It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Dear Emmett C. Burns Jr.,
I find it inconceivable that you are an elected official of Maryland's state government. Your vitriolic hatred and bigotry make me ashamed and disgusted to think that you are in any way responsible for shaping policy at any level. The views you espouse neglect to consider several fundamental key points, which I will outline in great detail (you may want to hire an intern to help you with the longer words):
1. As I suspect you have not read the Constitution, I would like to remind you that the very first, the VERY FIRST Amendment in this founding document deals with the freedom of speech, particularly the abridgment of said freedom. By using your position as an elected official (when referring to your constituents so as to implicitly threaten the Ravens organization) to state that the Ravens should "inhibit such expressions from your employees," more specifically Brendon Ayanbadejo, not only are you clearly violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a narcissistic fromunda stain. What on earth would possess you to be so mind-boggingly stupid? It baffles me that a man such as yourself, a man who relies on that same First Amendment to pursue your own religious studies without fear of persecution from the state, could somehow justify stifling another person's right to speech. To call that hypocritical would be to do a disservice to the word. Mind#ing obscenely hypocritical starts to approach it a little bit.
2. "Many of your fans are opposed to such a view and feel it has no place in a sport that is strictly for pride, entertainment, and excitement." Holy #ing #balls. Did you seriously just say that, as someone who's "deeply involved in government task forces on the legacy of slavery in Maryland"? Have you not heard of Kenny Washington? Jackie Robinson? As recently as 1962 the NFL still had segregation, which was only done away with by brave athletes and coaches daring to speak their mind and do the right thing, and you're going to say that political views have "no place in a sport"? I can't even begin to fathom the cognitive dissonance that must be coursing through your rapidly addled mind right now; the mental gymnastics your brain has to tortuously contort itself through to make such a preposterous statement are surely worthy of an Olympic gold medal (the Russian judge gives you a 10 for "beautiful oppressionism").
3. This is more a personal quibble of mine, but why do you hate freedom? Why do you hate the fact that other people want a chance to live their lives and be happy, even though they may believe in something different than you, or act different than you? How does gay marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? If gay marriage becomes legal, are you worried that all of a sudden you'll start thinking about penis? "Oh #. Gay marriage just passed. Gotta get me some of that hot dong action!" Will all of your friends suddenly turn gay and refuse to come to your Sunday Ticket grill-outs? (Unlikely, since gay people enjoy watching football too.)
I can assure you that gay people getting married will have zero effect on your life. They won't come into your house and steal your children. They won't magically turn you into a lustful cockmonster. They won't even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90 percent of our population—rights like Social Security benefits, child care tax credits, Family and Medical Leave to take care of loved ones, and COBRA healthcare for spouses and children. You know what having these rights will make gays? Full-fledged American citizens just like everyone else, with the freedom to pursue happiness and all that entails. Do the civil-rights struggles of the past 200 years mean absolutely nothing to you?
In closing, I would like to say that I hope this letter, in some small way, causes you to reflect upon the magnitude of the colossal foot in mouth cluster# you so brazenly unleashed on a man whose only crime was speaking out for something he believed in. Best of luck in the next election; I'm fairly certain you might need it.
Sincerely,
Chris Kluwe
P.S. I've also been vocal as hell about the issue of gay marriage so you can take your "I know of no other NFL player who has done what Mr. Ayanbadejo is doing" and shove it in your close-minded, totally lacking in empathy piehole and choke on it. Asshole.
Because it's true. Legalizing same-sex marriage will have NO ill-effects on those who do not choose to partake and marry someone of the same sex. Heterosexual marriage has had NO ill-effects on my life personally, so why should same-sex marriage be any different?
I can assure you that gay people getting married will have zero effect on your life. They won't come into your house and steal your children. They won't magically turn you into a lustful cockmonster. They won't even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90 percent of our population...
I'm not taking a position one way or another on anything, but doesn't Burns have the same right? Players have been fired, not just silenced over comments they've made to the press. For a while, it seemed like Tim Tebow was being told daily to lay off the prayer business. If Ayanbadejo was told to "shut up," he certainly wouldn't have been the only one.
In response, Ayanbadejo took to Twitter, tweeting, ''Football is just my job it's not who I am. I am an American before anything. And just like every American I have the right to speak!!!''
Originally posted by charles1952
Burns wrote his letter to Ayanbadejo's boss asking him to keep his player from the controversial statements,I'm not taking a position one way or another on anything, but doesn't Burns have the same right? Players have been fired, not just silenced over comments they've made to the press. For a while, it seemed like Tim Tebow was being told daily to lay off the prayer business. If Ayanbadejo was told to "shut up," he certainly wouldn't have been the only one.
In response, Ayanbadejo took to Twitter, tweeting, ''Football is just my job it's not who I am. I am an American before anything. And just like every American I have the right to speak!!!''
