I promise not to sneak into Brandon Spikes' bathtub.

There's probably already a girl in there anyway. Perhaps alive.

Major league baseball has easily maintained it's tolerance of convicted wife-beaters, as managers and players. That the players get their knickers in a knot over the moral failings of Gay people is beyond laughable.

And of course, how dare anyone be intolerant of intolerance? White slave holders were merely doing what they felt was the most moral thing possible in caring for, and beating to death, members of "inferior" races.

The gay thing isn't the top commandment or even in the top 10. It really should be relagated to shellfish level obscurity but yet it's all anyone wants to talk about. I guess dudes ####### other dudes just can't be left unaddressed. My pastor brings it up at least twice a month. Shellfish, not as much.

Raw oysters are disgusting, yet delicious.

Homosexuality is a sin in most (all?) Christian denominations. The right way to gain tolerance is not to fight that - Christian dogma and beliefs are unlikely to change.

First, most mainline protestant denominations do not consider gay sex inherently sinful. This fact tends to get lost in discussions of sexuality and Christianity, because evangelical protestants and conservative Catholics dominate the conversation. Lutherans and Episcopals and Congregationalists and a variety of other Christian groups are now accepting of homosexuality and gay folks (we'll have gay marriage as official policy in the Lutheran and Episcopal churches soon), and the Presbyterians and Methodists are on their way. Christian dogma on homosexuality is in fact not unlikely to change - it is changing now, as we speak.

I can't believe someone actually went with the "you don't tolerate my bigotry. that makes you a bigot, too." I guess it is the best argument they've got.

Thanks for the clarification on various denominations, MCoA. And I really hope I didn't come across as going with the "your intolerance of my bigotry makes you a bigot" defense. I don't feel that way at all.

"I know you are, but what am I?" :-)

This is such a counterproductive starting point for any dialogue. "You are a bigot. Nice to meet you."

You missed the point, which is there is no way to have a constructive dialogue, and here is why:

Christians would do well to remember that homosexuality is a sin

You think people having the audacity to exist is some sort of affront. You might as well claim that being black is a sin. It is a point of view, that people should be ashamed of, and the best way to achieve that is by shaming people who hold it.

I think the same portion of the Bible from which prohibitions on homosex also say you're supposed to keep kosher, Torii. If you eat shellfish, you're just as bad me. I think poly-cotton blends are also considered a no-no.

And I also promise to stay away from Brandon Spikes' bathtub. Unless he invites me there. Because he wants to scream. Or moan. Who knows?

Thanks for the clarification on various denominations, MCoA. And I really hope I didn't come across as going with the "your intolerance of my bigotry makes you a bigot" defense. I don't feel that way at all.

Oh, no, I was unclear. Those were two entirely separate thoughts.

I do think it's important to note that Christian theology and social practice is moving steadily (in some cases more quickly than others) toward a proper embrance of gay men and women. I could recommend books.

But that is entirely separate from the idiotic line spouted by JR Wolf.

Christians would do well to remember that homosexuality is a sin rather than the sin of all sins.

And following on to that, Christians would do well to remember that homosexuality is not a sin. There are tons of books making this clear argument, one of my favorites, because it's also a cracking good history, is Mark Jordan, The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology. Patrick Cheng, Radical Love is a good general introduction to queer theology.

Most MLB uniforms are a mixture of fabrics, right?

I can't believe someone actually went with the "you don't tolerate my bigotry. that makes you a bigot, too."

Yes, the backlash there is always fascinating.

Most MLB uniforms are a mixture of fabrics, right?

Except the Braves' new batting practice hats. Those are made of 100% live injun skin.

And I also promise to stay away from Brandon Spikes' bathtub. Unless he invites me there. Because he wants to scream. Or moan. Who knows?

Put my money in your meter baby so it won't run down
You caught me in the squeeze play on the cheesy side of town
Throw me a dime, throw me a line...
I hear you moan, I hear you moan, I hear you moan...

Except the Braves' new batting practice hats. Those are made of 100% live injun skin.

Brilliant.

It's a sin to have "objectively disordered" sex. Which encompasses all gay sex.

If it's not objectively disordered, it's probably not much fun.

My intolerance isn't voluntary. There's a tiny monkey inseparably grafted on my back that continuously hurls racial slurs on my behalf.

@Eddo: that was both intolerant and insulting. Congratulations on a twofer.

