Skip to content

Ayanbadejo speaks at Supreme Court rally

Gay marriage supporter Brendon Ayanbadejo, linebacker for the the Baltimore Ravens of the NFL, talks to reporters in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington Reuters

On Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court took up the question of whether California’s ban on same-sex marriage violates the Constitution.

Outside, Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo spoke at a rally supporting same-sex marriage.

“First and foremost, I have to say I’m not here as a Baltimore Raven,” Ayanbadejo said, via Erik Brady of USA Today.  “I’m actually here as a patriot — as a patriot to uphold the Constitution of the United States. . . .

“So this is a fight that we’ve seen here before, we’ve been here before.  How is this any different than Loving v. Virginia?” he added, in reference to the case that scuttled bans on interracial marriage.

“Luckily, I’m a child of the ’70s, because in some states in the ’60s, I wouldn’t be here.  So I’m a testament to progress.  I’m a testament to things are changing.  Love is always going to win the game,” Ayanbadejo said.

A ruling is expected in June.  But the very early indications aren’t promising.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative with a cousin in attendance who wants to marry her partner, offered this confusing comparison while questioning one of the lawyers:  “If you tell a child that somebody has to be their friend.  I suppose you can force the child to say ‘this is my friend,’ but it changes the definition of what it means to be a friend.  And that’s, it seems to me, what [supporters] of Proposition 8 are saying here.  All you’re interested in is the label, and you insist on changing the definition of the label.”

Whether the definition changes depends on what the definition is.  Does “marriage” reflect a committed union of two persons of different genders, or simply two persons?

The word “friend” doesn’t imply a gender.  Should the term “spouse”?

That’s easiest way to address concerns that same-sex marriage would result in a union between a man and a dog or a man and a sandwich.  Defining the term as a marriage between two persons would prevent the parade of horribles that so often is cited by those who opposed same-sex marriage.

My own views on the subject flow from apathy regarding the private business of others and stubbornness regarding our inalienable right to pursue happiness.  If it makes people of the same gender happy to be married, why should that bother me or anyone else?

Permalink 172 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Baltimore Ravens, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
172 Responses to “Ayanbadejo speaks at Supreme Court rally”
  1. 808raiderinparadise says: Mar 26, 2013 3:27 PM

    his public announcement coming soon too……

    but in all serious, great for him.

    I expect he will come out soon.

    Admirable.

  2. themitchfootball.com says: Mar 26, 2013 3:28 PM

    Cue the Patriots/Ravens comments.

  3. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Mar 26, 2013 3:32 PM

    I’m almost positive this is the player coming out soon.

  4. mwindle1973 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:32 PM

    I think this is great!

  5. timbuttrum says: Mar 26, 2013 3:34 PM

    Please do not mix politics with football. I could care less about what any football player’s social views are.

  6. jackericsson says: Mar 26, 2013 3:35 PM

    It’s now MSNBC no football talk.

  7. watermelon1 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:35 PM

    How about we just do away with “marriage” altogether? It’s a sham anyway… with how high the divorce rate and how frequent people cheat.

    I don’t need a piece of paper or a “law” to allow me to be with the people or person I want to be with.

    Stop letting the government control you. If all this is… is about getting some sort of tax reduction, then you’re missing the point you’re trying to make anyway.

    If this is truly about love… well, um, stop crying and just be with those you love. Put a ring on a finger and call your significant other whatever you want. Wife, Husband, Lover, Life-Partner… whatever. Nobody is stopping you from doing that. Who cares what the government says? Stop giving them all the power.

  8. steelerben says: Mar 26, 2013 3:35 PM

    When asked for comment Bill Belichik mumbled unintelligibly for a few minutes before the phrase, “not sure he’s on our team” was able to be deciphered.

  9. trbowman says: Mar 26, 2013 3:36 PM

    I tend to be apathetic towards the issue as well.

    At the same time, people who say marriage is just about love are entirely incorrect. Marriage as a social institution is designed solely with the idea of procreation in mind. If marriage were just about love, well, why would anyone get married? Most married couples wind up hating each other after ten years of living under the same roof anyway.

    Seen divorce rates lately? Good grief. And that doesn’t take into account how many marriages remain intact ONLY because of the kids or because the couple’s religion forbids divorce (i.e. Catholicism), The number of “happy married” couples is limited.

    Cliffnotes – marriage is overrated.

  10. wildbillsrodeo says: Mar 26, 2013 3:38 PM

    Good for him… It’s about damn time football gets out of the Dark Ages around this topic

  11. trbowman says: Mar 26, 2013 3:38 PM

    I also don’t buy for one second Ayanbadejo’s assertion of how many NFL players support gay marriage. I’d say roughly 80% of players would be uncomfortable (at best) having a gay player in the locker room.

    It seems like more players favor gay marriage than they actually do because most of them realize coming out as against it is media suicide. Chris Culliver gave his own opinion and got his pretty face destroyed in the media.

    Conversely, those like Ayanbadejo who come out in support of it are treated like heroes.

  12. yssupasigninnamnotyep says: Mar 26, 2013 3:38 PM

    If the sweater vest fits…

  13. hannahduccab says: Mar 26, 2013 3:38 PM

    States rights issue.

  14. firenflcommish says: Mar 26, 2013 3:39 PM

    It’s basic human rights. This issue should have been resolved years ago. Regardless, this bigotry will be coming to an end soon.

  15. listenup823 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:40 PM

    Just play football

  16. chrismatthewsucks says: Mar 26, 2013 3:40 PM

    *”“I’m actually here as a patriot — as a patriot to uphold the Constitution of the United States. . . .*”

    Oh yeah? where excatly in our constitution says anything about marriage?

  17. thraiderskin says: Mar 26, 2013 3:41 PM

    It is his right, I just don’t know what the value of a football player’s words means to this fight. Common sense and decency needs to be the catalyst here, not the name of a man in football. This is a battle with implications of constitutional rights, not the opportunity for grandstanding for public opinion. Ultimately, this is fight on how we define a word, sadly it is that stupid.

  18. kingmj4891 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:41 PM

    Forget all the nonsense created by the media on this issue The Chief Justice does make a good point! Go Marriage.

  19. warhammer420 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:43 PM

    Major respect for Ayanbadejo.

    /salute

  20. therealpittbull says: Mar 26, 2013 3:43 PM

    Can we please stop with the agenda? I don’t care what one does behind close doors, but the full court press is ridiculous. From every TV show introducing “a couple”, to now the highest level of sports. What’s next? Can I marry my dog, PETA said it’s ok.

  21. cbh54 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:44 PM

    So tired of the whining about all this. Talk about football only please.

  22. reed20fence says: Mar 26, 2013 3:44 PM

    He may not be there as a Raven but Raven Nation sure is proud of his efforts.

  23. harrisonhits2 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:46 PM

    Some of the tougher people I’ve ever run into have been gay who made no secret of it. It takes guts to stand up to the prejudice they face.

    We’re all human and its time to stop discriminating against gays.

  24. killerstiller says: Mar 26, 2013 3:49 PM

    Gays have the right to as miserable as the rest of us. Hell, they will get to pay the marriage penalty tax as well!

  25. crtzinc says: Mar 26, 2013 3:51 PM

    Ayanbadejo is not the player coming out. He is married with 4 kids I believe. I have no doubt that he knows who will come out though.

  26. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 3:51 PM

    trbowman says:
    Mar 26, 2013 3:36 PM
    I tend to be apathetic towards the issue as well.

    At the same time, people who say marriage is just about love are entirely incorrect. Marriage as a social institution is designed solely with the idea of procreation in mind. If marriage were just about love, well, why would anyone get married? Most married couples wind up hating each other after ten years of living under the same roof anyway.

    Seen divorce rates lately? Good grief. And that doesn’t take into account how many marriages remain intact ONLY because of the kids or because the couple’s religion forbids divorce (i.e. Catholicism), The number of “happy married” couples is limited.

    Cliffnotes – marriage is overrated.

    _________________

    Plenty of people get married that dont want or can’t have kids. Try again.

  27. ahawkalypse says: Mar 26, 2013 3:51 PM

    He was there because he thought it was a Hair Club for Men convention.

  28. rc33 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:52 PM

    In light of that opening statement, does Suggs (and 31 other teams) hate Ayanbadejo now?

  29. kb1313 says: Mar 26, 2013 3:52 PM

    But why do gay marriage supporters get to draw the moral line? Why can’t two loving siblings marry or multiple partners marry. These groups do exist and they feel as passionate about their situation as proponents of gay marriage. You see, a line has to be drawn somewhere. This country is changing before our very eyes into one that is ran by emotion and feelings…..that is a dangerous thing.

  30. prmpft says: Mar 26, 2013 3:53 PM

    you can count me as a hater!

  31. clarencewhorley says: Mar 26, 2013 3:53 PM

    government should not be in the marriage business, straight or gay.

  32. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 3:55 PM

    therealpittbull says:
    Mar 26, 2013 3:43 PM
    Can we please stop with the agenda? I don’t care what one does behind close doors, but the full court press is ridiculous. From every TV show introducing “a couple”, to now the highest level of sports. What’s next? Can I marry my dog, PETA said it’s ok.

    __________________

    Marrige is a legal binding contract that consententing adults can enter into that is recognized by the government. Does your dog meet those requirements?

  33. circuscivics says: Mar 26, 2013 3:55 PM

    Marriage has been re-defined several times throughout the history of this country. At one time it was not against the law to be married to multiple women at the same time (polygamy). At one time you could only marry someone of the same race. You could have also marry a 13 year old girl. Therefore, I don’t want to hear all the sanctimonious garbage about marriage only being between man and woman. The world is evolving. Our laws should reflect that. Ironic how all the conservative people who rail against big government, want government to prevent two consenting adults from forming a contract of devotion to each other.

    I also find it ironic how so many in my own community, African- American are also against equal rights for all.

    For those that can’t handle a discussion of social topics on a football site, don’t read the article. No one forced you to read the article. It’s Florio’s creation and he can express any thought that he wishes.

  34. pleasefiregoodell says: Mar 26, 2013 3:56 PM

    I get on here to read about football. Not this.

  35. circuscivics says: Mar 26, 2013 3:57 PM

    “pleasefiregoodell says: Mar 26, 2013 3:56 PM

    I get on here to read about football. Not this.”

    Then don’t read it. No one forced you.

  36. ccjcsr says: Mar 26, 2013 3:58 PM

    I thought this was the Land of the free and home of the brave? Shouldn’t be a vote, it should automatically happen!

  37. nineroutsider says: Mar 26, 2013 3:59 PM

    The Chief is making a horrible point and he doesn’t even realize that he is speaking to those that oppose the law, not support it.

    Yes on Prop 8 = Against gay marriage
    No on Prop 8 = Supports gay marriage

  38. herkulease says: Mar 26, 2013 4:00 PM

    Comments and questions by the Justices shouldn’t be taken as any signal of leaning one way or another.

    Roberts looked like he would’ve ruled to struck down the Affordable Act(Obamacare) questioning the individual mandate. But in the end he ruled to uphold the legislation. Kennedy who everyone expected to lean towards upholding it, voted to strike it down.

    I forgot which Justice said it but he/she enjoyed making the lawyers squirm defending their position even if they agreed with them anyways.

  39. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 4:01 PM

    hannahduccab says:
    Mar 26, 2013 3:38 PM
    States rights issue.

    __________________

    States cannot discriminate. Everyone should be treated equally under the law.

  40. godofwine330 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:01 PM

    @ watermelon1 ”

    If this is truly about love… well, um, stop crying and just be with those you love. Put a ring on a finger and call your significant other whatever you want. Wife, Husband, Lover, Life-Partner… whatever. Nobody is stopping you from doing that. Who cares what the government says? Stop giving them all the power.”

    This actually happened to someone I know. Told parents they were gay, parents disowned her. Started a business, eventually found a woman, lived as wife & wife for years unable to get married. She died suddenly in a car wreck, no will. Estate was awarded to the parents who hadn’t spoken to her in 20+ years and disowned her and not to her partner who got NOTHING.

