OT: BG's new legacy, and Baylor (merged thread)

[Icebear]

So you would have no problem with people joining your church and telling you and your church you were wrong in your biblical interpretation (not specifically this issue, but any issue)? I highly doubt that.

I have that every week and always have. Our denomination gives that authority to the local congregation. Since four years ago our congregations are able to call openly gay pastors in committed lifelong relationships to their congregation. Congregations are, also, able to bless relationships as allowed by the local state laws IF the congregation chooses to do so. I have been attacked by name from the pulpit by local conservative pastors and had things said that are not true about our ministry. It has been said I have done gay marriages, I have not, nor will I until the congregation is ready to take that action. Part of the skill of leadership is maintaining pressure towards change and growth but trusting and respecting the body to act. There is no reason to hate those who disagree with us, instead we teach and encourage. October 1st will be 25 years in this parish. The people pretty much know what to expect and I am still here.

 

[meyers7]

Congrats to Griner for being out and proud. Actually, it's something I don't think I've ever read about her before. It's cool that she just slid it into regular conversation like that.

Agreed. No fanfare, no press conference, just being who she is.

Being one that's out, it's just being who you are. Again, like I said, just be who you are. Don't worry about what other people are going to say, because they're always going to say something, but, if you're just true to yourself, let that shine through. Don't hide who you really are."

Well done Ms Griner.​

 

[pinotbear]

I'm not saying she was obliged to say something earlier. But -- leaving Griner aside -- I do get tired of the meme that college kids are too young to act like grown-ups[/quote ]

Although it's been many years since I worked on College campuses, I did so for almost 15 years. As a staff member, what used to frustrate me occassionally, is that college students kinda "pick and choose" when they want to "act like grown-ups". Sometimes, it's in their best interest to be all indignant because they're not being treated as adults, and sometimes it's in their best interest to be a kid.

Not a new nor startling revelation - society has always struggled with age-appropriate rights and responsibilities (voting, driving, smoking, drinking, military service, marriage, consent, etc.). Anybody who has had high-school age daughters know that a 15-17 year old sometimes acts like they're 11, and sometimes acts like they're 21.

I basically agree with maddoggy when he(?) says that college kids aren't too young to act like grown-ups. But, just the phrase "college kids" says a lot. It's their choice, often, as to whether they will or will not behave like a grown-up.

 

[Wbbfan1]

I"ll tread on dangerous ground here, which will probably result in the thread being locked.

Perhaps if people didn't try to force their views and lifestyles on others, the acceptance would happen at a faster pace. Perhaps if some in the LGBT community were more tolerant of the views of the people that don't agree with their lifestyle, then their views would be more accepted. People are reluctant to change when they perceive they are being forced to accept something they don't agree with. Violence, bullying or other forms of destructive criticism should not be tolerated because of a person's lifestyle. However, because a person doesn't agree with a lifestyle and lets others live their lifestyle without any form of objection, then that person is not a bad person. Some in the LGBT community believe a person has to fully endorse their lifestyle and if they don't then that person is a bad or immoral person. Sorry I don't believe that.

I saw no reason for ESPN to address this issue with the 3 to See. Sports fans should only care about how they performed on the court in College and how they will perform in the WNBA.

Someday that will be the case. It is not yet. Every person who stands up in every profession including sports helps others, especially, young people as they struggle with their sexual identity and how they fit into society because while it is changing and it gets better we aren't there yet.

 

[meyers7]

I have that every week and always have.

Like I said, I highly doubt that. I've been in plenty of churches where there has been division in the church. I've never seen it supported.

Part of the skill of leadership is maintaining pressure towards change and growth but trusting and respecting the body to act. There is no reason to hate those who disagree with us, instead we teach and encourage.

You are assuming you are right. My point was people coming in and disagreeing with you and the church and wanting to change you and the church. Why would you try to change them or resist the change if you thought Baylor shouldn't try to change the people (or resist the change) who join it? A little hypocritical don't you think? (and yes I know everyone is a hypocrite)

The point is, if a person is going to join a group (church, university, club, etc.), they should have similar beliefs. If not, then join something else. But, if they still want to join that group, then at least have the decency to respect that groups beliefs.