Intolerance is intolerance. Hate gays? Intolerance. Hate people who hate gays? Intolerance at the same level. (Exception: declaring up front that people who don't tolerate gays are "bigoted and wrong" actually makes the declarer even less tolerant than the opposition.)

People have the right to believe as they wish and you thought control bigots out there need to learn the very toleration that you think that your opponents are so lacking in.

Intolerance is intolerance. Hate gays? Intolerance. Hate people who hate gays? Intolerance at the same level.

I disagree. The first is being intolerant of someone for being the way they are. The second is being intolerant of the way someone has chosen to act.

Is the second perfectly fine? No. The goal is to educate and help people become more tolerant. But just letting it go and saying, "you can feel however you want," is not the right way to go about it.

Being intolerant of Christians and conservatives is intolerance on a level that is every bit as bad as them being intolerant of homosexuals.

Sure but that isn't what is happening when people are unhappy with people like Torii when they say the things they say. It's a strawman argument.

People have the right to believe as they wish and you thought control bigots out there need to learn the very toleration that you think that your opponents are so lacking in.

False equivalence. I can't stop you from believing what you want, however silly it may be, nor am I interested in doing so. But if you guys get your way, I get discriminated against. Possibly put in prison.

JR Wolf's best read in the voice of Eric Cartman.

Tolerance isn't much of a virtue except in a drinking contest.

Exception: declaring up front that people who don't tolerate gays are "bigoted and wrong" actually makes the declarer even less tolerant than the opposition

Does this make sense? Don't think about it, just drink.

And following on to that, Christians would do well to remember that homosexuality is not a sin

Well of course it is, biblically. It great that some folks have found a novel way to move some books but it's not ambiguous language. The thing is that we all sin, biblically, thousands of times daily, homosexually isn't the unforgivable sin, and there is still a clear way for sinful man to be right with the Christian God.

Put my money in your meter baby so it won't run down
You caught me in the squeeze play on the cheesy side of town
Throw me a dime, throw me a line...
I hear you moan, I hear you moan, I hear you moan...

You callin' me fat?!

Tolerance includes tolerating the ALL of the political, religious and lifestyle views and viewpoints of others, not just those of atheists, agnosticists and Leftists.

It may only be my particular reaction to this word. But "Tolerance", to me, says "I know the best way, and you choose not to think it with me. But I accept this."

There's a twinge of paternalism and self-righteousness to it.

It's to remind those who are intolerant that homosexuals are just like any other sinners - which includes everyone on the planet - and go from there.

I'm sure you think this sounds perfectly reasonable.

The problem with this line of thinking is it requires me to accept your notion that homosexuality is a sin.

That is the very point I would be debating with you.

When you stop viewing gay people as sinners just for being gay and you stop lumping them in the same group as adulterers, theives, child-molesting priests, frauds and loan sharks, you'll have made a great deal of progress. We can go from there.

But if you guys get your way, I get discriminated against. Possibly put in prison.

Or in Uganda, killed.

Ben Chapman was uncomfortable sharing a baseball field with African Americans in 1947, but was forced to do so if he wanted to remain in baseball. One would hope Torii Hunter is familiar with that story, whether or not he gets the irony.

the reason that there are so many people freaking out over (male) homosexuals is that it's contagious. yes, that's right. you see, torii and his buddy spikes know that gay penises are magnetic and if you get next to one in the locker room, next thing you know, you are bending over to pick up the soap and liking it.

and you know how those athletes are always patting/rubbing each others butts - and doing other things too - just think about canseco/mcgwire in the bathroom stalls giving each other "injections" in the butt.

yes indeedy, those homosex guys are dangerous to baseball - put em in the locker room, and next thing you know, all them 3rd base players be stealin home, you feelin me here.

oh yeah - and the reason you ignore most of leviticus is because cotton/poly blends are comfy, genetically modified mixed breed seeds are the only ones you can buy, shellfish/bacon are delicious - however, buttsex is icky-poo.

oh yeah - if the rest of the conservatives were like harveys instead of like huckaster, this country wouldn't be so effed up

You callin' me fat?!

Tubby.

Rabbi Hillel was right. All of religion boils down to the Golden Rule. The rest is just commentary. (I was raised Jewish, but am under the impression that Jesus essentially agreed, generations later?)

the reason that there are so many people freaking out over (male) homosexuals is that it's contagious.

Sadly, it is not.

