Jump to content

Breakout: Ron Brown and religion


Recommended Posts

I think Ron Brown is an amazing guy that many kids have benefited by him making their lives better both on and off the field.  This incident is a stain on his legacy.  But, I won't let it diminish my thoughts of him and what he has meant to kids coming through the program.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In honesty, some of the anti-gay rhetoric from conservative Christians essentially locks the gays in the burning building, then shakes its head sadly at the fate they chose.

Don't like the idea that the University would hire someone proactively against civil rights, but you have to work with people who have different opinions sometimes. Just the way things are. Hopefully

You have spectacularly missed the point. 

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Comfortably Numb said:

I think it is valuable for people to realize that church is not a museum for saints but rather is a hospital for sinners. Too often in these discussions I think non-Christian folk tend to assume that whenever a person speaks out on a behavior they feel is wrong that they are doing it for the wrong reasons. Sure it doesn't help that many actually do speak out for the wrong reasons, pointing out the speck in their neighbors eye while ignoring the log in their own. But knowing all that I think I know about Ron Brown I think his intentions are good, heart is in the right place, and that he is simply stating his beliefs and trying to help people rather than judge them, set them apart, or place himself above them. Having said that, it is still best if he maintains some separation between his personal beliefs and his very public employment by a state entity. I would imagine stating his address as the stadium where he worked was a mistake he won't make again. It's not an issue of segregation or silencing Christian voice but simply acting appropriately in specific situations. I think we have all probably violated that at some level at least once. Not sure why one indiscretion by a person who obviously has done so much good and has been such a good influence for so many should be a cause of concern going forward.

 

 

The bolded simply doesn't apply to Ron Brown in this instance. He fought to keep it legal for gays to be fired for being gay.

 

It does apply to how he behaves around someone like Ameer.

  • Plus1 2
Link to post
3 hours ago, Comfortably Numb said:

I think it is valuable for people to realize that church is not a museum for saints but rather is a hospital for sinners. Too often in these discussions I think non-Christian folk tend to assume that whenever a person speaks out on a behavior they feel is wrong that they are doing it for the wrong reasons. Sure it doesn't help that many actually do speak out for the wrong reasons, pointing out the speck in their neighbors eye while ignoring the log in their own. But knowing all that I think I know about Ron Brown I think his intentions are good, heart is in the right place, and that he is simply stating his beliefs and trying to help people rather than judge them, set them apart, or place himself above them. Having said that, it is still best if he maintains some separation between his personal beliefs and his very public employment by a state entity. I would imagine stating his address as the stadium where he worked was a mistake he won't make again. It's not an issue of segregation or silencing Christian voice but simply acting appropriately in specific situations. I think we have all probably violated that at some level at least once. Not sure why one indiscretion by a person who obviously has done so much good and has been such a good influence for so many should be a cause of concern going forward.

I don't buy that at all. The only people being helped by not having that law is employers who would fire an employee for being gay. That's the exact definition of setting people apart.

Link to post
31 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

The bolded simply doesn't apply to Ron Brown in this instance. He fought to keep it legal for gays to be fired for being gay.

 

It does apply to how he behaves around someone like Ameer.

I guess I am not privy to the details of his wanting it to be legal to fire people for being gay. That's new info for me. And yes I would need to hear his explanation, if that is in fact true, as to how that could possibly be intended as helping them.

 

Maybe I don't know enough about what he did and said and supported.

Link to post
4 minutes ago, Comfortably Numb said:

I guess I am not privy to the details of his wanting it to be legal to fire people for being gay. That's new info for me. And yes I would need to hear his explanation, if that is in fact true, as to how that could possibly be intended as helping them.

 

 

This is what he drove to Omaha to fight against:

 

 

In 15-days when the citywide ordinance takes effect -- if you are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender -- you cannot be fired or not hired for that reason alone.

 

http://www.wowt.com/home/headlines/City_Council_Approves_Gay_Discrimination_Ordinance_142529715.html

 

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to post

19 hours ago, funhusker said:

I'm going to use this as a lesson for my kids and in my classroom.  If you make a comment at the age of 18 (I'm well aware of Ron Brown's age), in public or social media, you better be prepared to own that statement when you are 80.  Public comments need public retraction; if not, c'est la vie.

 

Times do change, a person's words don't.  Brown has not come out publicly with a different opinion since 2012, at least it hasn't been posted here.  I do think it is a good hire, pros outweigh cons by a mile in my opinion.  But until Brown says otherwise, those "cons" exist.  And are fair game.

