Skip to comments.
Ex-Bears QB Miller: Religion a barrier for gays in locker room
Chicago Tribune ^
| February 26, 2013
Posted on 02/26/2013 5:59:37 PM PST by ConservativeStatement
Former Chicago Bears quarterback Jim Miller cited religion Tuesday in arguing that an openly gay player would not be welcomed in NFL locker rooms.
There are some religions that are just not going to accept a gay individual in the locker room, Miller told "The McNeil and Spiegel Show" on WSCR-AM 670. So now, are you as an organization going to bring that element into your locker room and think everything is going to be OK?
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: faith; football; gays; homosexualagenda; lavendermafia; lockerroom; miller; nfl; religion; sports
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 last
To: RoosterRedux
The use of any drug, including alcohol, IMHO, would be wrong if it caused or somehow encouraged sinfulness in the life of a believer. So it's true of any drug including alcohol that "The problem is right and wrong" if and only if it causes or somehow encourages sinfulness in the life of a believer? That I can agree with. Can we further agree that both pot and alcohol sometimes but not always cause or encourage sinfulness in the life of a believer?
41
posted on
02/27/2013 11:59:12 AM PST
by
JustSayNoToNannies
("The Lord has removed His judgments against you" - Zep. 3:15)
To: RoosterRedux
So if someone argues with you, it justifies slander. So nice to meet you, Jesus.
42
posted on
02/27/2013 12:03:23 PM PST
by
fattigermaster
(Train for life in prison because they are stacking the bricks and setting the bars around you.)
To: RoosterRedux
The problem is you insist upon conflating your religious perspective (boiled down to "sins should be illegal") with the law of the land in a nation state with freedom of religion, individual unalienable right to Liberty and pursue of happiness, and, wherein, the State's only interest in licensing what it wrongly calls "marriage" is in property rights and who'll take responsibility.
To: newzjunkey
Wrong Mr Junkie.
Marriage is chiefly a “religious” contract, having little or no other meaning. Government has no business in marriage; it is a violation of the first amendment free exercise clause.
44
posted on
02/27/2013 7:31:38 PM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: ConservativeStatement
45
posted on
02/27/2013 7:36:16 PM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: HiTech RedNeck; Past Your Eyes
I could care less is correct; it’s a sarcastic comment, and being over specific would destroy the sarcasm.
Some are simply not sufficiently cogent to grasp those nuances I guess.
46
posted on
02/27/2013 7:41:34 PM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: editor-surveyor
It was a poke at his use of “could” instead of “couldn't” as others later mentioned.
47
posted on
02/27/2013 8:53:06 PM PST
by
ConservativeStatement
(Obama is the "Disco Duck" president. A no-substance novelty that reached number one.)
To: editor-surveyor
"I could care less is incorrect; its a sarcastic comment made in ignorance.Fixed.
48
posted on
02/28/2013 3:51:12 AM PST
by
Past Your Eyes
(I've all but given up my crusade to rid the world of fools; there are, I found, just too many.)
To: newzjunkey
The problem is you insist upon conflating your religious perspective (boiled down to "sins should be illegal")... No I didn't.
Nowhere did I say "sins" should be illegal.
I merely said that there is a war (and there always has been) between the forces or good and evil, right and wrong.
As to gay marriage, there are civil unions already available. What the Gay Agenda wants is a declaration by all of society including religion, that sodomy is normal.
Sodomy is not normal or healthy...it is a mental disorder.
49
posted on
02/28/2013 5:09:57 AM PST
by
RoosterRedux
(Get armed, practice in the use of your weapons, get physically fit, stay alert!)
To: editor-surveyor
“Cognizant” is, I believe, the word which you intended.
50
posted on
02/28/2013 6:04:06 AM PST
by
HiTech RedNeck
(How long before all this "fairness" kills everybody, even the poor it was supposed to help???)
To: RoosterRedux
Even worse, driven by a spiritual disorder.
Nobody sane wants or expects a gummit to ban every single solitary evil thing. It would have to be such a colossal nanny that it would fall all over itself in its own ineptitude (this is not a government of perfected saints we are speaking of, but one of fallen sinners). It can both practically and legitimately ban some broad classes of evils that no reasonable person would disagree with, like murder or thievery, or careless spread of deadly and disfiguring disease.
51
posted on
02/28/2013 6:08:53 AM PST
by
HiTech RedNeck
(How long before all this "fairness" kills everybody, even the poor it was supposed to help???)
To: editor-surveyor
Government has no business in marriage So you think government should stop issuing marriage licenses?
52
posted on
02/28/2013 8:08:46 AM PST
by
JustSayNoToNannies
("The Lord has removed His judgments against you" - Zep. 3:15)
To: ConservativeStatement; Past Your Eyes
NO!
I could care less is what was intended. Couldn’t is what the slow mind replaces it with, not grasping the sarcasm intended. This is an old quip that is just another piece of our culture that has been destroyed by PC news boobs.
53
posted on
02/28/2013 9:00:40 AM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: JustSayNoToNannies
Since marriage is YHVH’s institution, the only ‘license’ that is appropriate is his.
Government issuance of a license invites government definition of what marriage is; do you want that?
Anyway, marriage was not the point of my comment. It’s the intrusion of government into interpersonal relationships of any kind that is wrong. I used marriage because it was easily shown that government has no place in it.
54
posted on
02/28/2013 9:06:09 AM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: HiTech RedNeck
Another rotation of the same entity, but I wasn’t aiming at recognition of, but usage of loaded communication, which is what I believe Mr Miller was attempting. He was trying to inform the reporter that they had no dog in the fight.
55
posted on
02/28/2013 9:13:22 AM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: editor-surveyor
The two words derive from different roots. Cogent is to be organized and forceful and effective. Cognizant means to perceive and know. Being cognizant helps in some ways of being cogent, but they are not the same thing twisted around.
56
posted on
02/28/2013 9:26:18 PM PST
by
HiTech RedNeck
(How long before all this "fairness" kills everybody, even the poor it was supposed to help???)
To: editor-surveyor
If you want to know the truth, I couldn’t care less and not only that, I COULD care less what you think, irregardless.
57
posted on
03/01/2013 8:47:19 AM PST
by
Past Your Eyes
(I've all but given up my crusade to rid the world of fools; there are, I found, just too many.)
To: Past Your Eyes
>> “irregardless.” <<
.
No word could better describe your intellect.
58
posted on
03/03/2013 4:20:06 PM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: editor-surveyor
I can see that I am wasting my time on a humorless person without even a modicum of understanding of irony such as yourself. But then, I really COULDN'T care less what you think.
59
posted on
03/03/2013 5:34:31 PM PST
by
Past Your Eyes
(I've all but given up my crusade to rid the world of fools; there are, I found, just too many.)
To: Past Your Eyes
60
posted on
03/03/2013 7:34:52 PM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson