The Importance of Allowing People to Say That You Can’t Be a Gay Basketball Player and a ChristianHe's talking about ESPN's Chris Broussard, who for the crime of criticizing the gay basketball player was beaten to death. Okay, not murdered, just beaten. Okay, not beaten, just criticized by people on Twitter, which is still censorship (because anything short of responding to Broussard's mouth-fart with "Intelligent people can disagree" and a pat on the back would be).
Broussard is predictably getting beaten to a rhetoric pulp on Twitter. And while I think today is a wonderful, watershed day for people (especially the artist formerly known as Ron Artest) to live as open and free as they wanna be, I agree with the New York Post editorial Robert George here: "Chris Broussard spoke what more than a few players feel. If such comments aren't expressed, a real conversation can't be had."Actually America had this conversation for years. Thesis: "DIE FAGGOT!" Antithesis: (cries of pain). Fascist that I am, I don't see any point in reviving it.
And sometimes engaging with the I'm not ready to go that far just yet crowd brings out the best in activists. See, for example, Martin Luther King's "Letter From a Birmingham Jail."MLK was glad people were opposing him -- in fact, he'd have been disappointed if people suddenly gave up and let him have what he wanted. Where'd be the fun in that? And getting assassinated was just an inevitable part of the process.
There is only one possible explanation for Welch's bizarre post: As I've been saying for years, libertarianism is just a hipper line extension of conservatism, the rightwing version of Budweiser Black Crown. So if liberals like something you'd imagine libertarians would approve, Reasonoids still have to maintain the anti-liberal brand positioning by bitching about it in a way the mouth-breathers can approve. The cleverer ones will do it by explaining how gay rights is statist, but with the kind of funding they have, there's really no need for a libertarian to be clever. Q.E.D.
So where is it that Broussard was not allowed to say what he actually, you know, said?
ReplyDeleteWell, people made fun of him for saying it. Which is exactly the same thing as brutal censorship. To a libertarian specializing in self-pity, anyway.
ReplyDeleteObviously we must not allow people to say anything against Broussard. That would be true freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteBroussard is predictably getting beaten to a rhetoric pulp on Twitter.
ReplyDeleteWas he tied to a rhetorical fence first?
What the fuck conversation are we not having? Fundie wackdoodles want to set the social rules that everyone lives by, an experiment that has been failing on this continent in one way or another since 1620. Even a back-of-the-cereal-box education will show you it's mostly been the fundies on the losing side, with the end result that nowadays it's possible to be property-owning Hispanic lesbian with voting rights, because freedom.
ReplyDeleteWhile we're on the subject of freedom, how come the only rights that Welch feels like talking up are the rights of entitled white males to be complete assholes on the subjects of race, class, gender, and (now) sexual preference?
Wait, sorry: I forgot who he works for, and how he has become a wholly-owned subsidiary thereof.
I say we rhetorically nail him to the T in Twitter! ALL THREE OF THEM.
ReplyDeletethe New York Post editorial Robert George here: "Chris Broussard
ReplyDeletespoke what more than a few players feel. If such comments aren't
expressed, a real conversation can't be had."
George is an extremist Fundie so we can't have a conversation with BECAUSE HE'S NOT INTERESTED,
Try a few noun substitutions to really appreciate such a sentiment:
ReplyDeleteMichael Bay is predictably getting beaten to a rhetorical pulp in the critical press.
Now that puts the sufferings of poor Mr. Broussard in the proper perspective.
(Yeah I know, some reliable critics found Gain & Pain worth watching, but you see my point.)
Robbie George is proof positive that there is no god. Or if there is he is unavailable due to constant vomiting every time Robbie georgevinvokes natural law to explain why he is so concerned about where people put their genitals.
ReplyDeleteShorter Reason: Everyone should be free to act in the best interests of straight white men.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about Robert P. George--he's an embarrassment to my workplace--but, just for the record, this is almost certainly Robert A. George who's being quoted here.
ReplyDeleteKitchen hint: don't throw that rhetorical pulp away. Put it in the freezer to use in your next baked oratory.
ReplyDeleteThe libertarian love of social freedom and civil rights is like that one guy who knows some cool martial arts trick, or can drink 25 shots of whiskey in a row without passing out. Forever talking about it, forever inserting it into conversations, but when it comes time to actually prove he can, it's all nervous giggling and sudden changes of subject.
ReplyDeleteI've wondered occasionally just how agreeable an advance in gay rights would have to be for the freedom-lovers' club to cheer it whole-heartedly, without any need for fudging or dire warnings of backlash or earnest pleas to not forget the rotten bigots of the world, because they're important too. And I think we've hit it. A pro athlete-from a middle-class family and a Stanford grad, no less-comes out in the twilight of his career, of his own free will, and the response around the NBA is mostly positive. And these spineless turds, these sniveling equivocators, these wholly-owned subsidaries of various corporate entities, they can't even bring themselves to cheer for that. And they think they're the brave and dangerous ones! Pathetic.
The Real Conversation is an elusive beast-David Brooks has been searching for it for years with no luck. I too have often wondered what this mythical conversation would be like, and what would make it more Real than the many, many conversations being had on this topic without Matt Welch's consent. I imagine it would go something like "Wow, Matt, now that you've shown me how you're right about everything and how liberals are wrong about everything, I totally agree!"
ReplyDeleteTa-Nehisi Coates wrote some interesting things Against The Conversation on Race a couple of weeks ago.
ReplyDeleteThe weird thing is that when Mr. Welch puts a hyperlink over the words "letter from a Birmingham jail" he links not to the letter, but to his analysis. An analysis that he himself made, but which completely undermines his point here. I don't get it.
Of course, we're having the conversation right now: Chris Broussard made a fairly sensible point about what his religion says, and the rest of us told him we don't give a shit about his goofy-ass religion and he should shut his mouth. That's a conversation.
he is unavailable due to constant vomiting
ReplyDeleteRobert makes his George rise?
Apparently, "conversation" means "agree completely with the bigots" in rightwing world.
ReplyDeleteNothing is more destructive to individual freedom that free individuals. Just ask the Reason crew.
ReplyDeleteSo basically, Christianity teaches that we're all sinners. So you can be a Christian and a sinner, unless the sin is homosexuality, in which case you can't be a Christian, because only some sins are Christian ones ... no, wait, I'll come in again ...
ReplyDeleteYou're gonna make Mark Shields cry, y'know.
ReplyDeleteYou beat me to at least two of the gags I was contemplating and did a much better job, and yet i am not tied, or at least don't feel tied to a fence, yet, (there is, however, some rope in the picnic basket, beneath the bottle of wine...)
ReplyDelete...
I got a great recipe for baked oratory from Andrew Breitbart: just sprinkle some chopped video on top.
ReplyDeleteImma gonna mostly skip the masthead with a parenthetical aside (Free minds Free markets...cracker, please! Reason haz TV channel? [Falls into the "not if I see you first" category})
ReplyDeleteOn to the headline:
The Importance of Allowing People to Say That You Can’t Be a Gay Basketball Player and a Christian
Blink, blink, staring at the orange shirt in the corner, the battery for the makita drill and the charger underneath the shirt in question and more blinking while catching a glimpse at my knitting and the ball of yarn to which it is attached and thinking about my grandma who is not long for this world, the hospice worker who gifted me both and my aunt who taught me how to knit less than 72 hours ago, the fact that I have to be at work in just a bit over 6 hours, while contemplating whether "Smacked be this Gob" should be the title of my new blog... (BTW did you know that a single string can be turned into something awesome with a couple of sticks? Yeah, I knew it too, but until you do it yerself....Mind is temporarily blown) but back to business.
Shorter Asshole: "I should be allowed to rub shit on your face without fear of reprisal"
On to the first two:
You have probably heard the news that
mediocre but long-lasting NBA backup center Jason Collins today
became the first active professional men's team sports player to
come out as gay. Read his Sports Illustrated
essay if you haven't.
"Mediocre but long-lasting" might describe the rope you tried to push into the hot chick you may have pulled last night, what with your rouge-ish-ness flip shades and leather jacket, but certainly does not describe Jason Collins. Look see, the dude is in "the show" and you are not, unless you consider tossing the Koch brothers salad "the show".
