USWNT

I don't hate religious bigots. Actually, I love them with all my heart. I just hate their actions and therefore use the authority of my moral high ground to oppose their efforts to seek preferential treatment, just as they use what they think is religious high ground to oppose equality. Do you understand now how ludicrous the "hate the sin but not the sinner" argument is? It is just an excuse for religious bigots to feel better about themselves when they oppose the civil rights of others. If you oppose equality and civil rights for the LGBT community and repeatedly speak out about it, as Hinkle does, you are by definition homophobic. Religious bigots no longer get to frame the argument with their twisted logic without getting called out for it, as the patriot Ashlyn Harris made clear. If you're a true Christian and think it is wrong to marry someone of the same sex, don't. There is no legitimate reason to oppose someone else's constitutional right to do so. None.

I didn't bring up Hinkle, and I'll stop talking about her here just as soon as others stop falsely accusing Ellis and USSF of excluding her because of her religion. As soon as they stop falsely claiming that USSF is a public entity and therefore must allow homophobes like her to play even when they aren't good enough on the merits. If you want to move on, then follow your advice instead of trying to tell me you really love the people you are seeking to deprive of their civil rights. But as long as you want to keep talking about it, I'm here.
Why did they exclude her?
 
Hate the sin, but not the sinner. If you think that is ludicrous, then you really don't understand it. You are focusing on one type of sin, example, let's say a family member commits a crime while under the influence. I don't think people will hate the family member, but we can say that we hate that they allowed the sin of being under the influence to cloud their judgement and commit another sin, the crime. The freedom of will allows all of us the choice on how we decide to live. Yet somehow, if the choice to not wear a jersey that empowers a lifestyle that one's faith says is not the right choice. Why is it that homophobic. You simply don't agree and choose not to support it. Kind of like if we lived in a nation that allowed us the freedom of speech. Its a choice, it's and opinion, it's a lifestyle. Where in all this has anyone's civil rights been trampled and denied. The real problem is that as soon as you don't agree with any LGBT stance, you automatically become the bigot, the oppressor, the homophobe. To say Hinkle's talent is not worthy of being on the team and somehow she managed to lose her spot on the team due to her lack of soccer talent. I think that is a shame. Like a said before, had a Muslim made the team, and ventured forth to make the same decision not to wear the rainbow jersey. Everyone would be called Islamophobic.
They would never call a Muslim out, muslims throw gays off of buildings and I don’t remember the left saying much about it. Let’s ask Omar about gays.
 
In 2017 Hinkle's club manager North Carolina Courage head coach Paul Riley has been quoted as saying that Hinkle has "been the best left back in the league this year, of that there's absolutely no question." While Hinkle did pass up on playing those games in which player were scheduled to sport the rainbow numbers as the team was celebrating the LGBTQ pride month. That didn't mean she wasn't available to play the next available games. She simply wasn't called back to play and it's pointless to speculate as to all the reasons why. People have reason's to believe that she wasn't good enough, that her faith, which may have made it difficult to be accepted and might have affected the teams chemistry and so on and so forth. I believe Dunn did a great job as a left back. Would Hinkle been better as a natural left back. We will never know. The USWNT has been amazing to watch and can't wait to see how far they can maintain this level of championship play. I have always been a proponent of playing the best players. You tend to get the best results. Only time will tell.
 
Not at all. Exodus 21:24.

The last time I checked, the Constitution is the law of the land, and the bible is a book from which too many people selectively pick and choose passages to rationalize inappropriate behavior and justify the continuing oppression of others.

Except that leftists consider the Constitution a "living, breathing document", endlessly attempting to change it with activist judicial interpretations for purposes of political expediency. Imagine if your lender informed you that your mortgage is "living, breathing document" and your interest rate just tripled.
 
