Young woman booted from team for being straight

[Beau_Ouiville]

Strawman much?

Check out the thread as to Eric Holder. That’s no strawman – its right there. The criticisms allege that any objection to the president’s programs will be considered racist. Where do folks get that?

But, of course, a young girl’s objections as to a competitive situation are considered valid right out of the box!

 

[goofyjim]

This is nonsense. Or goofy if you prefer. While I don’t know of any homosexual players that were turned away. The fact that homosexuality is an abberant behavior, as I hope you view murder. Anyone who avoids it is choosing good. The same as anyone who avoids murder is choosing good. Whether one sin is worse than another is not my place to judge.
Identifying with homosexuality? This sounds like some sort of identity crisis. As I said previous. Every human being is capable of every behavior.
Were not all murderers, homosexuals or what have you. We are all sinners. What we strive for --unless we are lost-- is to choose good. How about we use thief as opposed to murderer. Perhaps that will help you. Someone who is not stealing is choosing good. Just like someone who chooses not to engage in homosexual behavior is likewise choosing good. Does that help?

All of which has nothing to do with one’s qualifications for a basketball team. Or do we only pick members that do our construct of “good”. Some are not convinced that homosexual behavior is as bad as we believe it is. They don’t believe a human relationship is breaking morality whereas they do agree murder or stealing is wrong. You have to give them equal access to be on a team. It is not fair to create an environment where we can do the opposite of what was done here by saying no to homosexual teammates yet cry discrimination based on being straight.

I use the example again of two companies. One is owned by a heterosexual and the other owned by homosexual. We are not at liberty to require the homosexually owned company to be forced to hire heterosexuals unless we require the heterosexually owned company to give the homosexual an equal opportunity. If the heterosexually owned company can hire exclusively heterosexuals then the homosexually owned company must be fre to hire homosexual only if they choose. It’s either discrimination in both directions or discrimination in neither.

 

[Aramis]

Teen4Christ - you immediately illegitimize yourself when you use the abuse scandel in an argument…its like calling someone a Nazi on a usegroup - what’s that law called again?

Godwins’ Law: First one to bring up Nazism loses.

 

[Mickey_Finn]

All of which has nothing to do with one’s qualifications for a basketball team. Or do we only pick members that do our construct of “good”. Some are not convinced that homosexual behavior is as bad as we believe it is. They don’t believe a human relationship is breaking morality whereas they do agree murder or stealing is wrong. You have to give them equal access to be on a team. It is not fair to create an environment where we can do the opposite of what was done here by saying no to homosexual teammates yet cry discrimination based on being straight.

I use the example again of two companies. One is owned by a heterosexual and the other owned by homosexual. We are not at liberty to require the homosexually owned company to be forced to hire heterosexuals unless we require the heterosexually owned company to give the homosexual an equal opportunity. If the heterosexually owned company can hire exclusively heterosexuals then the homosexually owned company must be fre to hire homosexual only if they choose. It’s either discrimination in both directions or discrimination in neither.

Your killing me. The story was about a player alleging that she was ousted and lost her scholarship for being straight. Your point seems to be turn about his fair play. Or that straight people have it coming? Driving away people who exhibit abberant behavior is a societal phenominum thats predates christianity. Driving them away because they don’t? Well thats something new.

 

[goofyjim]

Your killing me. The story was about a player alleging that she was ousted and lost her scholarship for being straight. Your point seems to be turn about his fair play. Or that straight people have it coming? Driving away people who exhibit abberant behavior is a societal phenominum thats predates christianity. Driving them away because they don’t? Well thats something new.

I’ve suggested nothing you accuse me of. I ams imply saying that if the coach wants an all gay team she is entitled to have it that way, just like any other coach is entitled to have an all straight team.

 

[Soutane]

I’ve suggested nothing you accuse me of. I ams imply saying that if the coach wants an all gay team she is entitled to have it that way, just like any other coach is entitled to have an all straight team.

Huh???You ARE kidding right?

 

[goofyjim]

Huh???You ARE kidding right?

I am not kidding. We cannot apply rules to one case and not another. I take the hands off approach in allowing anyone to pick and choose who they want on their team just as in business decisions I let anyone determine who they want to hire and not hire. I don’t believe in anti discrimination laws protecting any groups of people. If I owned a company or a team I should have the final say in who gets to join.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

I think choosing players based on sexual orientation is at least unfair but it is also illogical and ineffective.

And in this state, it is illegal.

 

[Soutane]

I am not kidding. We cannot apply rules to one case and not another. I take the hands off approach in allowing anyone to pick and choose who they want on their team just as in business decisions I let anyone determine who they want to hire and not hire. I don’t believe in anti discrimination laws protecting any groups of people. If I owned a company or a team I should have the final say in who gets to join.

But it’s not the COACH’S team-It belongs to the students whose tuition FUNDS it.The coach OWNS nothing.

 

[Cluny]

**
Central Michigan University is being sued after one of their women’s basketball players said she was kicked off the team due to her heterosexuality.**

This is why laws banning discrimination based on sexual orientation are needed.

If they protect gays against such, they would protect heterosexuals as well.

 

[goofyjim]

**
Central Michigan University is being sued after one of their women’s basketball players said she was kicked off the team due to her heterosexuality.**

This is why laws banning discrimination based on sexual orientation are needed.

If they protect gays against such, they would protect heterosexuals as well.

I agree to the point that either both must be protected or neither should be protected. But protecting either over the other would be unfair. Yet we don’t need laws banning discrimination. We just need to jar the consciences of the coaches to make their decision solely on ability to play and overlook any sexual preference. Much like the wall street executives don’t need laws restricting their pay but need to be told they are a quite greedy in rough economic times.