Since then, commentary from his fellow basketball players, from
politicians (including President Barack Obama), and from
journalists has been overwhelmingly positive (just click on
Deadspin and scroll
down). One of the few exceptions has been ESPN commentator Chris
Broussard, who
said:
There is a reason that the response has been overwhelmingly positive, shit for brains...Why do I suspect that your hard-on for this particular announcement comes from a desire (that you continually deny) to share a hot tub, naked, with Barack Obama. Fire up the calfskin glove.*
*Assumes facts not in evidence while I wrestle with whether I should leave the image to your magnificent imaginations,
/wank
...
*Assumes facts not in evidence
Listen, sport: just because the conversation didn't go the way you wanted it to doesn't mean we didn't have the conversation. And it doesn't matter how loud you cry, either. You're not four years old and getting a do-over.
ReplyDeleteThat's a recipie you should probably share; most right-wing oratory is only half-baked.
ReplyDeleteThese are the conversations, folks!
ReplyDeleteI always get the rhetorical orange juice with the extra rhetorical pulp.
ReplyDeleteOops! Did I hate in the wrong ROBERT georgevor are there two if these whining, puling, high church style bigots?
ReplyDeletewhat about Yarnell? Nobody has any love for Yarnell!
ReplyDeleteno you didn't
ReplyDeleteAt this point I seriously doubt that any libertarians actually exist. The idological spectrum of soi disant libertarians' seems to go from conservatives against the Drug War to loonies who want to recreate Lord of the Flies in New Hampshire to "Surprise! I'm really a Nazi!" But it never fails to be the case that their all-purpose concept of "liberty" is both a catch-all and a sieve, an excuse for Stuff I Like and a cudgel for People I Hate. They are the Whiny Teenagers of Politics, forever.
ReplyDeleteAs to the idiocy Roy so deftly takes apart, it starts with Welch's hed: Broussard wasn't saying "you can’t be a gay basketball player and a Christian" he was saying you can't be a gay christian, period.
Also, the Reason comments thread is something else. Amid the usual invocations of the likes of Goldwater and George Wallace, one guy derails it completely with a discussion that begins like this:
Also, gay reasonoids, a question. Don't these guys basically always have to be the receptive partner if they are into anal?
Let me put it this way. I am pretty well endowed.
And it goes downhill from there.
I think that if Exxon were to come out as a gay corporation, and then express a desire to gay-marry Walmart, libertarians would totally defend that.
ReplyDeleteNo conversation is needed. This is an unalloyed good thing. End of conversation.
ReplyDeleteHow interesting it must be to live in a country where the musings of a sports announcer about the Christian theological stance on homosexuality are considered so much more important and newsworthy than the opinions of 250 million other, equally-unqualified people.
ReplyDeleteWhom am I fooling? This country is just as bad.
For the full effect he needs to be left tied to the rhetorical fence for a rhetorical 18 hours.
ReplyDeleteIt occurs to me that the two positions gay and anti gay) have flipped. Broussard and his friends are demanding permission to "let it all hang out, man" and mumbling "I just gotta be me" they sound more znd more like a kid demanding the right to mommy's respect for the backyard game of cowboys n Indians. While on our side we have an ever growing roster of respected, hard working, athletes and businessmen who are performing a modern day Jackie Robinson/Jesus impression to great national acclaim. You get the sense the ant gays are longing for a return to assless chaps--and not just for their own home use.
ReplyDeletethomas friedman's cab driver : megan mccardle's black bus rider : robert george's more than a few basketball players
ReplyDeleteUnfortunate, but typical, that Welch would use Alvin Dark as an example of Southern Christian impatience with the Civil Rights Movement. Because everyone thinks those comments are what got him fired after the 1964 season. They're not.
ReplyDelete"beaten to a rhetoric pulp" Oh, that's gotta hurt.
ReplyDeleteGee, Roy, I thought I was the only one who knew about Budweiser Black Crown.
ReplyDelete"Chris Broussard spoke what more than a few players feel. If such comments aren't expressed, a real conversation can't be had."
