Before Brittney: Emily Nkosi talks about Griner and life since leaving Baylor after coming out

[easttexastrash]

Let me ask you this- is every person that believes that gays/lesbians all should have absolutely all the same rights, etc. as any other person, human being, but is against changing the definition of marriage, as described in the bible, does that make every person that doesn't want to change the definition of that word a racist, anti-gay, and generally a bad person?

"ALL the same rights, etc. as any other person, human being"...just not the right to marry? You can't say that they believe that gays/lesbians should have absolutely ALL the same rights...and then leave out the right to marriage. Maybe a better word would have been "most" of the same rights"?

It is so odd how people pick and choose the parts of the bible that they choose to support while ignoring othe parts. But if it opresses the minority, who cares, I guess?

 

[sarals24]

Plus, the definition of marriage changes all the time. Women used to be considered property (and in some countries, still are). There used to be arranged marriages. People couldn't marry outside their class, race or religion. So the "definition of marriage" is a fluid thing, and those who hold on to that as proof that two people who love each other and happen to be the same sex shouldn't be allowed to be married are delusional. Just my two cents.

 

[Geno-ista]

"ALL the same rights, etc. as any other person, human being"...just not the right to marry? You can't say that they believe that gays/lesbians should have absolutely ALL the same rights...and then leave out the right to marriage. Maybe a better word would have been "most" of the same rights"?

It is so odd how people pick and choose the parts of the bible that they choose to support while ignoring othe parts. But if it opresses the minority, who cares, I guess?

I appreciate this response- and as a real traditionalist- I will do some soul searching! I may be a bit mis guided- but I love you! Go Huskies!!!

 

[Geno-ista]

Plus, the definition of marriage changes all the time. Women used to be considered property (and in some countries, still are). There used to be arranged marriages. People couldn't marry outside their class, race or religion. So the "definition of marriage" is a fluid thing, and those who hold on to that as proof that two people who love each other and happen to be the same sex shouldn't be allowed to be married are delusional. Just my two cents.

My rsvp to easttexas trash is ditto fo you!!! Go Huskies!!!

 

[easttexastrash]

I appreciate this response- and as a real traditionalist- I will do some soul searching! I may be a bit mis guided- but I love you! Go Huskies!!!

I appreciate that.

Twenty-seven years ago I met my most beloved friend, Mari, on the Baylor campus. She actually "came out" while a Baylor student, as out as you could be as a Baylor student at that time, so this debate strikes very close to home.

Five years ago Mari and her partner were "married" in a ceremony in Ft. Worth. Only Mari's parents attended the ceremony out of all of her family. I stood up for her, and was honored to fill that roll, traditionally filled by a family member.

Two months ago I lost my soul mate and best friend to a long battle with ovarian cancer. I attended Mari's funeral in the same church where she got married and sat next to her family and partner. Mari's mother, having watched the way that Mari's partner and the gay community had cared for her asked to have a letter read by the preacher. In this letter, Mari's mother said that before Mari came out that she thought that some gay people were "ok" but after seeing how her friends surrounded her with love that she was convinced that they were not just ok, but "better."

I am not claiming to be better or claiming that the gay community is better, but we are certainly not lesser and we do not deserve to be treated as such.

 

[DaddyChoc]

recruits and parents aren't suprised about gay players... they see it every day on the AAU circuit so playing with them as young adults in college shouldnt be a big deal.

 

[easttexastrash]

recruits and parents are suprised about gay players... they see it every day on the AAU circuit so playing with them as young adults in college shouldnt be a big deal.

Precisely.

 

[Kibitzer]

I note that liberals have successfully put through "Don't ask, Don't tell" in the military. My son is on this fifth tour to the sandbox and I can tell you that despite what the media protrays, the troops are overwelmingly against it.

I know something about the military and I will limit my comments to that portion of your post. Others here have quite adequately dealt with your comments about some "gay agenda" that exists more in your narrow mind than in the world of reality.