    Not being gay, I don’t care who marries who. Their marriage doesn’t affect me. What happened to my friend was wrong, and the same could happen to a boy/girlfriend with no will. All I am saying is recognize their marriage. If you don’t like seeing it – tough. Some people still don’t like seeing interracial marrages, but they have to get over it.

  41. 2difshoe says: Mar 26, 2013 4:02 PM

    I respect Ayanbadejo, and standing up for what he believes in.

    Ayanbadejo makes Liberace look like Charles Atlas. Time to come out young man.

  42. briansethness says: Mar 26, 2013 4:02 PM

    Sometimes, when two people love each other very much, they get married and ruin everything.

  43. thestrategyexpert says: Mar 26, 2013 4:04 PM

    Surely you all can at least admit that the patriot line is pretty powerful.

  44. samefamilymarriageadvocate says: Mar 26, 2013 4:05 PM

    When I say that my Brother is my life-partner, I truly mean it. We have been together our entire lives and hope that this ruling gives us the rights that we deserve.

  45. smithopher says: Mar 26, 2013 4:05 PM

    Just let gay people do what they want. They aren’t going to hurt anyone else by showing a similar level of commitment that straight people make, and it won’t belittle marriages which were performed in the traditional sense. I don’t care if gay people get married, there are plenty who have been long enough to be practically married for years now anyway. If they want to exchange rings and have the same legal rights, who cares? If they want to be equally unhappy as the rest of the married folks out there, let them lol…

  46. zaggs says: Mar 26, 2013 4:07 PM

    “godofwine330 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:01 PM
    Estate was awarded to the parents who hadn’t spoken to her in 20+ years and disowned her and not to her partner who got NOTHING.

    Not being gay, I don’t care who marries who. Their marriage doesn’t affect me. What happened to my friend was wrong, and the same could happen to a boy/girlfriend with no will. All I am saying is recognize their marriage. If you don’t like seeing it – tough. Some people still don’t like seeing interracial marrages, but they have to get over it.”

    Your story has more to do with the stupidity of not making a will then anything else. If a gay person gets married, gets a divorce, get a new spouse, but hadn’t changed their will from the last marriage their last spouse would still get nothing.

  47. zaggs says: Mar 26, 2013 4:08 PM

    “thestrategyexpert says: Mar 26, 2013 4:04 PM

    Surely you all can at least admit that the patriot line is pretty powerful.”

    Not when its spoken out of ignorance. US constitution has nothing to do with marriage. Nor should it.

  48. jvseahawk says: Mar 26, 2013 4:09 PM

    Oh, two adults. You mean like brother and sister, sister and sister, grandfather and grandson? And why just two people? Why not thirty? A thousand? And who are you to judge the love of a man and his four year old niece? Who comes up with these arbitrary restrictions on “love”?

    Here’s an idea.. Why don’t you try leaving the idiotic social engineering to others and focus on the reason people come here: sports.

  49. ravenatorridestheshortbus says: Mar 26, 2013 4:10 PM

    Did he leave Ravenator at home to go to washington for this? He will be comming out soon.

  50. zaggs says: Mar 26, 2013 4:10 PM

    “nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 4:01 PM

    hannahduccab says:
    Mar 26, 2013 3:38 PM
    States rights issue.

    __________________

    States cannot discriminate. Everyone should be treated equally under the law.”

    Then states cannot allow state schools or any state entity to use affirmative action.

  51. citizenstrange says: Mar 26, 2013 4:10 PM

    There is no gray area. Civil rights are civil rights and bigotry is bigotry.

  52. ampats says: Mar 26, 2013 4:12 PM

    Here comes another player who wants to be a Patriot.

  53. dalucks says: Mar 26, 2013 4:12 PM

    Maybe its just me but he is in the news more for gay rights then what he does on the football field.
    Case in point, with all of the losses the Ravens have had at LB, his name has not been mentioned as a possible replacement.
    Think about it.

  54. nineroutsider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:13 PM

    @godofwine330 – You nailed it sir, that’s what it is all about: granting legal marriage rights to gay couples. Its not about redefining anything or making churches marry gay people, it is about gay couples having the same legal rights as married straight couples. If they have to call it a “civil union” I am OK with that too, just make it so that we all have equal rights.

    Personally, I also think that government banning gay couples from marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and if the Court doesn’t rule that way it is nothing more than a thinly veiled partisan sham…just like Congress.

  55. stevent92 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:13 PM

    Gay people CAN get married under the law already. They just simply choose not to due to their orientation/preferences.

    The real comedy here is that clowns like Ayanbadejo Kluwe, et al have fully convinced the uneducated American public that there is some huge violation of civil rights and inequality here. If people stopped and thought about it for one millisecond, they’d realize this has nothing to do with “inequality” and everything to do with changing our laws based on an individual preferences and opinions. That is a REAL dangerous slope to go down.

  56. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:16 PM

    Enough of this crap! Lets get real:
    1. This is NOT football news
    2. Marriage was created and defined by God not the constitution
    3. ALL people should have the same 101 rights that are given in marriage.
    4. Just don’t call it marriage
    5. If you have issue with this, take it up with God -Marriage is his institution!!!

  57. rc33 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:19 PM

    Any chance the media will ever stop telling me how much I care about a topic I really don’t care about?

  58. heisthejuan says: Mar 26, 2013 4:20 PM

    dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:16 PM

    Enough of this crap! Lets get real:
    1. This is NOT football news
    2. Marriage was created and defined by God not the constitution
    3. ALL people should have the same 101 rights that are given in marriage.
    4. Just don’t call it marriage
    5. If you have issue with this, take it up with God -Marriage is his institution!!!

    Ummm… wow. Just throwing this out there, but there is, you know, the chance that God doesn’t exist. There’s honestly no proof.

  59. psilenttype says: Mar 26, 2013 4:23 PM

    His hairline is all I need to see…. didn’t even read article

  60. Patskrieg dot com says: Mar 26, 2013 4:26 PM

    Do to marriage rights what Ayanbadejo does to opposing teams kick returners.