As an aside, Burns is a black, Democrat politician. I recall that the Mayors of Boston and Chicago, both Democrats, wanted to hinder Chick-fil-A's business and punish then for their speech.
I'm truly (and I know you won't believe it) not trying to be partisan, but do the Democrats play a little harder hardball?
Anyway, as I say, I don't have a position on the issue, the story just sparked some thoughts.
I'm truly (and I know you won't believe it) not trying to be partisan, but do the Democrats play a little harder hardball?
Because it's true. Legalizing same-sex marriage will have NO ill-effects on those who do not choose to partake and marry someone of the same sex.
Originally posted by WhoKnows100
Because it's true. Legalizing same-sex marriage will have NO ill-effects on those who do not choose to partake and marry someone of the same sex.
You speak these words from a stance of ignorance of the words of God. It's a sign that judgement is already being made, and that wrath will be poured out upon our nations. It will not only have "ill effects" upon the partakers of such unions, but if will bring severe penalties to those that condone it and tolerate it. Wrath is promised, and He will fulfill it. Our Lord and God is patient that all can be saved, however, the end to that patience is upon us.
Originally posted by WhoKnows100
Because it's true. Legalizing same-sex marriage will have NO ill-effects on those who do not choose to partake and marry someone of the same sex.
You speak these words from a stance of ignorance of the words of God. It's a sign that judgement is already being made, and that wrath will be poured out upon our nations. It will not only have "ill effects" upon the partakers of such unions, but if will bring severe penalties to those that condone it and tolerate it. Wrath is promised, and He will fulfill it. Our Lord and God is patient that all can be saved, however, the end to that patience is upon us.
Lib Radio Host Bill Press Tells Tebow: ‘S-T-F-U’ (Shut the F**k Up) About Jesus
As former Denver quarterback Jake Plummer told a reporter, “I wish he’d just shut up after a game and go hug his teammates.”
That’s when I decided that I would side with the critics — Would you just shut up already?!? – and for altogether different reasons.
Many criticize this transformation, insisting that athletes should play ball and keep quiet about anything else. Summing up that belief in the wake of Guillen’s impolitic comments, Politico’s Jonathan Allen declared that athletes should “just shut up” and play.
Perfectly correct, entirely understood. It's really hard to express an opinion that goes against not only the majority, but in those times it probably was closer to 99%.
Interesting question Charles. I think it depends on where on the time-line we choose to look. There was a time when suggesting that gays should have equal rights wasn't even something you could say out loud in mixed company
Now that they have a voice - and a safe place to use it - they've got some stuff to say.
I don't wonder why at all. But after that, we start to separate a little, maybe it's just a misunderstanding. So being polite is useless but some feel that "punishing" those who oppose them is fine.
Being polite isn't going to win them a single thing
And if it appears that people who are civil-rights-minded want to punish the opposition - well, yeah - some probably do. We (of the level heads) who ask why - really should wonder why :-)
I'm convinced that they (including Emmanuel) meant it at the time. And they could have made good on the threats. Then their lawyers got a hold of them, slapped them around for a while and said "If you ever make one single move to keep a Chick-fil-A out of town after what you idiots said on TV, they will sue us for any amount they want, and they will win." At least that's what I would have told my clients. Shortly afterwards, the Mayors went back on TV to say, "Nah, we really didn't mean it."
Besides - the mayor of Boston can't make good on his threats - and he knows it. It was all just trash talk
Absolutely right, every word of it. He got an honest reaction, but it wasn't always a legal reaction. Spray painting buildings and grounds, for one. And I suppose you saw the video of the man who tore into the Chick-fil-A drive-through worker. That was honest, too. NOTE: But I do not believe that that was the standard reaction of the entire gay movement. Every movement has it's extremists. Every movement should condemn those who go outside the bounds
But - not without effect - right? Mr. Cathy did get to have his say - and what he got back in return was an honest reaction
You're right, tons and tons of it. Not as much as the Democrats and Republicans are spending to win their battles, but that is how battles in the US should be fought. Not with "hardball."
Anyway, how much money, time, effort and rhetoric has been poured into preventing the gay community from winning any of their battles?
NOTE: But I do not believe that that was the standard reaction of the entire gay movement. Every movement has it's extremists. Every movement should condemn those who go outside the bounds
So we've finally reached the beginning. There may be a formal definition for hardball, but I've never looked. For me, hardball includes what is commonly known as "dirty tricks." Attacks on family members, blackmailing opponents, (By the way that reminds me of Obama. In his earlier life he managed to obtain the 10 year-old, sealed, divorce records of an opponent and used them to win his primary.), the possible theft of Romney's tax records, the attacks on Palin's kids, losing your opponent's votes on the way to have them counted, threatening your opponent's supporters, using government agencies to scare or silence your opponents. That's the sort of thing I mean.
Evidence that one side does it more than the other? I don't have evidence, I just have an opinion. That's why I put it as a question, because I don't like making statements that I don't have at least some evidence to support.