ReplyDeleteYes, by all means, everything "more than a few" people feel must be expressed, for the sake of a "real conversation." This, from the same editorial page that will applaud pepper-spraying Occupy people in the name of "civility." When a right-wing opiner expresses concern over how people *feel* you know he's on deadline, phoning it in.
The only requirement to be a Christian is to believe Jesus is the Son of God and your savior. That homosexuality crap is from the Old Testament, which is full of prohibitions that no Christian follows. They serve ham at church socials, I hear.
ReplyDeleteHear hear. If Yarnell replaced Shields on The News Hour I might watch it again.
ReplyDeleteYeah, with rhetorical Chick-Fil-A sandwiches to rub in his face afterward.
ReplyDelete"Oh! Oh, oh, I'm sorry, this is abuse."
ReplyDeletePoor Dennis
ReplyDeleteWell, see, you have to admit that the behavior in question is a sin, and resolve to never engage in it again, which I suspect Jason Collins doesn't accept. So there isn't really a contradiction here.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, he could always take the Gingrich / Vitter / Sanford approach and just repent again and again. And again. Or make a deal that when the Talibornagain admit that bearing false witness, failing to observe Jubilee years, usury, neglecting the poor, etc, etc, etc, are sinful, he'll accept that homosexuality is, too. If he's not permitted to cherry-pick, neither are they.
And it goes downhill from there.
ReplyDeleteI dunno, making it so obviously about who should get screwed strikes me as a refreshing breath of honesty.
The old testament denounces homosexuality while supporting slavery and the slaughter of children. Don't recall Jeebus saying much about teh gaii proclivities. Of course the devil is in the details, which of course is lost on most Xtians.
ReplyDeleteI just have one question- if I, as a woman, can't share a locker room with men what do we do with a gay man? I assume it is not about my equipment - since we all use toilets. So it must be that some don't want to share with someone who seeing my equipment will get sexually aroused. So again what do we do with gay men in the locker room. And I guess it is just discrimination that I can't join the NBA.
ReplyDeleteYep, libertarianism contains just as much of a reactionary element as conservatism.
ReplyDeleteSome people have suggested that ESPN should fire him. Free speech isn't sufficient; you must be given a national media platform to advocate it, apparently.
ReplyDeleteand the ghastly stuff about women, divorce, adultery and slavery.
ReplyDeleteOh, a great many of them don't ignore that stuff either, I assure you. Except when political expediency demands it.
" And I guess it is just discrimination that I can't join the NBA." Really, you're playing at a pro level? Send us your audition tape, this could be a reality series.
ReplyDeletewhat do we do with a gay man? How about, treat him like any other man.
ReplyDeleteMr. Collins has played, so far, 12 seasons in the NBA. That is approximately 1000 games where he shared a locker room with other men (some of whom might also have been gay!) without any incidents of sexual assault or unwelcome sexual advances.
Now that he is out, I predict that this will continue to not be a problem at all except for people like you who like to turn their prejudices into concern trolling.
FWIW I don't think all of Judaism is lock-step with the Hebrew Bible's laws, nor are they uniformly bigoted against LGBT people.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Matt Welch subscribes to the Sarah Palin interpretation of the First Amendment.
ReplyDeleteWhat an amusing (if somewhat tortuously constructed) thought experiment, since, if you actually did play basketball on a professional or even collegiate level, you almost assuredly did share your locker room with lesbian players.
ReplyDeleteI hate to break it to you, but if you've ever belonged to a gym, or ever, you know, had gym class in high school, you've already shared a locker room with teh gayz. Boo!
ReplyDeletehell, if your issue is that it's inappropriate for men to shower together in case one of them might be sexually aroused by it, we should really play it safe just in case: no more group showers in sports lockerrooms. Everyone gets their own shower stall. Or we can put blinders on them all so they can't steal furtive glances at the other cocks around them. After all, those gays sure like to be secretive; how else can we be sure that our pro sports locker rooms are free of secret lust?
ReplyDeleteI would like to try to impress this comment with a nunchaku demonstration, even though I know that, sooner or later, I'll end up hitting myself in the nuts with it.
ReplyDelete: Fox News Channel's 'some people say'
ReplyDeleteThey probably quote the OT because of Matthew 5:17-20, where Christ said,
ReplyDelete“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."
