“They Won’t Magically Turn You Into A Lustful Cockmonster”: Chris Kluwe Explains ...

U

Unk

Ignorance goes on ignore
http://deadspin.com/5941348/they-wont-magically-turn-you-into-a-lustful-cockmonster-chris-kluwe-explains-gay-marriage-to-the-politician-who-is-offended-by-an-nfl-player-supporting-it


Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo has spoken out in favor of a Maryland ballot initiative that would legalize gay marriage. Yahoo has published a letter that Maryland state delegate Emmett C. Burns Jr. wrote last week to Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti, urging him to "inhibit such expressions from your employee." This is Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe's response to Burns.

Dear Emmett C. Burns Jr.,

I find it inconceivable that you are an elected official of Maryland's state government. Your vitriolic hatred and bigotry make me ashamed and disgusted to think that you are in any way responsible for shaping policy at any level. The views you espouse neglect to consider several fundamental key points, which I will outline in great detail (you may want to hire an intern to help you with the longer words):

1. As I suspect you have not read the Constitution, I would like to remind you that the very first, the VERY FIRST Amendment in this founding document deals with the freedom of speech, particularly the abridgment of said freedom. By using your position as an elected official (when referring to your constituents so as to implicitly threaten the Ravens organization) to state that the Ravens should "inhibit such expressions from your employees," more specifically Brendon Ayanbadejo, not only are you clearly violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a narcissistic fromunda stain. What on earth would possess you to be so mind-boggingly stupid? It baffles me that a man such as yourself, a man who relies on that same First Amendment to pursue your own religious studies without fear of persecution from the state, could somehow justify stifling another person's right to speech. To call that hypocritical would be to do a disservice to the word. Mindfucking obscenely hypocritical starts to approach it a little bit.

2. "Many of your fans are opposed to such a view and feel it has no place in a sport that is strictly for pride, entertainment, and excitement." Holy fucking shitballs. Did you seriously just say that, as someone who's "deeply involved in government task forces on the legacy of slavery in Maryland"? Have you not heard of Kenny Washington? Jackie Robinson? As recently as 1962 the NFL still had segregation, which was only done away with by brave athletes and coaches daring to speak their mind and do the right thing, and you're going to say that political views have "no place in a sport"? I can't even begin to fathom the cognitive dissonance that must be coursing through your rapidly addled mind right now; the mental gymnastics your brain has to tortuously contort itself through to make such a preposterous statement are surely worthy of an Olympic gold medal (the Russian judge gives you a 10 for "beautiful oppressionism").

3. This is more a personal quibble of mine, but why do you hate freedom? Why do you hate the fact that other people want a chance to live their lives and be happy, even though they may believe in something different than you, or act different than you? How does gay marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? If gay marriage becomes legal, are you worried that all of a sudden you'll start thinking about penis? "Oh shit. Gay marriage just passed. Gotta get me some of that hot dong action!" Will all of your friends suddenly turn gay and refuse to come to your Sunday Ticket grill-outs? (Unlikely, since gay people enjoy watching football too.)
I can assure you that gay people getting married will have zero effect on your life. They won't come into your house and steal your children. They won't magically turn you into a lustful cockmonster. They won't even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90 percent of our population—rights like Social Security benefits, child care tax credits, Family and Medical Leave to take care of loved ones, and COBRA healthcare for spouses and children. You know what having these rights will make gays? Full-fledged American citizens just like everyone else, with the freedom to pursue happiness and all that entails. Do the civil-rights struggles of the past 200 years mean absolutely nothing to you?

In closing, I would like to say that I hope this letter, in some small way, causes you to reflect upon the magnitude of the colossal foot in mouth clusterfuck you so brazenly unleashed on a man whose only crime was speaking out for something he believed in. Best of luck in the next election; I'm fairly certain you might need it.

Sincerely,

Chris Kluwe

P.S. I've also been vocal as hell about the issue of gay marriage so you can take your "I know of no other NFL player who has done what Mr. Ayanbadejo is doing" and shove it in your close-minded, totally lacking in empathy piehole and choke on it. Asshole.
Click to expand...

Yet again - proud to be a Minnesotan.
 
I read this letter on another forum this AM and it's a wonderful thing!!! Hit'em again, hit'em again, HARDER, Harder!!!!
 
I will NEVER look at another football player and assume he's just a dumb jock.

Ever.
 
How does gay marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life?
Click to expand...

This has been advanced as the foremost argument for gay marriage. I would like to interject the following for consideration...

How does child marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? Dating back thousands of years, men have taken children as wives. Even as recently as the middle of the last century, people as young as 12 and 13 could legally marry in this country. Ancient Greeks and Romans considered this beneficial to youth, in order to prepare them for adulthood. Nature and biology show that when children reach adolescence, their bodies change and mature, females become fertile and able to reproduce offspring, therefore it is perfectly 'natural' for them to mate and reproduce like any other animal in the wild. Why are we restricted from doing what is natural? Why should we be bound by archaic laws with arbitrary "age" thresholds and restrictions? Is this rooted in some uptight religious fanaticism? Are the "religious" views of others being forced upon society against its will? Who are WE to deny people the right to love who they please? How is it going to harm 'traditional marriages' to allow something that is natural and was, in fact, the law of the land for many years? How can we deny a person's right to consent with some arbitrary restriction based on their date of birth?
 