I don't hate religious bigots. Actually, I love them with all my heart. I just hate their actions and therefore use the authority of my moral high ground to oppose their efforts to seek preferential treatment, just as they use what they think is religious high ground to oppose equality. Do you understand now how ludicrous the "hate the sin but not the sinner" argument is? It is just an excuse for religious bigots to feel better about themselves when they oppose the civil rights of others. If you oppose equality and civil rights for the LGBT community and repeatedly speak out about it, as Hinkle does, you are by definition homophobic. Religious bigots no longer get to frame the argument with their twisted logic without getting called out for it, as the patriot Ashlyn Harris made clear. If you're a true Christian and think it is wrong to marry someone of the same sex, don't. There is no legitimate reason to oppose someone else's constitutional right to do so. None.

I didn't bring up Hinkle, and I'll stop talking about her here just as soon as others stop falsely accusing Ellis and USSF of excluding her because of her religion. As soon as they stop falsely claiming that USSF is a public entity and therefore must allow homophobes like her to play even when they aren't good enough on the merits. If you want to move on, then follow your advice instead of trying to tell me you really love the people you are seeking to deprive of their civil rights. But as long as you want to keep talking about it, I'm here.

antifa is in the bldg
 
Hate the sin, but not the sinner. If you think that is ludicrous, then you really don't understand it. You are focusing on one type of sin, example, let's say a family member commits a crime while under the influence. I don't think people will hate the family member, but we can say that we hate that they allowed the sin of being under the influence to cloud their judgement and commit another sin, the crime. The freedom of will allows all of us the choice on how we decide to live. Yet somehow, if the choice to not wear a jersey that empowers a lifestyle that one's faith says is not the right choice. Why is it that homophobic. You simply don't agree and choose not to support it. Kind of like if we lived in a nation that allowed us the freedom of speech. Its a choice, it's and opinion, it's a lifestyle. Where in all this has anyone's civil rights been trampled and denied. The real problem is that as soon as you don't agree with any LGBT stance, you automatically become the bigot, the oppressor, the homophobe. To say Hinkle's talent is not worthy of being on the team and somehow she managed to lose her spot on the team due to her lack of soccer talent. I think that is a shame. Like a said before, had a Muslim made the team, and ventured forth to make the same decision not to wear the rainbow jersey. Everyone would be called Islamophobic.

consider who you're trying to reason with
 
Except that leftists consider the Constitution a "living, breathing document", endlessly attempting to change it with activist judicial interpretations for purposes of political expediency. Imagine if your lender informed you that your mortgage is "living, breathing document" and your interest rate just tripled.

It's called an adjustable rate mortgage. Save your faux-conservative rage. You are a slave to a demagogue. Just grab it in the pussy and accept it.
 
Hinkle seems to get along with her club teammates just fine...as well as her former college mates, etc. Are we to assume that there were no lesbians on either team? Every female soccer team in the NWSL has multiple gay players. Your daughter's club team probably has at least one or two right now. The issue isn't Hinkle's disagreement with gay marriage--something the "bigoted" Barack Obama disagreed with until late in his political career. The issue is that she was forced into that personal moral decision because US Soccer (and Nike) decided to try and make money selling politically charged Rainbow jerseys and align politically with a large portion of their fan base. (Certainly doesn't hurt that the head coach is gay and at least 7 of their players are too.)

Decisions like these reinforce the argument that the USWNT is less about being a sporting team/endeavor and more about being a PAC, just like MoveOn or CPAC. I think the US men also wore Rainbow jerseys. But I'm not aware of any other sport that has done so. Never have seen US Swimming require rainbow speedos, or US Skiing require rainbow tights, or US softball (also a high participation lesbian sport) require rainbow uniforms. So, it begs the question, why? Many sports wear pink for cancer awareness, but that's not a political hot potato. Everyone is for cancer awareness and cures. And cancer strikes everyone -- gay, straight, black, white, etc. But everyone is not gay or potentially gay. So it's not an inclusive initiative on its face. Then add the politics and it's just a confounding decision.