First of all, you should catch up. The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy has come and gone. As for the troops? The Commandant of the US Marine Corps, hardly a bastion of liberalism, was originally against the new (now current) policy of allowing openly gay Marines to serve. Then he did what leaders do -- he surveyed the Corps and determined that Marines didn't give a rat's patootie if a brother or sister Marine was straight or gay, so long as they were good Marines. So he fully endorses standing policy in our great nation's armed forces, which is to be straightforward about your sexual orientation and serve with dedication and courage. Period.

 

[pppggg]

I know something about the military and I will limit my comments to that portion of your post. Others here have quite adequately dealt with your comments about some "gay agenda" that exists more in your narrow mind than in the world of reality.

First of all, you should catch up. The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy has come and gone. As for the troops? The Commandant of the US Marine Corps, hardly a bastion of liberalism, was originally against the new (now current) policy of allowing openly gay Marines to serve. Then he did what leaders do -- he surveyed the Corps and determined that Marines didn't give a rat's patootie if a brother or sister Marine was straight or gay, so long as they were good Marines. So he fully endorses standing policy in our great nation's armed forces, which is to be straightforward about your sexual orientation and serve with dedication and courage. Period.

Apparently you can't read because I clearly said don't ask dont tell was enected and the troops are against it.

and appartently you know zero about the military be cause the comander of the marines is appointment and he serves at the pleasure of the president. He will not publically buck the president/congress and lose his job.

When left to the people, the country clearly REJECTS the gay agenda- things like gay marrige, gay scout masters and repealing don't ask, don't tell. the only time stuff like that gets enacted is when elected officals want to suck up to a segment of the country. Based on the people rejecting that agenda eveytime they get to vote on it, you can't call me a liar.

Even if you don't like it, people have a right to reject the gay agenda. They can choose where they play or who they associate with.

Mulkey did Griener and Baylor a disservice. MULKEY WAS AND MOST LIKELY STILL IS INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST ABOUT GRIENER. She is aso a phoney by not allowing Griener to be herself and she did it for her the program. You apparently don't have a problem with that. Why not? Why didn't she tell parents of recruits that Bayor is an "open" team. By not doing that, didn't she discriminate against BG?

By the way, some coaches use the fact that some team are "open" as a recruiting tool.

I am not anti gay. my brother died of AIDS. I am just stating facts. If you or anybody eles don't like the facts, that's your problem. When you get out of the Peoples Rebuplic of New Engand and Commie-fornia, the country say an entirely different set of values.

 

[Kibitzer]

First of all, I can read. And what I have read (try Marine Corps Times) are the facts. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was repealed in 2011 and replaced by the existing policy that members of the LBGT population may be open about their sexual orientation and serve honorably in our nation's Armed Forces. You will be astonished to learn, for example, that on November 10, when the Marines celebrate their birthday, there will be some gay Marines bringing dates (their partners) to some of the balls.

General Amos (USMC Commandant) was initially publicly resistant to the new policy (replacing DADT). He then determined that his Marines were not concerned about the sexual orientation of other Marines. To suggest that he (and the USMC Command Sergeant Major) is merely sucking up to President Obama is to challenge his honor and integrity. I happen to have more faith in the Marine Corps Commandant than you do.

Your comments about my association with some People's Republic of New England and Commie-fornia are so crude and contemptible that a dignified response is impossible. Clearly you don't know me at all and perhaps it's just as well.

 

[SFJeff]

To pppggg. You said:

"The popular narative in the media is that the counrty is overwelmingly in favar of things like gay marrige. Nothing could be further from the truth. Dispite the polls showing that people agree with gay marrrige, everytime it has been vored on by the citizens, the initative has gone down 30 times. The only places it has been enacted is when the legistators, most likely against the will of the people, voted it in as law in, I think, 17 states. Clearly dispite the narative, there is a problem."

Perhaps you missed last November's election results. The voters of Maine, Maryland, and Washington state approved gay marriage initiatives, thereby legalizing same sex marriage.