    Just let it run free.

    Good for him.

  61. myeaglescantwin says: Mar 26, 2013 4:28 PM

    apparently, in the 60′s some states killed people with terrible hair.

  62. mp4pack says: Mar 26, 2013 4:28 PM

    The government shouldn’t be in the business of marriage. Civil union under law, for any type of couple. Let people’s imaginary friend in the sky determine the boundaries of “marriage” as they see fit.

  63. jibberator says: Mar 26, 2013 4:29 PM

    I think that everyone that likes to eat pizza should acknowledge that I like calzone better, should make it so all pizza is called calzone because thats what I prefer, you know, what the hell, lets redefine pizza to be a type of calzone because anything else is discriminating against calzone!

  64. myeaglescantwin says: Mar 26, 2013 4:29 PM

    seriously laughing @ heisthejuan

    good thing religions arent facts.

  65. cunningben says: Mar 26, 2013 4:31 PM

    dondiraider:

    How ignorant are you? Let me think this through… Islamist people get married, Christian people can get married, Athiests can get married, even Devil Worshipers can get married… but two people who love each other would upset God more than any of those people??? Doesn’t sound like a very fair God to me.

  66. heisthejuan says: Mar 26, 2013 4:34 PM

    myeaglescantwin says: Mar 26, 2013 4:29 PM

    seriously laughing @ heisthejuan

    good thing religions arent facts.

    ————————————————-
    Not a good thing that people want to institutionalize discrimination based on fairy tale.

    I wonder wanta Santa thinks about marriage.

    If there is a God, he/she/it created sex, but marriage? Only humans could come up with such a fundamentally flawed institution.

  67. revskip says: Mar 26, 2013 4:34 PM

    trbowman says: Mar 26, 2013 3:38 PM

    I also don’t buy for one second Ayanbadejo’s assertion of how many NFL players support gay marriage. I’d say roughly 80% of players would be uncomfortable (at best) having a gay player in the locker room.

    ———————————————————–

    Yes, I am sure you have a much more accurate take on the pulse of an NFL locker room unlike the guy who actually is in an NFL locker room every day of the season. I am also sure you are way more qualified to give me medical advice than a doctor and way more qualified to give me legal advice than a sitting judge.

    Most of the nation is finally coming to terms with the fact that everyone should be treated equally regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. That locker rooms would be mostly tolerant of a gay teammate isn’t a crazy notion but simple common sense. Enough people have a gay friend or relative at this point that no rational person really has a leg to stand on when it comes to discriminating against the gay community in any workplace, the NFL included.

  68. blackngold4life says: Mar 26, 2013 4:34 PM

    Maybe he wants a Career in politics after football..SO WHAT

  69. baddegg says: Mar 26, 2013 4:35 PM

    dondiraider says:Mar 26, 2013 4:16 PM

    5. If you have issue with this, take it up with God -Marriage is his institution!!!

    —————

    Marriage is Roger Goddell’s institution? :-P

  70. jmbresky says: Mar 26, 2013 4:36 PM

    Next it’s everyone must support beastiality and pedophile rights. Love is love, right? and if your against that your unpatriotic of course!

  71. bucslose says: Mar 26, 2013 4:37 PM

    Those of you who say they arent redefining anything….they are. Its a fact. Marriage has always been viewed as man/woman. I dont understand why gays couldnt just settle for a union. Most people wouldve been fine with that.

    And if you dont think they arent next going to be pushing for churches to be forced to perform ceremonies, think again. They will.

    And you might as well just legalize any type of “marriage” at this point if this goes forward. Multiple people, cousins, etc. If we can change from a man and woman to guy/guy woMan/woMAN then why not just allow everything else? You says it just about “love” well some people love multiple people. Some people love each other who happen to be related in some way. Are you a bigot now if you are against those instances as you say those are who are against gays marrying?

  72. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:37 PM

    If you don’t believe in God, your choice…..Ponder this- even Satan worshipers believe there is a God BTW…I sincerely encourage you to study the BIBLE before dismissing it.

  73. deliveredbysherpa says: Mar 26, 2013 4:39 PM

    Quoting Tom Keane: “Same-sex marriage, obviously, doesn’t involve any destruction of potential life. And while there are some who argue that permitting gays to marry hurts traditional marriage, the data from states with same-sex marriage don’t bear that out. Divorce rates in Massachusetts, for instance, have declined in the last 10 years. In fact, far from undermining marriage, the battle for same-sex marriage really is an affirmation of its importance. Why fight for something unless you think it has great value?”

    Gay Marriage has great value, to the children of gay couples and the couples themselves. It also does a great service to our country, making true that all men and women are equal under the law and treated as such.

  74. ace8842 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:39 PM

    Really tired of PFT mixing politics with football. We come here to get away from this stuff. Tired of the daily “gay” stories which all amount to nothing.

  75. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:39 PM

    Have you ever studied the bible?

  76. bucslose says: Mar 26, 2013 4:40 PM

    I cant wait for this to be over. I am done hearing about gays

    Im to the point where its time to give them what they want so they shut up about it and we hear less about gays.

    If we used common sense, government wouldnt have anything to do with marriage. They would view all partnerships as a domestic contract/partnership. Marriage stays as man and woman and dictated by getting MARRIED at a church. So gays get what they want by government viewing all couples as domestic partnerships instead of marriage. Others get what they want as marriage technically stays as man and woman.

  77. bostoncommon says: Mar 26, 2013 4:40 PM

    I had no idea there was such a bunch of bigots here.

  78. icecubeusedtobeangry says: Mar 26, 2013 4:41 PM

    Why is God in my laws, and why is gay marriage in my football news? Any two consenting adults should be able to be afforded the same rights for transfer of assets, protection against forced testimony, ect ect.

    OK, so lets get back to talking about Teo’s crappy 40 times mmmkay?

  79. ace8842 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:41 PM

    States right issue. Federal government has not right to jump in like they did on abortion, creating rights out of thin air.