Which would have a fairly clear meaning if it wasn't immediately followed and preceded by a series of speeches explaining which of Moses' laws we no longer had to follow (Incidentally, dietary restrictions are probably ignored on the authority of Mark 7 [not the production company])
My very limited understanding is that Paul is a big source of the idea that Christians can, in fact, ignore the least stroke of a pen in the OT (Some of what I read in Romans just now seems to directly contradict and completely undermine Matthew 5:17-20), but than, he's also the source of the NT's condemnations of homosexual behavior, so he's not much help there.
well, I appreciate your doing the legwork for me and explaining that, though I would simply go back to this in reply to someone who might earnestly propose what you have:
ReplyDelete1) Why would a loving, merciful and just God make it so him-damned difficult for us humans to follow his rules, which if we don't correctly follow we'll suffer eternal punishment?
2) Why should I give a shit about your primitive legends and myths? I don't believe in Egyptian gods, Norse gods, Roman gods, Greek gods... but if I don't believe in the Jewish/Abrahamic god (and it HAS to be 'God', not 'Allah' because that's totally different and only infidels believe in that god!) then I am automatically a really bad person who should never be allowed to teach your kids or hold elective office or any other position of trust and responsibility. Oooooookay.
Well, if you're Brittney Griner, you already had quasi-libertarian Mark Cuban offer you a tryout, so it isn't a complete waste (and hope you can perimeter defend better than Dirk Nowitzki).
ReplyDeleteOh, wait--Griner is also out. What was my point again?
Secret Lust: Locker Room Desire
ReplyDeleteWhen a born-again Democratic woman finds her quest for a toilet has led her into a men's locker room by mistake, she awakens a deeply hidden need to have her equipment cabinet unlocked.
Secret Lust II: Subbing for the Other Team
When a zesty born-again Democratic woman tries to sneak back into the men's locker room, only to end up in a women's locker room by mistake, she learns an intimate lesson about avoiding discrimination.
I also do not ultimately care what that collection of oral legends and myths called The Bible has to say about certain sexual practices. Mansex is an 'abomination'? OK, to you in your day perhaps. Cunnilingus was probably regarded with equal disgust, at least until the miracle of modern bodily hygiene was invented.
ReplyDeleteI've certainly rarely heard any anti-gay bigots railing about the evils of man-on-woman buttsex. Yes they might also believe it's wrong and disgusting but you never hear these people trying to ban straights from marrying in case the husband might stick his wang in the woman's pooper or other unapproved orifices.
Some great shirts on Teach the Controversy here:
ReplyDeletehttp://controversy.wearscience.com/
so, lesbians in a male locker room should be OK, right? They are not interested in mangear.
ReplyDeleteIn fairness, the men in the locker room might be interested in womangear ... unless creeping gayness means it's already too late.
ReplyDeletesssshhh nobody tell bornagainconcerntroll about the epidemic of butt-slapping in male locker rooms too! That's surely the fault of openly gay athletes as well.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, gay sex is a "choice" and not something that's innately part of you. But when discussing gays in the military, it's the people they want to shut out of serving, rather than banning the behavior.
ReplyDeleteThank you all. For some reason disqus is borked on my computer and I can only post comments on my phone so could not link to the mp sketch.
ReplyDeleteI feel like seeing top gun again. I wonder why?
ReplyDeleteI would REALLY like to subscribe to your newsletter. Hubba Hubba.
ReplyDeleteI think there's some confusion about the implication of Broussard's statement.
ReplyDeleteTo say that one believes a person cannot be a homosexual and a Christian is to express a private religious belief. A stupid, private religious belief. But nonetheless, it is not in and of itself an argument for any discriminatory policy, and though motivated by an intolerant ideology, I don't think it can be called hateful. He is not saying a gay person should not be allowed to play basketball, or vote. He is saying that by his definition, in order to practice Christianity, one must only have sex with a member of the opposite gender in the context of a marriage.
It's a stupid thing to believe, but he has every right to believe it and express it. And it's important for those of us on the marriage equality side to distinguish between private religious convictions and public policy. These spheres must be kept distinct in order to be kept seperate.