Also, we've been showering with breeder dudes all thru high school and college and the minors, well, those of us who get there anyway. I'd say that we learn to keep our urges under control, but it's not even that, really. The gym shower is not really a sexualized situation. I realize that the adult film industry does not view it that way, but I also once delivered pizzas and the adult film industry doesn't portray that profession accurately either. Go figure.

Anyone else think it would be funny to see Prince Fielder getting banged by Miguel Cabrera?

"Is it in yet?"

"I dunno, I can't feel it, I think you need to spread apart the fat first. You know what, nevermind, lets just do it in the mouth. I haven't had a sausage in years".

That would really tear Tori up!

I think it's safe to say that, in general, the reception of the first openly gay male athlete in the Big 3 will depend heavily on how good he is. If it's a perennial All-Star, even the most prejudiced would be able to put aside their "difficulty" so long as the player is helping the team.

But if it was a bench player who was perpetually having to fight for a roster spot every spring? That's an entirely different story.

I don't think so. I suspect as long as the guy is a respected pro, not an AJ or Arod type, he'll be fine. When ballplayers are asked about having a gay teammate, they don't think of a specific guy as being gay, but as a hypothetical person whose only known characteristic is his homosexuality. It's much easier to think this hypothetical guy will be a problem.

But that won't be the case. The first openly gay player will be someone who has, presumably, already demonstrated himself as a ballplayer and teammate and hearty fellow, etc., and thus his sexual preference will be just a small part of him. And while it will obviously be news for a while, I doubt it will be much of an issue in most clubhouses.

83 - i don't guess i should make jokes about locker room sex, but then again, i'm a bad BAD grrrrl

so are you trying to tell me that when you delivered pizzas all these hot dudes didn't suddenly realize what they'd been missing and you were makin a delivery you didn't expect?

breeder dudes

Heh. My guess is that this expression is common, but being unhip and uncool, I had never heard it. Pretty funny.

I agree with most of what SoSH said, and as discussed before, I think it is likely that the first active player to come out, whatever the sport, will be a guy who is pretty damn good to great and therefore secure.

The problem with this line of thinking is it requires me to accept your notion that homosexuality is a sin.

Walt -

I think that's more of a counter-argument towards people who think homosexuality is a sin. You don't need to accept that homosexuality is a sin to make the argument to those who do that we're all sinners, homosexual behaviour isn't some sort of special unforgivable sin (at least in Catholicism) and that they ought not to any more hung up on it than they are adulterers.

But that won't be the case. The first openly gay player will be someone who has, presumably, already demonstrated himself as a ballplayer and teammate and hearty fellow, etc., and thus his sexual preference will be just a small part of him. And while it will obviously be news for a while, I doubt it will be much of an issue in most clubhouses.

Not to mention who will have a substantial number of teammates who don't care about him being gay -- who *very actively* want it to be the non-issue it should be, where a guy like Torii turns out to be the disruptive divisive presence in the clubhouse.

Edit: "non-issue" isn't the right way to put it, because it will be a big deal. More that there will be teammates who will be all: "Hey, don't be an #######..."

Not to mention who will have a substantial number of teammates who don't care about him being gay -- who *very actively* want it to be the non-issue it should be, where a guy like Torii turns out to be the disruptive divisive presence in the clubhouse.

Morever, I suspect that a lot of the Torii types will change their views when this gay teammate is a guy they happen to like/respect.

so are you trying to tell me that when you delivered pizzas all these hot dudes didn't suddenly realize what they'd been missing and you were makin a delivery you didn't expect?

Lonely housewives do not look like porn stars, whether or not they are horny.

I am guessing that the local gays were not ordering pizza delivery, or at least were not doing so as a means of obtaining sexual gratification.

You don't need to accept that homosexuality is a sin to make the argument to those who do that we're all sinners, homosexual behaviour isn't some sort of special unforgivable sin (at least in Catholicism) and that they ought not to any more hung up on it than they are adulterers.

A preacher who excoriates adulterers or gamblers is uncomfortably talking about a big chunk of his flock. A preacher who goes after homosexuals is maybe talking about a few relatives of his flock who likely don't go to his church.

@jdunster55 - Sure, I don't disagree with that. Just because the pastor is keenly aware of who puts bread in his mouth doesn't mean that those of us who don't need to keep the congregation donating can't point out the incongruity.

#13 hit the nail on the head. I'm sure he's played with dozens of adulterers. That's one of the Ten freaking Commandments! He should be a lot more uncomfortable by that "as a Christian." What offends him as a bigot is his prerogative, just leave the church out of it.

