Jump to content

NFL News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Refugee said:

No need to feel sorry, in fact that’s a pretty weak rebuttal. Speaking for his wife is one thing but he definitely told a room full of women as college grads what he would venture to guess the most important thing in their lives will be. That’s in the actual transcript. I’m not basing anything off of a single fabricated headline so why even bring that up? Again, it might not be offensive to you personally but you don’t get to decide any of that  for anyone else.

There are some pretty weak takes over these last few pages that are laughable in how sheltered they are to the wider world. If those views are working for you personally, so be it but they just might not fit with how a lot of people see the world and their lives in it. 

So? 

If he's not correct, that might be the most damning statement about our culture and society I can fathom. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're more than welcome to call him a bad person. Just like I'm then entitled to call you a hypocritical whack job. 

The NFL was quicker to come out against Butker than they were against Ray Rice caving in his wife's face and dragging her unconscious body around a hotel like a leopard with a dead gazelle. Spare me the NFL's opinion on anything. 

You seem to really, really need an enemy. Leftist harpies? There’s some pretty serious stretching here but that is impressive. 

Ray Rice was suspended and effectively lost his career after it all was said and done. I would be very surprised if anything remotely like that happens here so why act like there is any equivalence?

I know there is a sector of society that really wants to be persecuted and have the world realize it is them that is right and fighting the lost cause for the last vestiges of humanity, but the rest of us are not only not buying it but absolutely reflecting those people from speaking for us and holding power. Of course this guy will appeal to that sector, he can capitalize on that as he sees fit but forgive me if I don’t see him as a martyr. 

Conservatives don’t have a monopoly on patriotism, liberals don’t have a monopoly on compassion and religious people damn sure don’t have a monopoly on morality. Those that act like they do will continually miss the plot. 

Edited by Refugee
  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

Lol

No, that's not why. 

This might surprise you, but there are a LOT of religious themed speeches every day. Almost none of which receive this backlash. It's not because he's famous, either (because he's not). It's the content.

You're smarter than this. 

It's because he dared to say what a lot of those religious speeches have avoided. The media is fine with Christianity so long as Christianity is permissive and docile. They have a problem when Christianity asserts itself. 

This was literally in the speech.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It's because he dared to say what a lot of those religious speeches have avoided. The media is fine with Christianity so long as Christianity is permissive and docile. They have a problem when Christianity asserts itself. 

This was literally in the speech.

Oh so this was like a planned brotest or something? I imagine this is getting a lot of traffic in the alt-right. There's a crossover there I bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It's because he dared to say what a lot of those religious speeches have avoided. The media is fine with Christianity so long as Christianity is permissive and docile. They have a problem when Christianity asserts itself. 

This was literally in the speech.

Christianity asserting itself. That's interesting. Do you support the separation of church & state? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Leader said:

Christianity asserting itself. That's interesting. Do you support the separation of church & state? 

I support the government not founding a religion. 

If the people's morality is informed and guided by a religion, and the people put laws into place that reflect that morality, that's not just democracy, it's inevitability. 

Who gives you the right to deny self governance to the people?

+++

I also whole heatedly reject the notion that Liberals have any principles regarding the separation of Church and State. If they did, they might have the guts to say something about any number of Muslim municipalities popping up in the country. 

Objections to the separation of Church and State seem to die pretty quick when it's the moon and stars (or God forbid the Star of David)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...