  80. bucslose says: Mar 26, 2013 4:43 PM

    Is he wearing a hat or some sorts or is that his hair? Dude, just shave it. You look ridiculous. Maybe Lebron can lend you his headband to cover that if you dont want to shave

  81. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:43 PM

    I am sorry for you if you do not believe in God….maybe you feel the same for me….If I am living a fairy tail, no harm. However if you are- you tell me? And if you cannot, please study the bible.

  82. movementarians says: Mar 26, 2013 4:43 PM

    I don’t think marriage between two straight people should be a legal institution. Doug Stanhope had a funny bit where he echos those thoughts. He says if marriage as a legal institution were not around, would you ever look at your parter and say “baby, what we have is so good we should get the government in on this.” The point being that you can marry or do whatever you want without the government regulating it. The government should stay out of moral issues.

  83. audient says: Mar 26, 2013 4:44 PM

    baddegg says:
    Mar 26, 2013 4:35 PM
    dondiraider says:Mar 26, 2013 4:16 PM

    5. If you have issue with this, take it up with God -Marriage is his institution!!!

    —————

    Marriage is Roger Goddell’s institution?

    ———

    No. Eric Clapton’s.

  84. carlsbadboltfan says: Mar 26, 2013 4:44 PM

    timbuttrum says: Mar 26, 2013 3:34 PM

    Please do not mix politics with football. I could care less about what any football player’s social views are.
    ——————————————————————————————————————————–
    So he’s not allowed an opinion? If you don’t like what he says, then don’t read it.

  85. moagecu says: Mar 26, 2013 4:44 PM

    dalucks

    he isn’t being mentioned add rays retirement because he’s 36. he is way too old.

  86. jmbresky says: Mar 26, 2013 4:44 PM

    icecubeusedtobeangry says:Mar 26, 2013 4:41 PM

    Why is God in my laws, and why is gay marriage in my football news? Any two consenting adults should be able to be afforded the same rights for transfer of assets, protection against forced testimony, ect ect.

    OK, so lets get back to talking about Teo’s crappy 40 times mmmkay?

    Sorry to dissapoint you but America’s principles were founded on religion. If you take away any mention of God in public you are basically saying what you believe in and where you get your morals from is not acceptable in public.

  87. uvmcatamounts says: Mar 26, 2013 4:46 PM

    chrismatthewsucks says: Mar 26, 2013 3:40 PM

    *”“I’m actually here as a patriot — as a patriot to uphold the Constitution of the United States. . . .*”

    Oh yeah? where excatly in our constitution says anything about marriage?

    —————————————————-

    The Constitution does say something about equality. A Constitutional scholar you are not.

  88. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 4:48 PM

    stevent92 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 4:13 PM
    Gay people CAN get married under the law already. They just simply choose not to due to their orientation/preferences.

    The real comedy here is that clowns like Ayanbadejo Kluwe, et al have fully convinced the uneducated American public that there is some huge violation of civil rights and inequality here. If people stopped and thought about it for one millisecond, they’d realize this has nothing to do with “inequality” and everything to do with changing our laws based on an individual preferences and opinions. That is a REAL dangerous slope to go down.

    __________

    Black people can go to school and drink from water fountains. Why does it matter if its seperate but equal?

    Loving consenting adults will be able to get married. What a horrible slippery slope!

    Gay people being married changes your life how?

  89. heisthejuan says: Mar 26, 2013 4:48 PM

    dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:37 PM

    If you don’t believe in God, your choice…..Ponder this- even Satan worshipers believe there is a God BTW…I sincerely encourage you to study the BIBLE before dismissing it.
    ———————————————————-

    How does the reference to Satan worshipers prove anything? Obviously if you believe in an antichrist, he has to be anti-something, right?

    On a micro level, religion and faith are beautiful things for an individual to have. On a macro level it can be a form of social control and dangerous group think. That’s my perception and experience of 12 years of Catholic School.

  90. uvmcatamounts says: Mar 26, 2013 4:49 PM

    stevent92 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:13 PM

    Gay people CAN get married under the law already. They just simply choose not to due to their orientation/preferences.

    The real comedy here is that clowns like Ayanbadejo Kluwe, et al have fully convinced the uneducated American public that there is some huge violation of civil rights and inequality here. If people stopped and thought about it for one millisecond, they’d realize this has nothing to do with “inequality” and everything to do with changing our laws based on an individual preferences and opinions. That is a REAL dangerous slope to go down.

    ——————————————–

    I am honestly ashamed to share a country with people like you.

  91. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:49 PM

    So does science , now what?

  92. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 4:50 PM

    dondiraider says:
    Mar 26, 2013 4:43 PM
    I am sorry for you if you do not believe in God….maybe you feel the same for me….If I am living a fairy tail, no harm. However if you are- you tell me? And if you cannot, please study the bible.

    ___________

    And you chose this fairy tale over the other 1,000s man has created why?

    May the Pasta be with you.

  93. circuscivics says: Mar 26, 2013 4:50 PM

    “stevent92 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:13 PM

    Gay people CAN get married under the law already. They just simply choose not to due to their orientation/preferences.

    The real comedy here is that clowns like Ayanbadejo Kluwe, et al have fully convinced the uneducated American public that there is some huge violation of civil rights and inequality here. If people stopped and thought about it for one millisecond, they’d realize this has nothing to do with “inequality” and everything to do with changing our laws based on an individual preferences and opinions. That is a REAL dangerous slope to go down.”

    It seems to me that you may be apart of the uneducated that you disparage. It has everything do with equality and it is false that people can get married if they want. You can call yourself married, but if your marriage is not recognized by the government, you are not entitled to the benefits that other married couples receive, whether it be in the tax code or privacy rights. Does that somewhat illustrate the discrepancy in the the equality to you? Marriage as it is now, is defined on a state level. You have some states where you have common law spouses. But if SCOTUS upholds the federal appellate court ruling and rules prop 8 unconstitutional, then it will be illegal for any state to bar the same gender from getting married.