 

[meyers7]

Although it's been many years since I worked on College campuses, I did so for almost 15 years. As a staff member, what used to frustrate me occassionally, is that college students kinda "pick and choose" when they want to "act like grown-ups". Sometimes, it's in their best interest to be all indignant because they're not being treated as adults, and sometimes it's in their best interest to be a kid.

A lot of "adults" are like that too.

 

[meyers7]

I hope that Baylor allows her to graduate.

I hope they would too. Hope that would not even be a question.

 

[CBus13]

I have sons that are 18 and 16. I asked them how they feel about gay marriage and they shrugged. I asked them how they feel about gays and they shrugged again. I'm glad to see that their generation isn't going to judge others by whom they date or marry.

That is great to hear! You seem to have two very well adjusted sons. I know many people who feel the same way as your sons, in fact many heteros who fight for equality...I of course go to an art college so I may be in the exception but it's nice to hear two teenage boys in high school see it as non-issue. Maybe soon everyone else will!

 

[ScarlettB]

I imagine BG may have been encouraged by the coaching staff to keep her sexual orientation to herself, for several reasons, including making it easier for her to fit in better with the Baylor community. She must have really wanted to play for Kim, if she was willing to go to a University that openly discourages her from being who she is. IMO she was willing to live with the situation as she felt the pros outweighed the cons. That is her choice and I respect it.

I do think it would have been interesting to see how the Baylor administration and community would have reacted if she had come out publicly during her college career, but I don't feel BG should have been obligated to find out.

 

[Icebear]

Like I said, I highly doubt that. I've been in plenty of churches where there has been division in the church. I've never seen it supported.


You are assuming you are right. My point was people coming in and disagreeing with you and the church and wanting to change you and the church. Why would you try to change them or resist the change if you thought Baylor shouldn't try to change the people (or resist the change) who join it? A little hypocritical don't you think? (and yes I know everyone is a hypocrite)

The point is, if a person is going to join a group (church, university, club, etc.), they should have similar beliefs. If not, then join something else. But, if they still want to join that group, then at least have the decency to respect that groups beliefs.

When I say I have that every week that does not apply only to issues surrounding LGBT matters. My congregation has had and continues to have people who disagree with me on educational issues, union issues, political issues, etc. etc. They, also, know that this never gets in the way of my ministering to them in their lives in joys or in grief.

It is not about trying to change people. It is not a matter of assuming I am right it is about doing everything I can to be faithful to my understanding of scripture over and even against church tradition and church history when necessary. Once any preacher stops being faithful to their understanding of scripture they have no business being in the pulpit. It is the Bible and God's Word that changes people. Ultimately, you and every other lay person sitting in a congregation must decide whether they believe the pastor is a fair and faithful arbiter of the Word of God in their preaching.

Last count I have read more than 2 dozen books relating to the Bible and this issue on both sides of the issue. I can probably give to people on either side some of the best and most compelling material on both sides of this issue. It is my responsibility to be informed on matters o faith and scripture. I frequently disagree with people on both sides of the issue in relation to particulars. They know that I will attempt to speak honestly to them. That is all I or any pastor can do. In reality it is all any person can do when they try to be their best.

 

[Adesmar123]

Are we having fun discussing people's sexual orientation and their personal lives?

 

[meyers7]

Are we having fun discussing people's sexual orientation and their personal lives?

Good point, but to be fair, they did bring it up in a Sports Illustrated article. Kind of opening themselves to conversation.

And this thread has drifted a bit into other things.

 

[cardfan]

I"ll tread on dangerous ground here, which will probably result in the thread being locked.

Perhaps if people didn't try to force their views and lifestyles on others, the acceptance would happen at a faster pace. Perhaps if some in the LGBT community were more tolerant of the views of the people that don't agree with their lifestyle, then their views would be more accepted. People are reluctant to change when they perceive they are being forced to accept something they don't agree with. Violence, bullying or other forms of destructive criticism should not be tolerated because of a person's lifestyle. However, because a person doesn't agree with a lifestyle and lets others live their lifestyle without any form of objection, then that person is not a bad person. Some in the LGBT community believe a person has to fully endorse their lifestyle and if they don't then that person is a bad or immoral person. Sorry I don't believe that.