 

[pppggg]

To pppggg. You said:

"The popular narative in the media is that the counrty is overwelmingly in favar of things like gay marrige. Nothing could be further from the truth. Dispite the polls showing that people agree with gay marrrige, everytime it has been vored on by the citizens, the initative has gone down 30 times. The only places it has been enacted is when the legistators, most likely against the will of the people, voted it in as law in, I think, 17 states. Clearly dispite the narative, there is a problem."

Perhaps you missed last November's election results. The voters of Maine, Maryland, and Washington state approved gay marriage initiatives, thereby legalizing same sex marriage.

I did miss it. OK. the vote is 30-3. The majority of the country is still not in favor of it.

 

[speedoo]

I did miss it. OK. the vote is 30-3. The majority of the country is still not in favor of it.

Wrong, again. Currently, nine states, plus the District of Columbia, allow same sex marriage.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Apparently you can't read because I clearly said don't ask dont tell was enected and the troops are against it.

and appartently you know zero about the military be cause the comander of the marines is appointment and he serves at the pleasure of the president. He will not publically buck the president/congress and lose his job.

When left to the people, the country clearly REJECTS the gay agenda- things like gay marrige, gay scout masters and repealing don't ask, don't tell. the only time stuff like that gets enacted is when elected officals want to suck up to a segment of the country. Based on the people rejecting that agenda eveytime they get to vote on it, you can't call me a liar.

Even if you don't like it, people have a right to reject the gay agenda. They can choose where they play or who they associate with.

Mulkey did Griener and Baylor a disservice. MULKEY WAS AND MOST LIKELY STILL IS INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST ABOUT GRIENER. She is aso a phoney by not allowing Griener to be herself and she did it for her the program. You apparently don't have a problem with that. Why not? Why didn't she tell parents of recruits that Bayor is an "open" team. By not doing that, didn't she discriminate against BG?

By the way, some coaches use the fact that some team are "open" as a recruiting tool.

I am not anti gay. my brother died of AIDS. I am just stating facts. If you or anybody eles don't like the facts, that's your problem. When you get out of the Peoples Rebuplic of New Engand and Commie-fornia, the country say an entirely different set of values.

its "Griner"

 

[DaddyChoc]

Apparently you can't read because I clearly said don't ask dont tell was enected and the troops are against it.

and appartently you know zero about the military be cause the comander of the marines is appointment and he serves at the pleasure of the president. He will not publically buck the president/congress and lose his job.

When left to the people, the country clearly REJECTS the gay agenda- things like gay marrige, gay scout masters and repealing don't ask, don't tell. the only time stuff like that gets enacted is when elected officals want to suck up to a segment of the country. Based on the people rejecting that agenda eveytime they get to vote on it, you can't call me a liar.

Even if you don't like it, people have a right to reject the gay agenda. They can choose where they play or who they associate with.

Mulkey did Griener and Baylor a disservice. MULKEY WAS AND MOST LIKELY STILL IS INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST ABOUT GRIENER. She is aso a phoney by not allowing Griener to be herself and she did it for her the program. You apparently don't have a problem with that. Why not? Why didn't she tell parents of recruits that Bayor is an "open" team. By not doing that, didn't she discriminate against BG?

By the way, some coaches use the fact that some team are "open" as a recruiting tool.

I am not anti gay. my brother died of AIDS. I am just stating facts. If you or anybody eles don't like the facts, that's your problem. When you get out of the Peoples Rebuplic of New Engand and Commie-fornia, the country say an entirely different set of values.

did he get it from his gay lover or dirty needles? was he in the military?

 

[pppggg]

LOL...

Here is my gay "Agenda"

• Treat people with respect
• Have others treat me with respect
• Be a good son, brother, partner and friend
• Be a good owner to my pets (Nitro and Sadie)
• Make an honest living
• Be a good American

Should I go on? My "agenda" is no different than that of anyone else. The use of the phrase "Gay Agenda" is insulting, as if my goal in life is to turn everyone gay. What rubbish!!!

Now, I will say something that I have never said here, but maybe a good time to lock this thread...