    Also, the fact that you state that being gay is an individual preference already displays your ignorance and bigotry, so I doubt that you will even absorb what I just stated.

  94. the2013miamidolphins says: Mar 26, 2013 4:50 PM

    i dont understand the idea of allowing anyone to vote, something that affects hundreds of millions of people, while at the same time preventing certain people from getting married…..Its nonsensical really……. just let them get married, why do people care soo much about it?

  95. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 4:52 PM

    ace8842 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 4:41 PM
    States right issue. Federal government has not right to jump in like they did on abortion, creating rights out of thin air.

    ______________

    The 14th amendment disagrees with you.

  96. ace8842 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:54 PM

    Gay people being married absolutely changes lives. Christians or other religious people will be discriminated against in employment. Take the New Mexico Christian photographer fined $6,000 for refusing to photograph a lesbian ceremony out of religious conviction. Once gay is seen as normal, gay teachings will invade public schools. Your 2nd grader will read “A King and a King”, your middle schooler will attend mandatory gay marriage chapels, and your high schooler will learn details about gay sex. No opt outs for any of this and this is the tip of the iceberg. Down the road, churches may be forced to marry gays or hire gay employees against their own beliefs. This is not about tolerance anymore, it is about forced acceptance. And by changing the word marriage and its definition, marriage will become something few strive for anymore as it no longer means anything…more kids out of wedlock.

  97. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:54 PM

    Appreciate the conversation…..I have studied “Religions” including Catholicism, and there is very little bible study there….its more about traditions unfortunately.

  98. ace8842 says: Mar 26, 2013 4:57 PM

    NYjetsknicks fan…regarding the 14th Amendment, first off gays have an equal ability to marry someone of the opposite sex, just like all of us. Secondly, gays can’t accidentally get pregnant. They never, ever can naturally produce a child. So the idea that we are comparing apples to apples if false, two completely different dynamics. Therefore equal protection should not apply.

  99. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:57 PM

    Read your bible for that answer…..you willbe glad you did…hmu if u have questions.

  100. jamaltimore says: Mar 26, 2013 5:00 PM

    justice roberts is correct. Marriage is between a man and a women. Gays want to change that fact that it means a married of two people so they can feel normal. To hear people compare it to interacial couples seems absurd to me but then again if you want to compare being born as a person of color to someone with a mental disorder by all means go ahead.

  101. timbuttrum says: Mar 26, 2013 5:00 PM

    @circuscivics:

    “So he’s not allowed an opinion? If you don’t like what he says, then don’t read it.”

    If I wanted to read about gay marriage, I’d go to cnn.com. I come to this website called profootballtalk.com to read about PRO FOOTBALL, not the debate about gay marriage.

    If you want to debate on anything other than football, I’d suggest you look elsewhere.

  102. foosball11 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:01 PM

    Deviant sexual acts are deviant sexual acts no matter how hard the left tries to whitewash that fact.

  103. PriorKnowledge says: Mar 26, 2013 5:02 PM

    If he’s the one coming out soon, I hope he just comes out to his teammates and not the general public. Only his teammates somewhat deserve this information. The general public has no “need to know.”

  104. baytownbombers says: Mar 26, 2013 5:04 PM

    myeaglescantwin says:
    Mar 26, 2013 4:28 PM
    apparently, in the 60′s some states killed people with terrible hair.

    I think I’m for that? Should I be ashamed? I’m so confused.

  105. nineroutsider says: Mar 26, 2013 5:06 PM

    @dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 4:43 PM

    I am sorry for you if you do not believe in God….maybe you feel the same for me….If I am living a fairy tail, no harm. However if you are- you tell me? And if you cannot, please study the bible.
    ———————————————————–
    I do feel the same for you…because the Raiders are going to be a real devil of a football team next year. I do feel better knowing that you can skip watching that garbage and can spend your entire Sundays reading the Bible and coming onto PFT offering studious and well-informed political opinions.

    Also, why do you feel sorry for him? What if he doesn’t believe in God, but he lives a more Christian life than you do based on his actions and not merely his professed love for God or voting the way he thinks God wants him to? What if God values what we actually say and do more than what we think we know? What if God wants us to let others be and leave the question of their worthiness up to him alone? What if God is sick of us acting like we know what he wants and wants us to leave that up to him?

    Also, why did God create human beings? I have yet to hear an acceptable answer to this question. Since you are our resident Bible scholar perhaps you will take a crack at it for me?

  106. the2013miamidolphins says: Mar 26, 2013 5:06 PM

    ace8842 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 4:41 PM
    States right issue. Federal government has not right to jump in like they did on abortion, creating rights out of thin air.

    ____________________________________

    bro learn english before you make any kind of legal comment…it helps the credibility along ;) …. let me help.. The Federal Governement DOES not HAVE the right to jump in like they did IN REGARDS TO abortion……….oh by the way everything you said was BS, oh and earth is a lot older than 5,000 years old….

  107. circuscivics says: Mar 26, 2013 5:17 PM

    “timbuttrum says: Mar 26, 2013 5:00 PM

    @circuscivics:

    “So he’s not allowed an opinion? If you don’t like what he says, then don’t read it.”

    If I wanted to read about gay marriage, I’d go to cnn.com. I come to this website called profootballtalk.com to read about PRO FOOTBALL, not the debate about gay marriage.

    If you want to debate on anything other than football, I’d suggest you look elsewhere.”

    Thanks for engaging in the debate. You know what they say about opinions. Never disputed his right to an opinion. Just like I stated mine, he has the right to state his. I said that he doesn’t have to read the article. So in an odd sort of way your defending me having a right to an opinion. Thanks for defending me, man:-)

  108. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 5:18 PM

    ace8842 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 4:57 PM
    NYjetsknicks fan…regarding the 14th Amendment, first off gays have an equal ability to marry someone of the opposite sex, just like all of us. Secondly, gays can’t accidentally get pregnant. They never, ever can naturally produce a child. So the idea that we are comparing apples to apples if false, two completely different dynamics. Therefore equal protection should not apply.