As I mentioned previously, Canada was, proudly, way ahead of the US and rest of the world on recognizing gay marriage and rights. Our soccer teams have never donned rainbow jerseys. Maybe we feel that our actions speak louder than a shirt with colorful numbers, and a nike logo of course.
 
Hinkle seems to get along with her club teammates just fine...as well as her former college mates, etc. Are we to assume that there were no lesbians on either team? Every female soccer team in the NWSL has multiple gay players. Your daughter's club team probably has at least one or two right now. The issue isn't Hinkle's disagreement with gay marriage--something the "bigoted" Barack Obama disagreed with until late in his political career. The issue is that she was forced into that personal moral decision because US Soccer (and Nike) decided to try and make money selling politically charged Rainbow jerseys and align politically with a large portion of their fan base. (Certainly doesn't hurt that the head coach is gay and at least 7 of their players are too.)

Decisions like these reinforce the argument that the USWNT is less about being a sporting team/endeavor and more about being a PAC, just like MoveOn or CPAC. I think the US men also wore Rainbow jerseys. But I'm not aware of any other sport that has done so. Never have seen US Swimming require rainbow speedos, or US Skiing require rainbow tights, or US softball (also a high participation lesbian sport) require rainbow uniforms. So, it begs the question, why? Many sports wear pink for cancer awareness, but that's not a political hot potato. Everyone is for cancer awareness and cures. And cancer strikes everyone -- gay, straight, black, white, etc. But everyone is not gay or potentially gay. So it's not an inclusive initiative on its face. Then add the politics and it's just a confounding decision.

As I mentioned previously, Canada was, proudly, way ahead of the US and rest of the world on recognizing gay marriage and rights. Our soccer teams have never donned rainbow jerseys. Maybe we feel that our actions speak louder than a shirt with colorful numbers, and a nike logo of course.

I can understand and respect Hinkle’s decision. She thoughtfully did what she felt was right and she doesn’t deserve to be lambasted for it. But where do those that oppose draw the line? Is it ok to play for an organization that hosts gay pride nights and sells gay pride gear to fans? Does it only matter if the symbol is directly on your body?

I wonder if Hinkle considered that a player can wear that rainbow number on her jersey as an endorsement of equal human rights without condoning homosexuality.
 
Hinkle seems to get along with her club teammates just fine...as well as her former college mates, etc. Are we to assume that there were no lesbians on either team? Every female soccer team in the NWSL has multiple gay players. Your daughter's club team probably has at least one or two right now. The issue isn't Hinkle's disagreement with gay marriage--something the "bigoted" Barack Obama disagreed with until late in his political career. The issue is that she was forced into that personal moral decision because US Soccer (and Nike) decided to try and make money selling politically charged Rainbow jerseys and align politically with a large portion of their fan base. (Certainly doesn't hurt that the head coach is gay and at least 7 of their players are too.)

Decisions like these reinforce the argument that the USWNT is less about being a sporting team/endeavor and more about being a PAC, just like MoveOn or CPAC. I think the US men also wore Rainbow jerseys. But I'm not aware of any other sport that has done so. Never have seen US Swimming require rainbow speedos, or US Skiing require rainbow tights, or US softball (also a high participation lesbian sport) require rainbow uniforms. So, it begs the question, why? Many sports wear pink for cancer awareness, but that's not a political hot potato. Everyone is for cancer awareness and cures. And cancer strikes everyone -- gay, straight, black, white, etc. But everyone is not gay or potentially gay. So it's not an inclusive initiative on its face. Then add the politics and it's just a confounding decision.

As I mentioned previously, Canada was, proudly, way ahead of the US and rest of the world on recognizing gay marriage and rights. Our soccer teams have never donned rainbow jerseys. Maybe we feel that our actions speak louder than a shirt with colorful numbers, and a nike logo of course.
yeh ok. but fyi: in some parts of THIS country, kids are still killed or bullied into killing themselves because they are gay.
 
Back
Top