The gay agenda is a secular agenda. The gay agenda is things gay marriage, gay adaption, gay scout masters and gay boy scouts. I have no problem with marriage or adaption. As for as the scout thing goes, I am against it based on the fact that the scouts are a private organization and can admit who they want to.
Gays keep trying to jam their agenda down the throat of people who disagree with them and always engage in personal attacks when they do it. If you don’t agree with them, you are for example, homophobic.
Aren’t people who engage in personal attacks on straight people prejudice? Aren’t they heterophobic? Or are only straight people bigots?
Why are parents who don’t want their children around gays while on a camping trip or in a locker room not entitled to that view? Don’t they are a right to protect their children? Isn’t it all about protecting the children or do gays getting an exception when it comes to potentially putting children in a harm’s way?
And speaking of that, why do straight people have to be tolerant of gay views but gays don’t have to be tolerant of their views? I keep asking that question but I never get an answer.
I have asked a few simple questions and I look forward to you responding to them especially the last one.

 

[easttexastrash]

Pppggg, everyone has a right to their views, just not the right to discriminate. I am sure that the exact same arguments that you are using were used when African-Americans were fighting for their CIVIL RIGHTS battle. And this is a civil rights issue.

We obviously have to agree to disagree. Neither of us will understand the position of the other.

 

[easttexastrash]

Perhaps an equivalent to "Texas Western" and Bobby Joe Hill will have to unfold in WCBB. This would require a lesbian head coach and 5 out-of-closet starters. The opponent would need to be a "family values" team like Iowa State. And, of course the outcome would need to be as it was in that quintessential game in 1966.

On a more serious note, it might help if we were to be a bit more specific and precise in naming WHAT we are talking about. Human sexuality and gender characteristics are each matters of knowledge-based science, as well as social constructs informed by beliefs, mores, taboos and all sorts of other baggage.

Individual human beings who are female all have some degree of male characteristics as a matter of their genes. Likewise male individuals all have some genetic makeup consistent with female structure. Infinite variation exists between and among individual human beings concerning each and every human being's gender characteristics.

So far as I know, it is not yet known whether there is any such thing as a "gay" gene or whether there is a brain related mechanism or structure of some kind that determines sexual orientation. I gather research is being done on such matters. Perhaps posters can address this "WHAT?" aspect in subsequent posts. Doing so might help keep the discussion more focused and less emotionally wrenching.

Adding a bit of irony here, one of the co-authors of a recent study attributing homosexuality to epi-genetics is from UT-Knoxville :-0

http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_homosexuality

Great read! Thanks for posting.

 

[LesMis89]

I appreciate that.

Twenty-seven years ago I met my most beloved friend, Mari, on the Baylor campus. She actually "came out" while a Baylor student, as out as you could be as a Baylor student at that time, so this debate strikes very close to home.

Five years ago Mari and her partner were "married" in a ceremony in Ft. Worth. Only Mari's parents attended the ceremony out of all of her family. I stood up for her, and was honored to fill that roll, traditionally filled by a family member.

Two months ago I lost my soul mate and best friend to a long battle with ovarian cancer. I attended Mari's funeral in the same church where she got married and sat next to her family and partner. Mari's mother, having watched the way that Mari's partner and the gay community had cared for her asked to have a letter read by the preacher. In this letter, Mari's mother said that before Mari came out that she thought that some gay people were "ok" but after seeing how her friends surrounded her with love that she was convinced that they were not just ok, but "better."

I am not claiming to be better or claiming that the gay community is better, but we are certainly not lesser and we do not deserve to be treated as such.

I am so very sorry for your loss, ETT.

 

[caravaggio]

Here's my bottom line: just because you preface an opinion with "bottom line" does not it make any more true or accurate.

The popular narative in the media is that the counrty is overwelmingly in favar of things like gay marrige. Nothing could be further from the truth. Dispite the polls showing that people agree with gay marrrige, everytime it has been vored on by the citizens, the initative has gone down 30 times. The only places it has been enacted is when the legistators, most likely against the will of the people, voted it in as law in, I think, 17 states. Clearly dispite the narative, there is a problem.