    ___________________

    I already addressed the issue with kids above. They don’t have the ability to marry the consenting adult they love. Why does it bother you that two same-sex consenting adults get married? Why aren’t you making it tougher for everyone to get married? Drunken Vegas marriage is fine. Same-sex loving couple that love each wrong. Makes sense…

  109. mjdkid100 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:19 PM

    Wow, and I thought the football comments were ignorant on here…

    Couple things…to all the people saying this is football site and its not football news. You’re an idiot. It’s a football player and no one forced you to click on the title of the article AYENBEDAYJO SPEAKS AT SUPREME COURT RALLY. You knew exactly what it would be about, then took the time to comment.

    Why do people who are gay have to “settle” for civil unions? That’s the whole point. Who says you get a right to marriage that they don’t?

    I don’t believe in God at all. You are free to believe in whatever you want and I dont care. But, YOU ARE NEVER allowed to push your view on me in any form or fashion. I don’t want to hear it. I don’t care what our uneducated founders believed 400 years ago.

    People once believe the Earth was the center of the Universe too.

  110. pftbillsfan says: Mar 26, 2013 5:20 PM

    No clue if you read this Mike but well done. You may be a “Internet hack” as you put it but to support something that controversial with your own words must make your family proud. Not many people risk alienating readers, but I respect your regard for equality over views.

  111. PriorKnowledge says: Mar 26, 2013 5:21 PM

    HEY – I am a conservative and I am in favor of gay marriage, so stop being a bigot against conservatives.

  112. prmpft says: Mar 26, 2013 5:21 PM

    I am glad to know that ‘the2013miamidolphins’ knows everything about everything (was that correct syntax sir?) – we are safe here folks – the one who knows all is a PFT fan…move along, there is nothing else to see here…

  113. mjdkid100 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:21 PM

    foosball11 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:01 PM

    Deviant sexual acts are deviant sexual acts no matter how hard the left tries to whitewash that fact.

    ————

    HAHAHA the left…

    Its the repressed god loving conservatives that always end up doing some shady stuff…too bad its usually to kids. I bet all those priests voted to the right…

  114. raiddawgz says: Mar 26, 2013 5:23 PM

    Ayanbadejo looks so gay (happy) in that picture…

  115. JSpicoli says: Mar 26, 2013 5:24 PM

    Does anyone know where I can find a website dedicated to talking about pro football?

  116. danfan528 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:27 PM

    Dude belongs in San Francisco

  117. blaine615 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:31 PM

    If I were Ozzie Newsome, I would cut Ayanbedjo not because he supports gay rights but because his production is not outweighed by the distractions he brings to the football team. There are plenty of free agents that can produce as 4th string LBs and on special teams. Then Ayanbedjo can focus all his time on social issues.

  118. yssupasigninnamnotyep says: Mar 26, 2013 5:34 PM

    If it doesn’t fit…you must acquit!

  119. turkjones says: Mar 26, 2013 5:35 PM

    Saying Ayanbadejo is gay because of his support for marriage equality is like saying all white people who marched in the ’60s were closeted African-Americans.

  120. b3nz0z says: Mar 26, 2013 5:36 PM

    “this is a states rights issue” = “but we don’t WANNA treat everyone equal!”
    . . . always.

  121. commonsensedude says: Mar 26, 2013 5:36 PM

    Florio, it seems like the “Days Without a Same-Sex Marriage Story” counter is in a tough competition with the “Days Without An Arrest” counter. May both counters run high because I come here to read and talk about football. Not about a very divisive political issue. We can debate same-sex marriage on a lot of other sites.

  122. nineroutsider says: Mar 26, 2013 5:42 PM

    @PriorKnowledge says: Mar 26, 2013 5:21 PM

    HEY – I am a conservative and I am in favor of gay marriage, so stop being a bigot against conservatives.
    ———————————————————-
    Great point, people need to realize that their are social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. Fiscal conservatives are the ones you can respect and can engage in intelligent conversation with, even if you don’t agree with them. They are the ones in which compromise can be found. I’m more of a fiscal conservative than I am a fiscal liberal, although I’m largely a moderate…for lack of a better term.

    Social conservatives are the lying hypocrites and despots who want America to emerge as a Christian government much like the Islamists in the Middle East. They are hardliners and the greatest threat to our version of freedom and liberty. There is a reason social conservatives no longer want Thomas Jefferson in their kid’s history books. They are retelling America’s story as one of a religious nation and working hard to reform our government in their image. This is the single greatest threat to our nation and our form of liberty and its intensified a lot since the early 80′s. They all claim to be champions of freedom and liberty, but look at how much they want to curtail freedoms. You are free to work hard and to believe in God (their version of God, not Catholicism, etc.) under their system and that’s it. Yeah, fine, you think I’m a crackpot, but please just pay attention over the next 30 years, especially to how states in the Bible belt are governed.

  123. basexc9 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:43 PM

    The best comment by Florio, and best argument by anyone that is for same-sex marriage, is that we live in a free country, so why should we (the government, you, me, etc.) step in to prevent two people from marrying? Who is this really bothering? Who are we to tell people they can’t do something because we have personal beliefs to the contrary?

  124. gregm5s7 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:49 PM

    Suprised by the amount of bigotry in these comments. Really eye-opening.

    Comparing gay marriage to beastiality in a slippery slope comparison tells me all I need to know about you and your closed world of experiences.

    In 20-30 years we’re going to look back and realize how backwards we were.

  125. patfanken says: Mar 26, 2013 5:50 PM

    Why do nonsensical issues like gay marriage and abortion get so much press, when essentially they are really individual choices and not the business of government? Because that same government wants you all hot and bothered about THESE issues, and not asking questions like, “how come over a trillion dollars was looted from the economy in 2007 -8, and yet not a SINGLE person has even gone on trial, let alone gotten convicted.

    See, if you are all debating, regardless of what side you take, these “moral issues”, the powers that be, can continue to hoodwink you with anything that’s even slightly complex.

    It’s like the Wizard of Oz. “Ignore the man behind the curtain”. Keep looking at my right hand, while I take your wallet with my left.

