Author Topic: First Openly Gay Athlete (in a major sport) (Read 61586 times)

michigancat · « **Reply #275 on:** May 02, 2013, 11:53:40 AM »

Quote from: _33 on May 02, 2013, 08:55:45 AM

Quote from: MakeItRain on May 01, 2013, 10:34:07 PM
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on April 30, 2013, 01:10:46 PM
This is a fantastic thread.

But chalk me up as someone who is asking why this is such a big deal.

I guess I ask because for one reason or another I've been around quite a few gay people in my life. Neighbors, co-workers, customers, friends . . . and it just doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

Talk to those gay people about it if you want to understand why its a big deal. Human rights advancement can never be oversold.

How does this advance human rights?

It makes it far easier for future gay athletes to be out of the closet. Honestly, what Collins did took some serious balls. It will be much easier for the rest.

_33 · « **Reply #276 on:** May 02, 2013, 01:11:27 PM »

Quote from: michigancat on May 02, 2013, 11:53:40 AM

Quote from: _33 on May 02, 2013, 08:55:45 AM
Quote from: MakeItRain on May 01, 2013, 10:34:07 PM
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on April 30, 2013, 01:10:46 PM
This is a fantastic thread.

But chalk me up as someone who is asking why this is such a big deal.

I guess I ask because for one reason or another I've been around quite a few gay people in my life. Neighbors, co-workers, customers, friends . . . and it just doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

Talk to those gay people about it if you want to understand why its a big deal. Human rights advancement can never be oversold.

How does this advance human rights?

It makes it far easier for future gay athletes to be out of the closet. Honestly, what Collins did took some serious balls. It will be much easier for the rest.

Right. But how does that advance human rights?

CNS · « **Reply #277 on:** May 02, 2013, 01:16:32 PM »

The more common it is, the more accepted it will be. The more accepted it is, the more equality members of the gay community will enjoy. Equality will lead to gays having the same rights as heteros.

Maybe you are playing the line that inheritance, benefits, insurance, marriage, etc aren't "human" rights

michigancat · « **Reply #278 on:** May 02, 2013, 02:53:07 PM »

Quote from: _33 on May 02, 2013, 01:11:27 PM

Quote from: michigancat on May 02, 2013, 11:53:40 AM
Quote from: _33 on May 02, 2013, 08:55:45 AM
Quote from: MakeItRain on May 01, 2013, 10:34:07 PM
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on April 30, 2013, 01:10:46 PM
This is a fantastic thread.

But chalk me up as someone who is asking why this is such a big deal.

I guess I ask because for one reason or another I've been around quite a few gay people in my life. Neighbors, co-workers, customers, friends . . . and it just doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

Talk to those gay people about it if you want to understand why its a big deal. Human rights advancement can never be oversold.

How does this advance human rights?

It makes it far easier for future gay athletes to be out of the closet. Honestly, what Collins did took some serious balls. It will be much easier for the rest.

Right. But how does that advance human rights?

The ability to be openly gay without fear of persecution is a human right. (Or it should be).

_33 · « **Reply #279 on:** May 02, 2013, 07:56:07 PM »

Alrighty.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #280 on:** May 02, 2013, 09:22:07 PM »

It doesn't.

The term "human rights" in this country is as nebulous as "fair share" or "equality". It means nothing other than to the person using it. It is a talking point that self aggrandising, shallow, superficial nitwits dwell over when they arent busy telling each other how wonderful they are.

This thread has outed many of these types of useless people.

The guy is gay, wgaf. It's ironic that the people who want everyone treated equally spend they're entire lives categoricalizing people for the purpose of treating them differently. But if not for these people words like imbecile would have no meaningp

steve dave · « **Reply #281 on:** May 02, 2013, 09:23:34 PM »

well that lived up to expectations

michigancat · « **Reply #282 on:** May 02, 2013, 09:51:07 PM »

Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 02, 2013, 09:22:07 PM

It doesn't.

The term "human rights" in this country is as nebulous as "fair share" or "equality". It means nothing other than to the person using it. It is a talking point that self aggrandising, shallow, superficial nitwits dwell over when they arent busy telling each other how wonderful they are.

This thread has outed many of these types of useless people.

The guy is gay, wgaf. It's ironic that the people who want everyone treated equally spend they're entire lives categoricalizing people for the purpose of treating them differently. But if not for these people words like imbecile would have no meaningp

You are wonderful, fake sugar dick.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #283 on:** May 02, 2013, 09:58:27 PM »

What are you two so afraid of?