I saw no reason for ESPN to address this issue with the 3 to See. Sports fans should only care about how they performed on the court in College and how they will perform in the WNBA.

It's not a "lifestyle", but a life. She was sharing her life, just as others share their lives about their boyfriends, husbands, kids, etc. We heard the same thing about acceptance (slower pace, don't force it on us, etc) regarding women's rights, civil rights, etc. Minorities who are discriminated against face even more discrimination by telling them to slow down, don't go so fast, etc. When exactly will it be okay? I've never understood how gay people wanting to get married affects the daily lives of others who are not gay, or who may not agree with gay marriage. If you don't want to marry a gay person, then don't.

 

[JS]

I"ll tread on dangerous ground here, which will probably result in the thread being locked.

The thread has been civil thus far. Let's see what happens.

As far as "dangerous ground," well yes, mutual respect is a laudatory goal, but you're pushing a hot button (six times no less) with the "lifestyle" characterization.

If you don't see why this is so, feel free to send me a PM. Suffice it to say we don't want this thread to veer any further toward religious or moral themes predicated on choice.

 

[meyers7]

I have sons that are 18 and 16. I asked them how they feel about gay marriage and they shrugged. I asked them how they feel about gays and they shrugged again. I'm glad to see that their generation isn't going to judge others by whom they date or marry.

I think my kids (24, 22, 21) though being pretty conservative (at least as kids go) feel pretty much the same way. And most of their friends, at least from what I have interacted with them, feel the same way.

I do see some resistance in a few of the kids I coach (boys 14-16 year olds), but not really anything blatant. Did have one kid though a couple years ago who seemed anti-gay. Not that he would do anything bullying wise, I don't think. A unique situation since his older brother was gay (I had coached him too). Don't know if he felt betrayed by his brother, or maybe he felt he had to overcompensate because of his brother??? Interesting to see.

Even more interesting, to me anyway, was his brother was probably one of the toughest, meanest kids on the team. None of the other kids would cross him. He was more likely to bully than to be bullied. He eventually quit the sport though (unfortunately, because he was very good) and took up dance. Interesting to see the differences and similarities between the two.

 

[Stray Cat]

Congrats to Griner for being out and proud. Actually, it's something I don't think I've ever read about her before. It's cool that she just slid it into regular conversation like that.

Totally agree...and not that there's anything wrong with it, but I was totally unaware of this fact too. Good for her. I was impressed by all three ladies -- very well-spoken and appear to be outstanding role models.

 

[DobbsRover2]

I"ll tread on dangerous ground here, which will probably result in the thread being locked.

Perhaps if people didn't try to force their views and lifestyles on others, the acceptance would happen at a faster pace. Perhaps if some in the LGBT community were more tolerant of the views of the people that don't agree with their lifestyle, then their views would be more accepted. People are reluctant to change when they perceive they are being forced to accept something they don't agree with. Violence, bullying or other forms of destructive criticism should not be tolerated because of a person's lifestyle. However, because a person doesn't agree with a lifestyle and lets others live their lifestyle without any form of objection, then that person is not a bad person. Some in the LGBT community believe a person has to fully endorse their lifestyle and if they don't then that person is a bad or immoral person. Sorry I don't believe that.

I saw no reason for ESPN to address this issue with the 3 to See. Sports fans should only care about how they performed on the court in College and how they will perform in the WNBA.

Really doubt anything on BY will be locked over something that does not revolve around player bashing.

So, um, is BG is "forcing" her views and lifestyle on the anti-LGBT crowd? Did she say that anyone at Baylor or elsewhere who does not accept her as she is is a "bad person?" I'm not a great fan of ESPN in general but I can't see how helping further an effort in social acceptance that BG wants to assist is such a terrible thing.

Yeah, I know we sports fans should only care about what Joe Paterno did on the playing field. It's none of our business if someone is spouting anti-gay messages in the locker room because, hey, that's his business and right and what matters is how many goals he scored. And heck, all that wonderful background stuff about the Husky players -- their uprbringings, the fun they have with each other, their hobbies, whatever -- that should be off the table because we should only care about how they performed on the court. Um, yeah.