The RI senate will be voting shortly on gay marriage. Polls show the people are heavely in favor of it. If that's the case, why not let the people vote on the subject and remove the controversy of the vote.? The answer , of course is that the Democrats lead by an openly gay Speaker of the House and an openly gay Senate President (talk abiut conflict of interest) know exactly what will happen if the people vote.

I note that liberals have successfully put through "Don't ask, Don't tell" in the military. My son is on this fifth tour to the sandbox and I can tell you that despite what the media protrays, the troops are overwelmingly against it. Yet, I note that nobody at least on the boneyard has a problem with Mulkey's policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Just why is that? Could it be that having openly gay players on the team would affect her recuriting?

Brittney seams relieved at the draft when she said she had "freedom". Nobody seams bothered by what she had to endure for 4 years, covering up her felling.

Bottom line Mulkey and Baylor were dishonst and IMO it effected Brittney and it will affect the program in the future.

Bottom line everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the subject and some parents/kids for what ever reason choose not to be exposed to the problem. That's there right, isn't?

Bottom line based on 30 states rejecting gay marrige, there is a problem with America's acceptance of the Gay agenda. Like it or not, you can't deny it exsists.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Here's my bottom line: just because you preface an opinion with "bottom line" does not it make any more true or accurate.

Unless you're talking about saggy buttocks and how low they hang to. Which reminds of a song about Continental soldiers.

The world is changing very rapidly in ways that some people will see as bad and some as good, and there will be a lot of changes that will just need time to be accepted. As ETT noted, the civil rights era changes of the mid-1900s are relevant here, and they did not get accepted overnight or without a lot of kicking and screaming and sometimes violence. Just as a UConn number that is now 8 and ready to go higher is still not accepted as really a fact in certain parts of the country, there is a more general number incredibly now at 9 that is on the way to much higher numbers as we old memory-addled curmudgeons die off and the young and America's new and more aptly named moral majority reshape their world. Some people will not accept that world and will pull out "research" and "bottom lines" from a past long gone that includes no state that authorized gay marriage, maybe only 5 to 10 years gone, but still long gone. The soldiers of the new era who are working to reshape the continent are smart enough not to get waylaid by citations of decrepit old truisms and to understand that progress requires marshaling the good intentions of millions while understanding that old hatreds die hard.

Yes, pppggg, there is an agenda, and it simply built around a new found belief by the great majority of Americans that equality in basic human rights needs to be applied to all, that it is not held hostage by those of us who claim to have some higher moral vision that comes from some document other than the Bill of Rights and Constitution. You can rant and rail and shake your fist against the incoming tide, but your feet are still getting wet. And maybe in the long run the pace of the changes won't feel so bad and the water refreshing. Between Nkosi and Griner, Baylor got accustomed to the pace, and though there are some wrinkles to iron out, the Bears' community seems to be okay with how things fit.

 

[LesMis89]

Apparently you can't read because I clearly said don't ask dont tell was enected and the troops are against it.

and appartently you know zero about the military be cause the comander of the marines is appointment and he serves at the pleasure of the president. He will not publically buck the president/congress and lose his job.

When left to the people, the country clearly REJECTS the gay agenda- things like gay marrige, gay scout masters and repealing don't ask, don't tell. the only time stuff like that gets enacted is when elected officals want to suck up to a segment of the country. Based on the people rejecting that agenda eveytime they get to vote on it, you can't call me a liar.

Even if you don't like it, people have a right to reject the gay agenda. They can choose where they play or who they associate with.

Mulkey did Griener and Baylor a disservice. MULKEY WAS AND MOST LIKELY STILL IS INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST ABOUT GRIENER. She is aso a phoney by not allowing Griener to be herself and she did it for her the program. You apparently don't have a problem with that. Why not? Why didn't she tell parents of recruits that Bayor is an "open" team. By not doing that, didn't she discriminate against BG?

By the way, some coaches use the fact that some team are "open" as a recruiting tool.

I am not anti gay. my brother died of AIDS. I am just stating facts. If you or anybody eles don't like the facts, that's your problem. When you get out of the Peoples Rebuplic of New Engand and Commie-fornia, the country say an entirely different set of values.

Try very, very hard not to show your ignorance.