Spaces · « **Reply #284 on:** May 02, 2013, 10:19:18 PM »

OK_Cat · « **Reply #285 on:** May 03, 2013, 09:35:21 AM »

someone should change FSD's title to "a white midwesterner talking point"

The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep · « **Reply #286 on:** May 03, 2013, 09:47:54 AM »

Karl Welzein?@DadBoner 20h
There's tons of NBA guys wastin' dough on random kids they made. Heard that Shawn Kemp has like 17. If he was into dudes, he'd be loaded.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #287 on:** May 03, 2013, 11:41:15 AM »

Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 02, 2013, 09:22:07 PM

It doesn't.

The term "human rights" in this country is as nebulous as "fair share" or "equality". It means nothing other than to the person using it. It is a talking point that self aggrandising, shallow, superficial nitwits dwell over when they arent busy telling each other how wonderful they are.

This thread has outed many of these types of useless people.

The guy is gay, wgaf. It's ironic that the people who want everyone treated equally spend they're entire lives categoricalizing people for the purpose of treating them differently. But if not for these people words like imbecile would have no meaningp

This is amazing.

Also what are "aggrandising" and "categoricalizing?" I think one is a misspelling, not a typo, and one is a completely made-up word; pretty glaring errors made in the course of calling people nitwits and imbeciles.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #288 on:** May 03, 2013, 02:03:06 PM »

Present participle (<-- not made up), nitwit and/or imbecile.

Although categoricalizing appears to be an autocorrect from categorizing, it still works.

Usually the grammar/spell check police (one of the lowest forms of bbs'ing) are at least versed in grammar and spelling, and a 200+ word vocabulary. SMH, mir.

michigancat · « **Reply #289 on:** May 03, 2013, 03:06:38 PM »

OK_Cat · « **Reply #290 on:** May 03, 2013, 03:07:23 PM »

i guarantee that FSD rocks a flannel/overalls combo at least three times a week

Cire · « **Reply #291 on:** May 03, 2013, 03:51:15 PM »

hey muffin and PW how do you guys feel about OWNING SLAVES!!!!!11!!!!11!!!11

MakeItRain · « **Reply #292 on:** May 03, 2013, 04:34:43 PM »

Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 03, 2013, 02:03:06 PM

Present participle (<-- not made up), nitwit and/or imbecile.

Although categoricalizing appears to be an autocorrect from categorizing, it still works.

Usually the grammar/spell check police (one of the lowest forms of bbs'ing) are at least versed in grammar and spelling, and a 200+ word vocabulary. SMH, mir.

Wait, are you saying your software auto corrected a correct word to a made up one?

EllRobersonisInnocent · « **Reply #293 on:** May 03, 2013, 04:45:42 PM »

Will use "categoricalizing" in a sentence tonight to see if I get called out for being a dumbass

MakeItRain · « **Reply #294 on:** May 03, 2013, 05:33:54 PM »

A google search of "categoricalizing" has this thread as its #2 result. Grats FSD, the joke is on the rest of us imbeciles and nitwits. Lets shoot for #1.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #295 on:** May 03, 2013, 05:35:33 PM »

Quote from: Cire on May 03, 2013, 03:51:15 PM

hey muffin and PW how do you guys feel about OWNING SLAVES!!!!!11!!!!11!!!11

I don't think they will answer questions of this nature. I asked them about interracial relationships and shaving their beards and I've yet to hear a response.

fun muffin · « **Reply #296 on:** May 03, 2013, 06:04:07 PM »

Quote from: MakeItRain on May 03, 2013, 05:35:33 PM

Quote from: Cire on May 03, 2013, 03:51:15 PM
hey muffin and PW how do you guys feel about OWNING SLAVES!!!!!11!!!!11!!!11

I don't think they will answer questions of this nature. I asked them about interracial relationships and shaving their beards and I've yet to hear a response.

Both Poetwarrior and I said there is no evidence in the Bible that prohibits interracial relationships.

Cire · « **Reply #297 on:** May 03, 2013, 06:51:07 PM »

That's because it wasn't even an after thought back then you hateful pos.

EllRobersonisInnocent · « **Reply #298 on:** May 03, 2013, 07:19:17 PM »

Quote from: Cire on May 03, 2013, 06:51:07 PM

That's because it wasn't even an after thought back then you hateful pos.

Reading this then looking at your avatar made me

fun muffin · « **Reply #299 on:** May 03, 2013, 07:45:15 PM »

Quote from: Cire on May 03, 2013, 06:51:07 PM

That's because it wasn't even an after thought back then you hateful pos.

Interracial relationships are a beautiful thing. Not sure where the hate is coming from. MIR was the one who brought it up. And all I told him was that there is no evidence in the Bible against interracial relationships. I am very much for interracial relationships.