And finally, and I know this is getting closer to the objectionable lock-up stuff you mentioned, but I grew up at a time when the media loved to bash the views of the pushy untidy civil rights/anti-war/female rights activists and their hateful attempts to push their "intolerant" views on an America that was supposedly all too content to placidly go with the comfortable slow pace of change for expanding civil rights/ending the war/providing equality for women. No we didn't hate the people who disagreed with us because, heck, some of them were our fathers-mothers-brothers-sisters. I'm sorry, but you take the coward's way out when you purposely muddy the debate by setting up a straw dog of some kind of radical fringe of LGBTers who want to force everyone in America to accept their beliefs and that your upright stance against your perception of some type of bullying by the LGBT crowd supports a conclusion that no one in the sports world should be discussing their sexual identity. As far as I've heard, the LGBT crowd wants the right to get married (and divorced) like other Americans. They're not saying you have to agree with that view, they're just saying like MLK that even if you disagree with a particular group of Americans' getting equal rights, you cannot break the laws that are set up to protect those equal rights. They also likely feel that they will not get those rights if they just shut up about it as many want them to. I may not agree with anything the Westboro Baptist Church family cadre say about anything including their LGBT bashing, but I certainly agree that they have the right to spout their bile, especially when my daughter's college can use their presence to get a ton of donations for great suicide-prevention LGBT services. Every group has its place, I guess.

Like it or not, sports are a big part of society and you cannot shelter them in a pristine isolated corner. Until androids play our sports for us, we're stuck with people, warts and all. And their issues will be heard.

 

[maddoggy]

It's not a "lifestyle", but a life. She was sharing her life, just as others share their lives about their boyfriends, husbands, kids, etc. We heard the same thing about acceptance (slower pace, don't force it on us, etc) regarding women's rights, civil rights, etc. Minorities who are discriminated against face even more discrimination by telling them to slow down, don't go so fast, etc. When exactly will it be okay? I've never understood how gay people wanting to get married affects the daily lives of others who are not gay, or who may not agree with gay marriage. If you don't want to marry a gay person, then don't.

Indeed, 50 years and two days ago, Martin Luther King addressed some similar calls in his Letter From A Birmingham Jail (<http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html> and elsewhere). Always worth a read if you ask me.

I'm not sure if wbbfan1 means Griner was trying to force her views or if the comment was directed elsewhere. But it brings up another interesting question: to what extent do folks think Griner and/or the Mercury and/or ESPN actually wanted to raise the issue at this specific time (or ever). Reading the team's coverage of Griner, it looks like the Mercury is fairly comfortable (but somewhat euphemistic) in addressing it, and, after Griner's choice of outfits on draft day, it seemed like she wanted to let a neon cat out of a cellophane bag in any case. It feels like there has been some planning and coordination -- either that or awfully fast reaction by a well-prepared team in a city and state that -- when I lived there -- was not exactly gay-friendly.

 

[DishNSwish]

Outstanding piece on it by hoopfeed (no not me) here:

http://www.hoopfeed.com/content/201...rt-and-then-theres-noh8-prop-8-and-ken-starr/

 

[maddoggy]

Outstanding piece on it by hoopfeed (no not me) here:

http://www.hoopfeed.com/content/201...rt-and-then-theres-noh8-prop-8-and-ken-starr/

You're right: outstanding and well-researched piece that adds a lot to the conversation we are having. Thanks

 

[DobbsRover2]

Outstanding piece on it by hoopfeed (no not me) here:

http://www.hoopfeed.com/content/201...rt-and-then-theres-noh8-prop-8-and-ken-starr/

Wow, that is incredible, and a great read. Baylor prez and Prop-8 supporting counsel Kenneth Starr actually said that it is basically the right of the people in a state (or maybe country) to strip other citizens of basic equal rights if they just raise a proposition and vote for it. "The right of the people is inalienable to change their constitution through the amendment process. The people are sovereign and they can do very unwise things, and things that tug at the equality principle."

