got to be the most ridiculous comment I have heard. So someone who doesn't believe in a lifestyle is automatically a hatefull person? Come on.

No - someone who refers to sexual orientation as a sin that is an "abomination before God" and yada yada yada while still professing to love all and follow in the footsteps of Christ is a hypocrite. That's what I have a huge problem with.