It is always a joy to read your posts. Don't let me get away with anything. I'm not here to win, I'm here to get my thinking straight.
Originally posted by WhoKnows100
Because it's true. Legalizing same-sex marriage will have NO ill-effects on those who do not choose to partake and marry someone of the same sex.
You speak these words from a stance of ignorance of the words of God. It's a sign that judgement is already being made, and that wrath will be poured out upon our nations. It will not only have "ill effects" upon the partakers of such unions, but if will bring severe penalties to those that condone it and tolerate it. Wrath is promised, and He will fulfill it. Our Lord and God is patient that all can be saved, however, the end to that patience is upon us.
Oh, so you want to fight do you? Ok, here, (briefly, thank goodness) are the areas where I can't seem to get agreement.
Gay marriage supporters are looking for the benefits that government gives to married couples, benefits are determined by laws, which are determined by votes. Citizens voting on the issue have, so far, always said "no," and they have the right to. (And there are fewer than 20 states left to hear from.)
The tactics used, and not condemned, by the movement have alienated and frightened some people. The gays need every vote they can get. I think they're doing it wrong.
Attempting to get those benefits by executive order and judges, instead of by popular approval, will create, I think, resentments, backlash, and a movement to change back to the "old ways."
For various reasons, not always good or natural ones. But I agree with all that. Dagnab it, how am I going to get a fight started this way?
Now that the requests come fast and furious - they still say no, but not as quickly or as unanimously as they used to. In addition to that, they've had to become far more clever in how they say no
What does that tell you? :-)
Times change - attitudes change - laws change.
Agreed again, but I think voting and getting benefits from marriage are different enough to take note of.
Why Charles - did you know that women did not receive the right to vote until 1920 in the United States of America? It wasn't because they didn't ask either :-)
I meant, alienated from the movement, repelled by it, "turned off."
I would argue that people were frightened (if not recoiling in horror) at the idea before it even was a full fledged idea - but alienated? Alienated from who - or what? The good old days?
I think this is where our difference can be found. Nobody is entitled to, or has a right to, by law, a religious marriage ceremony. So let's look at the government sponsored marriages I honestly believe that if there were no benefits written into law for a married couple, then no gays would insist on a "legal" marriage. They'd just say "I love you," and start living together.
The only reason these people don't have their rights now is because another group says they can't. Who are they to say they can't?
Well, of course - this is a democracy (or - whatever) and people get to vote. But - as I said - we change our minds sometimes - we citizens of earth. Thank goodness
You're right, I don't know if there lives will change, and I would bet that they wouldn't. However, I would wager that you and I both have cheered or booed proposals that wouldn't affect us personally. The fresh raw milk off the farm controversy, for example. I've got an opinion, but raw milk will never affect me personally.
Then, one real world question: what will happen to the people who don't want this when their nos aren't enough anymore?
Will their lives change? At all? Really?
You can't call someone ignorant and then in the same breath say that a mythological being is going to punish nations because they treat gays equally in regards to marriage. You have to have an actual reason why gay marriage is bad, not made-up ones.
Originally posted by WhoKnows100
Because it's true. Legalizing same-sex marriage will have NO ill-effects on those who do not choose to partake and marry someone of the same sex.
You speak these words from a stance of ignorance of the words of God. It's a sign that judgement is already being made, and that wrath will be poured out upon our nations. It will not only have "ill effects" upon the partakers of such unions, but if will bring severe penalties to those that condone it and tolerate it. Wrath is promised, and He will fulfill it. Our Lord and God is patient that all can be saved, however, the end to that patience is upon us.
Originally posted by r2d246
Wow what a bad impression the guy is sending to everyone, fellow players, fans, coaches etc. So unprofessional! If he's at odd with someone write them the same kind of letter, keep it short and professional. That way it doesn't reflect so bad on you, your team and might actually get the recipient thinking. All this would do is ruffle feathers while making yourself and your team look very unprofessional.
Gay marriage is bad for society as a whole. They've already done studies on this proving some of the aspects, such as the kids they raise which turn out to be totally messed up adults.
But research on families headed by gays and lesbians doesn't back up these dire assertions. In fact, in some ways, gay parents may bring talents to the table that straight parents don't.
Gay parents "tend to be more motivated, more committed than heterosexual parents on average, because they chose to be parents," said Abbie Goldberg, a psychologist at Clark University in Massachusetts who researches gay and lesbian parenting. Gays and lesbians rarely become parents by accident, compared with an almost 50 percent accidental pregnancy rate among heterosexuals, Goldberg said. "That translates to greater commitment on average and more involvement."
And while research indicates that kids of gay parents show few differences in achievement, mental health, social functioning and other measures, these kids may have the advantage of open-mindedness, tolerance and role models for equitable relationships, according to some research.
Gay marriage is so terrible for society as a whole. And if they get the benefits then it's wasted tax payer resources as well. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate anyone, but it's just my opinion that it's not a good thing for society and the country as a whole.