That is a degree of slippery-slope and mendacious legal thought that is truly frightening. I hope BG can provide some more principled moral suasion to her alma mater than its president can. But yeah, in AZ and elsewhere there will be those who say she should just stick to basketball and leave those "human rights" issues to people like Starr who know better.

 

[EricSD]

I"ll tread on dangerous ground here, which will probably result in the thread being locked.

Perhaps if people didn't try to force their views and lifestyles on others, the acceptance would happen at a faster pace. Perhaps if some in the LGBT community were more tolerant of the views of the people that don't agree with their lifestyle, then their views would be more accepted. People are reluctant to change when they perceive they are being forced to accept something they don't agree with. Violence, bullying or other forms of destructive criticism should not be tolerated because of a person's lifestyle. However, because a person doesn't agree with a lifestyle and lets others live their lifestyle without any form of objection, then that person is not a bad person. Some in the LGBT community believe a person has to fully endorse their lifestyle and if they don't then that person is a bad or immoral person. Sorry I don't believe that.

I saw no reason for ESPN to address this issue with the 3 to See. Sports fans should only care about how they performed on the court in College and how they will perform in the WNBA.

Just a slight correction. Myself, and every single LGBT person I know (and I know a lot) have zero interest in "forcing our views and lifestyle" on anyone else. I'm not "out" at work, but most of my coworkers know I'm gay. Many of them are very religious as my company is actually a faith based organization. However, I no more try to force anything on them than any of my religions friends or coworkers try to force their religion on me. It's all about accepting people for who they are.

If you really believe we as a community are trying to "force our views and lifestyles on others", I'd like to try to correct that perception. This may be going down a path the mods don't want to, but there's a huge difference between pushing for equality in marriage and rights for our spouses etc. vs. forcing our views down the throats of others. I totally respect that most people are straight and have relationships with opposite sex partners. For those of us in the gay community, we don't care one iota if people "agree" with who we are (as our "lifestyle" is not a choice). We DO care that we aren't afforded equal rights under the law and thankfully, that is eventually going to change.

As cardfan pointed out, I still am very confused how a gay couple marrying affects a straight couple, as it's really irrelevant to their daily life in any way. Fortunately times are changing and I'm very proud when I read public opinion has completely shifted in the past 5-10 years on the issues that we are fighting for...

 

[easttexastrash]

I have sons that are 18 and 16. I asked them how they feel about gay marriage and they shrugged. I asked them how they feel about gays and they shrugged again. I'm glad to see that their generation isn't going to judge others by whom they date or marry.

Shows that you have done a great job raising accepting and open minded children and how times have changed.

 

[easttexastrash]

I'm not saying she was obliged to say something earlier. But -- leaving Griner aside -- I do get tired of the meme that college kids are too young to act like grown-ups. I and a dozen of my fellow students faced arrest in a non-violent anti-war protest my freshman year at UConn. Hundreds of my fellow students and I were arrested in a non-violent anti-racism sit-in my junior year. And, as head of the student government, I regularly had a beer at the Rathskellar on Gay and Lesbian night each week, just as I met with other interest groups. And all that was in the early 70s, mind you. Just because you are a teenager/young twenty-something doesn't mean you should skip out on your social responsibilities or subsidize the hypocrisy of the school you attend.

I'm not saying Griner HAD to speak up, but I do wish she had, and I would respect her a lot more if that had been the case. To paraphrase Luke 12:48, from those to whom much has been given, more is expected. I admire Griner's basketball talents, but I have more respect for the straight and GLBT students at Baylor like Samantha Jones and Susan Duty who had the courage to raise their voices within the belly of the beast.

BG was not a random student who was paying her own way through Baylor. She was a scholarship athlete also REPRESENTING the university and the athletic department. She was doing what she thought was right for her teammates and coaches.

 

[Adesmar123]

Shows that you have done a great job raising accepting and open minded children and how times have changed.

I imagine they would have shrugged at almost any question. They are 18 and 16 year old guys!!!!

 

[easttexastrash]

I imagine they would have shrugged at almost any question. They are 18 and 16 year old guys!!!!

come on...give Nan her due!