Bitch, please. Until millions of children are fighting for equal rights, that's a strawman.
 
At least gay people have the right to vote and engage in political activism... why don't we allow children the same rights?

Allowing child marriage won't turn you into a pedophile! Is that what you are scared of???
 
Dixie said:
This has been advanced as the foremost argument for gay marriage. I would like to interject the following for consideration...

How does child marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? Dating back thousands of years, men have taken children as wives. Even as recently as the middle of the last century, people as young as 12 and 13 could legally marry in this country. Ancient Greeks and Romans considered this beneficial to youth, in order to prepare them for adulthood. Nature and biology show that when children reach adolescence, their bodies change and mature, females become fertile and able to reproduce offspring, therefore it is perfectly 'natural' for them to mate and reproduce like any other animal in the wild. Why are we restricted from doing what is natural? Why should we be bound by archaic laws with arbitrary "age" thresholds and restrictions? Is this rooted in some uptight religious fanaticism? Are the "religious" views of others being forced upon society against its will? Who are WE to deny people the right to love who they please? How is it going to harm 'traditional marriages' to allow something that is natural and was, in fact, the law of the land for many years? How can we deny a person's right to consent with some arbitrary restriction based on their date of birth?
Click to expand...

I think allowing a child of 12 to be sexually molested does a great deal of harm to the child. We created the laws that prohibit it to protect the child. Therein lies the problem in your strawman argument. There is no harm to either party in a gay marriage.

Once again, this is about consenting adults.
 
Dixie said:
This has been advanced as the foremost argument for gay marriage. I would like to interject the following for consideration...

How does child marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? Dating back thousands of years, men have taken children as wives. Even as recently as the middle of the last century, people as young as 12 and 13 could legally marry in this country. Ancient Greeks and Romans considered this beneficial to youth, in order to prepare them for adulthood. Nature and biology show that when children reach adolescence, their bodies change and mature, females become fertile and able to reproduce offspring, therefore it is perfectly 'natural' for them to mate and reproduce like any other animal in the wild. Why are we restricted from doing what is natural? Why should we be bound by archaic laws with arbitrary "age" thresholds and restrictions? Is this rooted in some uptight religious fanaticism? Are the "religious" views of others being forced upon society against its will? Who are WE to deny people the right to love who they please? How is it going to harm 'traditional marriages' to allow something that is natural and was, in fact, the law of the land for many years? How can we deny a person's right to consent with some arbitrary restriction based on their date of birth?
Click to expand...

It is easy, they are children. Our current society has determined that there are certain activities that children must wait to perform until their reasoning abilities catch up to their physical abilities. We therefore have laws to protect children.
 
Next, she'll bring my dachshund into it.


You can tell by the look on his face. He's just ASKING for it!!
 
Dix,

If there were a victim in a Gay Marriage your analogy might hold water, but there isn't. It's a silly strawman.

While I don't personally care whether gay people get married or not, I don't even think of marriage as a right for that matter, and think government should step back out of our lives at that level as it just isn't something that they need to care about. I do realize there is a difference between two consenting adults and pedophilia. There is zero purpose in promoting the NAMBLA vision here and it isn't even a valid comparison. It is just another silly "but if we let 'those people' do it then Animal Lovers will want to as well" crappy slippery slope fallacy (not all slippery slope arguments are a fallacy, but this one is; it is based on there being some equality to forcing animals and children into relationships and two adults consenting).

If you can give me a valid direct victim in a relationship participated in by two consenting adults then I'm willing to hear it, but IMO government has no right to step in and define your personal relationships based on their personal "ick factor" or definitions of "sin".
 
WinterBorn said:
I think allowing a child of 12 to be sexually molested does a great deal of harm to the child. We created the laws that prohibit it to protect the child. Therein lies the problem in your strawman argument. There is no harm to either party in a gay marriage.

Once again, this is about consenting adults.
Click to expand...

What you think is harm to a child may not be what others think of as harm, they may think of it as beneficial, like the early Romans and Greeks. You're trying to impose your beliefs on others, and that is bigoted and intolerant. This country had "child marriage" for years, and children weren't harmed, besides, you don't own everyone's children, who are YOU to decide for them? How does it affect YOUR life, if you don't want to marry a child, no one will force you to! Who are you to deny people love? What does "consent" really mean? Why can't "consent" be extended to people who've reached sexual maturity? Why are you such a bigoted closed-minded intolerant? Does your Bible teach that sex is wrong? Are you trying to impose your religious beliefs on us?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top