 

On the flip side, someone like James Gunn makes off color/blue jokes, apologizes and shows true contrition and growth when called out for these jokes, then up and gets fired nearly 10 years later because some alt-right asshole doesn't like that he tweets at Trump all the time. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, Comfortably Numb said:

I guess I am not privy to the details of his wanting it to be legal to fire people for being gay. That's new info for me. And yes I would need to hear his explanation, if that is in fact true, as to how that could possibly be intended as helping them.

 

Maybe I don't know enough about what he did and said and supported.

Some have tried to skew the message by saying something along the lines of Brown was 'only against special treatment for others' in reference to his testimony.

 

That's merely a diversion.

 

The ordinance he was testifying against would've made it illegal to fire someone for being LGBTQ, of which LGBTQ members did not have the protection (legally) in Omaha.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post
2 hours ago, jsneb83 said:

So what happens if scientists actually discover that someone being straight or gay is determined by there genetic makeup? Surely it can't be a sin if God made you that way, right?

 

Are there still people that think it's simply a life choice? Probably I guess. I've seen enough to know that most, if not all, people's orientation is determined at birth. And yes that should be enough evidence for those who seem to have a problem with it to just accept them being that way. Maybe someday.

  • Plus1 2
Link to post
6 hours ago, jsneb83 said:

So what happens if scientists actually discover that someone being straight or gay is determined by there genetic makeup? Surely it can't be a sin if God made you that way, right?

 

 

This has already been discovered and well researched. Kind of. It's not quite as simple as that sort of dichotomy, but the response of Christians who think "it" is a sin is that it's not your sexual orientation that is sinful, but it's gay behavior/actions and lifestyle that are sin. Functionally, that it's okay to be gay, but don't ever act on it and you have to be celibate or change your orientation and get married to the opposite sex in order to not be living in sin.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post

4 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

This has already been discovered and well researched. Kind of. It's not quite as simple as that sort of dichotomy, but the response of Christians who think "it" is a sin is that it's not your sexual orientation that is sinful, but it's gay behavior/actions and lifestyle that are sin. Functionally, that it's okay to be gay, but don't ever act on it and you have to be celibate or change your orientation and get married to the opposite sex in order to not be living in sin.

Maybe discover was the wrong word. I know they've been doing research and have found a link, but more research still needs to be done before it can be started as a scientific fact.

Link to post
12 hours ago, jsneb83 said:

So what happens if scientists actually discover that someone being straight or gay is determined by there genetic makeup? Surely it can't be a sin if God made you that way, right?

I'd guarantee you that there are people that would claim God made homosexuals that way so they wouldn't be interested in women/men and families so they could focus their energy on spreading God's word.  There would be many comparisons to the apostle Paul.  

Link to post
8 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

This has already been discovered and well researched. Kind of. It's not quite as simple as that sort of dichotomy, but the response of Christians who think "it" is a sin is that it's not your sexual orientation that is sinful, but it's gay behavior/actions and lifestyle that are sin. Functionally, that it's okay to be gay, but don't ever act on it and you have to be celibate or change your orientation and get married to the opposite sex in order to not be living in sin.

 

Yes, that is an important distinction and one that I think many overlook. But I understand totally why that distinction means little to those who feel they are being attacked by Christians. It would serve Christians well to not have such a laser focus on a few of these issues. If they would speak out equally loud about all sins, especially the ones that may hit too close to home, then it would be much easier for them to get that message across. Or maybe better yet, just remove themselves from the position of judge and concentrate on the golden rule.

  • Plus1 2
Link to post
18 hours ago, jsneb83 said:

So what happens if scientists actually discover that someone being straight or gay is determined by there genetic makeup? Surely it can't be a sin if God made you that way, right?

I don't think science is ever going to sway their opinion on anything.

  • Plus1 3
Link to post
3 hours ago, LumberJackSker said:

I don't think science is ever going to sway their opinion on anything.

Science: starts with "s"

Satan: starts with "s"

 

Both have an "n" (I'm guessing this means something)

Edit:  FOUND IT!!!!  The 5th letter in each word is "n".  How many points does a pentagram have???

 

<----   Hint  (but that is a red Cowboys star, similarities are eerie though)

 

Both have a prime number of letters (5 and 7)...

 

hmmmm........

  • Plus1 1
Link to post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.






×
×
  • Create New...