No one is the least confused about what Broussard said or what it means-/we are just making fun of him and his imaginary friends for bringing his supposed religious beliefs into the locker room and the tv studio. It's as though the Collins situation came up and when asked "what do you think about an out gay man in the NBA ??" He responded "I don't think a man can really consider himself a real man unless he can play a Mozart sonata blindfolded." I mean:I get that its a true statement of his beliefs on the subject of manhood and pianos but why is it here? What relevance does it have to anything. Does he think that because baseball players sometimes ding. "God bless America" that the locker room is full of would be saints and choirboys and not druggies, whoremongers, gamblers and divorced guys?
ReplyDeleteAnd I guess it is just discrimination that I can't join the NBA.
ReplyDeleteNo, I heard your tryouts were AWFUL.
Oh poop.
ReplyDeleteThe latter part will probably happen at some point, although the gay-marry part will be left to read between the lines.
ReplyDeletePrefer to get my baked oratory from Cheech and Chong, thanks.
ReplyDeleteOh, I agree about The Importance of Allowing People to Say That You Can’t Be a Gay Basketball Player and a Christian, because then--and only then--we can have a Real Conversation about how those people are Bigoted Fuckbags. Because it's also Important to call those people Bigoted Fuckbags, and if they did not have the freedom to say what they believe, we could not tell them to Fuck Off.
ReplyDeleteI think that gay-haters would be more outraged to find out that very few gays want to fuck them, than they are about the notion of gay sex itself.
ReplyDeleteIt all goes back to seeing them as non-humans. Once you understand that gays are just people too with the same hopes, dreams, aspirations and problems as the rest of us, it becomes a lot clearer.
Well, there ARE the short pants...
ReplyDeleteand if you violate the rules, they put you in TIMEOUT! How manly is that?!?!?!?!
ReplyDeleteas my old football coach used to say -- ya gotta keep running that play until you get it right
ReplyDeleteSo hot!
ReplyDeleteRhetorical Pulp Fiction is my favorite movie.
ReplyDeleteHow much did Reason, the magazine of free markets, make in profit last year?
ReplyDeleteThat's really all you need to know about Glibtards.
Interesting that in the first graf Welsh needs to belittle Collins: "You have probably heard the news that
ReplyDeletemediocre but long-lasting NBA backup center Jason Collins today
became the first active professional men's team sports player to
come out as gay." So he's not Bill Russell. How is that relevant?
Re Brussard--he suffers from a misconception about the meaning of "faith." He thinks that anything he believes that falls under the category of "faith" cannot ever be analysed, or more seriously reflected upon. Under this notion of "faith" there would be no place for, errrmm, theologians and theology. Brussard needs to do some serious reading and thinking about what it means to be a Christian, if he wants to be one. Hint: It's not what TV preachers are doing.
Gridiron Lust: Moving the Goalposts
ReplyDeleteWhen an athletic born-again Democratic man decides to grapple with numerous other men, then shower with them afterwards, he discovers a whole new meaning for "NFL."
Gridiron Lust II: Fourth and Down
A born-again Democratic NFL coach learns there's more than one way to "go for it."
Gridiron Lust III: Chucking the Pigskin
... Um, I'll just stop right there.
Broussard's village misses its idiot.
ReplyDeleteHey! I'm a libertarian, and I'm all for social freedom and civil rights :(
ReplyDeleteOh... you meant those _conservative_ libertarians.
Yeah...
Mmm...That is sooo hot!
ReplyDeleteWhy here of course, where it might be read by more than a half dozen people and if it proves popular I might fire up YAB* and cross post them there. still working on the distillation of the format making observations about the appearance of the place in question and then goofing on the first couple of sentences, or paragraphs (tops), thus limiting my exposure to a minimum of insanity and inanity, a win win for me, mingled with a real time description of my reactions (expect the orange shirt and Makita drill or what ever is in my sightline when I look away from the screen to be regular features.
ReplyDeleteBut what if I have much different dreams and aspirations? What if these cause me different problems?
ReplyDeleteSorry, but I never liked the "gays should be first-class citizens because they're just like everyone else" angle. It's turned the gay community into (it seems) just another bunch of square white men throwing freaks and hippies under the bus. Enough already.