When you stop viewing gay people as sinners just for being gay and you stop lumping them in the same group as adulterers, theives, child-molesting priests, frauds and loan sharks, you'll have made a great deal of progress. We can go from there

OK I have never viewed gay people as sinners just for being gay, and have never lumped them in with those other people. I have also made no progress since I have never thought differently. I still think that people can think whatever they like and I do not have the right to demonize them for disapproving of whatever they want to disapprove of. For example, I do not believe that polygamy is a sin, nor prostitution. I expect that there will be several posters here who think that they are. As far as I'm concerned you can all disapprove of whatever you like and I'm willing to tolerate you. OTOH I do believe that abortion is a sin. I expect that several posters who think it is not. If I am not extended the same tolerance for disapproving of something that you do not disapprove of you are, whether Walt likes it or not, just as bigoted as Torii Hunter. Further your brand of bigotry, wherein you believe you are somehow "superior" for being "tolerant" because you do not disapprove of something that I do disapprove of, irritates me far more than that of Torii Hunter, who is just saying what he thinks. He is not saying that he is a superior human being. You people are.

Where did I say I am a superior human being?

I said homosexuality is not sinful.

I will also say that Jack Morris does not deserve to be a Hall of Famer.

I am not saying I am superior to those who disagree with me, I am saying, on these topics, that they are wrong, incorrect, misguided, what have you.

Now, you may disagree with me that the Who were better than the Beatles and I will not call you wrong. You might prefer Chinese food to Indian and I will not call you wrong.

But, in any of those cases, the notion that the best way for to engage someone is to grant the assumption that they are correct is a pointless non-starter. #88 is saying that I should engage people by pointing out their hypocrisy (this is questionable strategy but whatever). This is the approach that people are taking by noting that Hunter has probably played with many adulterers and should be as or more bothered by them than by any homosexuals he plays with. (For all we know Torii is very uncomfortable with the adulterers.)

Those positions are wrong. Those positions make the claim that homosexuality is a sin but that you should "love the sinner" or be more annoyed with adulterers. Those positions allow bigots to be comfortable in their bigotry.

Homosexuality is not a sin. There is NOTHING wrong with homosexuality. Not a single god-damned thing. The position of the Catholic Church (and many other religions and Christian sects) with regard to homosexuality is wrong. The position of many religions with regard to women is wrong. Major League Baseball was wrong to exclude black players. Slavery was wrong, Jim Crow was wrong, denying women the vote was wrong, monarchies and dictatorships are wrong. These are not hard questions.

That they are also often hypocritical in their castigation of some "sinners" and not others is just icing on the cake.

OK I have never viewed gay people as sinners just for being gay, and have never lumped them in with those other people. I have also made no progress since I have never thought differently. I still think that people can think whatever they like and I do not have the right to demonize them for disapproving of whatever they want to disapprove of. For example, I do not believe that polygamy is a sin, nor prostitution. I expect that there will be several posters here who think that they are. As far as I'm concerned you can all disapprove of whatever you like and I'm willing to tolerate you. OTOH I do believe that abortion is a sin. I expect that several posters who think it is not. If I am not extended the same tolerance for disapproving of something that you do not disapprove of you are, whether Walt likes it or not, just as bigoted as Torii Hunter. Further your brand of bigotry, wherein you believe you are somehow "superior" for being "tolerant" because you do not disapprove of something that I do disapprove of, irritates me far more than that of Torii Hunter, who is just saying what he thinks. He is not saying that he is a superior human being. You people are.

Was it inappropriate for the Civil Rights marchers to feel superior to the Bull Connors and George Wallaces of the world? There are still people in this country that are against interracial marriage, it it OK to criticize them? Is it "bigotry" to call those people out?

You have every right to demonize people for holding views you find to be abhorrent. There is no justifiable reason to be against homosexuality or gay sex.

Torii Hunter, who is just saying what he thinks. He is not saying that he is a superior human being.

Sure he is. If "it's not right" to be gay, and he isn't gay, then he is superior to gays.

[95] (and others) seems to be making the moral relativist argument, where as [96] (and others) seems to be making a fundamental human rights argument.

FWIW, I'm in the "fundamental human rights" camp.

I wonder if Torii had said having a Jewish teammate or a Chinese teammate or a deaf teammate would be difficult he would be getting this same defense.