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Two points -

Meyers - the Lutherans were not a good choice for your remarks about disagreeing with an organization, but joining / belonging. My congregation schismed just before we moved here, and the strongly anti-gay faction, led by the pastor, went and formed their own congregation in a different denomination (yes, there are more than one kind of Lutheran). Because folks stayed doesn't mean that they support gay marraige or would call a gay pastor - only that they believed affiliation with the ELCA branch of Lutheranism (which happens to permit gay pastors in committed relationships) and our congregation was more important than the exact shade of opinion they might have on that subject.

Second, I have never felt any pressure from anyone I know that is gay (includes 2 cousins, a couple of pastors, some fellow Rutgers fans including a former fan club prez, etc.) regarding these issues. I do understand that some folks feel that if they do not support gay marraige they are being "forced" into it if it becomes a law in their area - but that's the way democracy works. The 45% (say) that object to something ultimately have to accept what the majority has decided.

 

[Adesmar123]

Did anyone see the SI swimsuit issue? I wish they would do a gay women's issue. Wouldn't that be liberating?

 

[JS]

we don't care one iota if people "agree" with who we are (as our "lifestyle" is not a choice). We DO care that we aren't afforded equal rights under the law and thankfully, that is eventually going to change.

A debate on gay marriage is for another board, but your post kind of sums up the general dynamic.

Equal rights are worth fighting for. And it's VERY hard to see how equal rights adversely affect those who already have those rights or force anything down their throats. If they feel that way, it's regrettable, but equal rights are still worth fighting for.

As for personal attitudes, there's little reason, no duty, and not a whole lot of hope, in trying to change them. People, gay and straight, need to lead good lives and, as far as other people's sex lives are concerned, mind their own business.

Attitudes may evolve some, but the demographics (generational differences) are so stark as to suggest that the issue is on its way to becoming moot. It's my generation where most of the negative attitude resides, and we're going to die off. Not that I'm in any hurry.

 

[DobbsRover2]

The kind of quiet opening up on a national stage of a previously faintly disguised fact of Brittney Griner's status in the LGBT community by herself yesterday raised a host of interesting issues that will play out in the news in the future. They include among others:

• What effect will it have on the WNBA to have one of its biggest stars as possibly the most prominent face in sports of the lesbian athlete? The associations between women's pro ball and gay culture has always been out there and been debated as either a good or bad thing for the sport, but with BG now entering the league, the discussions will become stronger.
• How does a school like Baylor that defines homosexuality as a misuse of a divine gift and lumps it with incest, sexual assault, and sexual abuse deal with the out-and-out proclamation of one of its all-time top athletes that she was defying their sexual misconduct code while on campus. While the situations are 180 degress different, if PSU can be laid low by its inability to properly deal with serial child molestor on its campus, how will Baylor deal with its own college code of sexual propriety if it does put homosexuality and sexual abuse in the same category?
• What will be the new relationship between Baylor's president Kenneth Starr, who among other things has fought to nullify the marriages of gay couples in California, and the former Baylor WCBB star who he is apparently fairly chummy with?
• With Griner being a very large target for absorbing and deflecting any of the anti-gay invective coming from the usual sources, how many other lesbian athletes will be either coming out or becoming even more outspoken on gay rights?

There is one indication of a change that has probably been very huge since BG enrolled at her school. On the Baylor fourm's thread on her action yesterday, you would have to strain very hard to find a big nugget of anti-gay feeling. True the school has it's code of sexual misconduct, but it seems that it it mainly serves as a university ideal and is for the most part accorded lip service. As one poster noted when the question of whether Griner could be in danger of not being allowed to graduate for violating school policy, the main issue would be just the ban on sexual activity in general (not specifically homosexual vs heterosexual) which is obviously overlooked since a number of Baylor grads have fathered kids without being married. Though there is very much a "I wish her well anyway" and "I don't agree with the way she is but it's her business" attitude on the Baylor board, it appears that any attempt by anti-gay agitators to whip up hostility even on a school with professedly anti-gay ordinances like Baylor is not likely to gain much steam.