Kibitzer is too modest to give his own creds but I'm more than happy to do it for him. If you had either been around long enough/cared enough to read our annual Veteran's Day Roll Call thread, you'd already know that Kibitzer is a 20-year veteran of the United States Army, most of it in the Special Forces. He knows plenty about the military - first hand.

And your argument about the rank-and-file military not supporting serving next to openly gay personnel actually isn't important. That specious argument has been used throughout history against various groups to try and say that it destroys military discipline, among other things. Each time history has proven that wrong.

We'll just start with the American Civil War:
- Irish (drunken, lazy, Catholic). Had to fight in their own regiments, etc.
- African-Americans (won't fight like a white man will, not bright enough to understand military orders)

Let's jump to just when Harry Truman integrated the military in 1948:
- African-Americans (choose your favorite bigoted, racist argument and insert here)

Now let's head to 1976 when the first females entered the United States Military Academy at West Point.
- Men won't take orders from females
- Women will get loony once a month. Ya can't trust 'em...
- Women can't physically stand up to the rigors of the military (This coming from a segment of the population that is incapable of giving birth so has ZERO idea what that physically entails.)

Welp, now it's 2013 and the argument is about gays openly serving. Same old argument, new name. Already been disproven. The reality is that when people actually get to know those they fear/dislike, they end up dealing with them as individuals. They end up liking some, not liking others, etc., just the way you do with anyone else. Because they are people.

 

[alexrgct]

The gay agenda is a secular agenda. The gay agenda is things gay marriage, gay adaption, gay scout masters and gay boy scouts. I have no problem with marriage or adaption. As for as the scout thing goes, I am against it based on the fact that the scouts are a private organization and can admit who they want to.
Gays keep trying to jam their agenda down the throat of people who disagree with them and always engage in personal attacks when they do it. If you don’t agree with them, you are for example, homophobic.
Aren’t people who engage in personal attacks on straight people prejudice? Aren’t they heterophobic? Or are only straight people bigots?
Why are parents who don’t want their children around gays while on a camping trip or in a locker room not entitled to that view? Don’t they are a right to protect their children? Isn’t it all about protecting the children or do gays getting an exception when it comes to potentially putting children in a harm’s way?
And speaking of that, why do straight people have to be tolerant of gay views but gays don’t have to be tolerant of their views? I keep asking that question but I never get an answer.
I have asked a few simple questions and I look forward to you responding to them especially the last one.

Homophobia literally means "fear of homosexuals/homosexuality". If you "don't want your children around gays", what is that desire based on but fear? If you don't want gay people to be able to adopt children who need a loving home, what argument is there that isn't fear based? What argument in favor of excluding openly gay people from serving in the military is based on anything but fear?

Homophobia also refers to discrimination. Marriage is a legal institution in this country with legal entitlements associated with it. The 14th Amendment of our Constitution states that all US citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law. Not providing for equal protection under the law is discriminatory.

And BTW, how is discriminating based on faith-based arguments anything but jamming an agenda down everyone's collective throats?

Legislative bodies have an obligation to pass legislation that provides appropriate legal protection to its constituents. There isn't anything to put to a vote. The results of a hypothetical statewide referendum are irrelevant. Moreover, homophobic ballot initiatives being put on ballots as wedge issues and being driven by outside money is not democracy.

I'm sorry you apparently believe the only people who value equality are communists. Oddly enough, our country has managed to balance having a market economy AND a progressively more inclusive society over the past 235+ years. Shocking, huh?

The rest of your posts are too ridiculous to respond to. However, I suggest you refer to the rape statistics. If you did, you might come to the conclusion that people should be more concerned about avoiding heterosexuals. And yes, that conclusion would be as mind-boggingly silly as some of the ones you've drawn.

Oh, one more thing: personal attacks, whether they're right or wrong in a specific context, are not "prejudice". Assuming that gay people collectively have an agenda? Pretty prejudiced...

 

[easttexastrash]

Anyone who hasn't already should watch the movie "Philadelphia."

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

Some superb posts in this thread...lots of likes.