    Like so many have said, who cares. Why are we getting so emotional about this, when there are so many REAL and important issues that we refuse to get involved with because we are too damned lazy to take the time to understand anything that can’t be framed in a black/white format.

    When democracy ends in this country, it won’t be because anyone took it away, it will be because we GAVE it away.

  126. gregm5s7 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:52 PM

    I’m so glad the laws of our country aren’t based on a book with a talking snake

  127. jeff6381 says: Mar 26, 2013 5:56 PM

    You are not a bigot if you disagree with with gay marriage everybody is entitled to believe morally what they want. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman I don’t hate a gay people i am actually cool with some of them. People have there on own beliefs about it for some its a religious belief so gay marriage people should respect that also just as non gay marriage people should do the same.

  128. hannahduccab says: Mar 26, 2013 6:03 PM

    I’ll bet the majority of people supporting gay marriage on this site have no issue with limiting magazine capacity on weapons or taking away certain rifles because they’re scary looking. I’ll also bet you have no problem with Obamacare requiring the Catholic church to pay for birth control to their employees.

  129. bigoldred says: Mar 26, 2013 6:11 PM

    @ watermelon1 ”

    This actually happened to someone I know. Told parents they were gay, parents disowned her. Started a business, eventually found a woman, lived as wife & wife for years unable to get married. She died suddenly in a car wreck, no will. Estate was awarded to the parents who hadn’t spoken to her in 20+ years and disowned her and not to her partner who got NOTHING.

    I call BS. Independent enough to come to parents like that, smart enough to start a successful business, and loves their partner. BUT… didn’t buy life insurance or have a will?

  130. trulywilde66 says: Mar 26, 2013 6:11 PM

    Several times over the past few years when I post a comment on PFT that mentions the fact that in 2008, PFT was running ads that supported California’s hateful Proposition 8 banning marriage equality, my comments were removed.

    Today, in response to this story I again posted a comment that reminded Mr. Florio that PFT was running “Yes on 8″ ads in 2008.

    My comment was removed, but what has been allowed to remain is a litany of comments from bigoted, ignorant, anti-gay PFT readers.

    Luckily, I copied my comment in case it was removed, so that I could re-post it. Here it is:

    Chrismatthewsucks says: “Oh yeah? where excatly in our constitution says anything about marriage?”

    Where does it say in the constitution you can play football? Where does it say in the constitution you can own an assault rifle? Where does it say in the constitution you have the right to an abortion?

    It doesn’t. The constitution is a framework of rights, not a laundry list of freedoms and prohibitions.

    Therefore the U.S. Supreme Court is often asked to interpret certain laws to determine if the constitution supports them. Today, the Court was asked to determine if the constitution upholds the right for states to ban same sex marriage.

    It was only 4 short years ago when I came to PFT to escape the back and forth of the heated argument playing out in California about Prop 8, a divisive ballot initiative to take away the rights of same sex couples in California to marry.

    Sadly, as the PFT page loaded with the NFL headlines of the day, a large advertisement supporting Prop 8 appeared alongside those PFT headlines. This was before the PFT/NBC merger, so the decision to support Prop 8 was clearly Mr. Florio’s, and his alone.

    It’s nice to read Mr. Florio has evolved on the issue and now describes his opinion on the issue of marriage equality as apathetic.

    Finally, Chris Matthews is awesome!

  131. osteelers says: Mar 26, 2013 6:19 PM

    Words have meaning. If we start redefining words then society loses another standard.
    2. Marriage is a covenant ordained by God. Government barged in and started forcing people to follow their rules in regards to marriage.
    3. Because government has already barged in and forced people to follow their rules regarding marriage, there is nothing to stop them from forcing churches from performing same sex ceremonies.
    4. There is also nothing stopping them from defining what same sex unions mean.
    5. Because of that, it’s bizarre to me that any group would want the government to define anything for them.
    6. That’s not freedom.
    7. Real equality would be a government that is not in charge of marriage.

  132. osteelers says: Mar 26, 2013 6:20 PM

    gregm5s7 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 5:52 PM
    I’m so glad the laws of our country aren’t based on a book with a talking snake

    ______________________________

    Where do you think most of our laws come from?

  133. sanityinsd says: Mar 26, 2013 6:24 PM

    I appreciate your position on the Prop 8 matter, but we as residents of the pathetic state of California already voted on it and a decision was realized by the peopl and for the people. Now, SCOTUS just heard arguments over the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, something that was presented before the electorate, voted upon, and passed back in 2008. The opponents of Proposition 8 decided they did not like the results of the peoples’ democratic decision, so they took it to the courts. Now we have the courts potentially overruling the referendum of the people. Is this a case of legislating from the bench to appease a special interest group? If the people decided by vote on the matter, should that not settle the issue? Or have we come to a point in America where a minority special interest can protest and use the court system to mandate their whims and desires? I thought the right of free speech and expression extended to everyone – even conservatives.

  134. raiderbeliever says: Mar 26, 2013 6:27 PM

    Interesting how Florio censors remarks not fitting his PC agenda.
    :)

    I count it all joy to not be included, and to be censored!

  135. Deb says: Mar 26, 2013 6:30 PM

    Ayanbadejo aside, I don’t understand what this topic has to do with pro football. Players probably lobby on everything from local zoning issues to gun control, and we don’t read about it here. However, I’ve long admired your feel for click-magnet topics. It’s your greatest gift.

    But did you have to share the Chief Justice’s quote? As if that evil imp Scalia weren’t enough, now we learn Roberts may be a few Cheerios short of a bowl, too.

  136. rushmatic says: Mar 26, 2013 6:39 PM

    steelerben says:

    When asked for comment Bill Belichik mumbled unintelligibly for a few minutes before the phrase, “not sure he’s on our team” was able to be deciphered.

    ____________

    Oh man. That’s really, really bad. I know you tried and all, but just… fail.

  137. beneagles says: Mar 26, 2013 6:46 PM

    “We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive
    and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.”- Pope Benedict XVI

  138. trulywilde66 says: Mar 26, 2013 6:50 PM

    Sanityinsd said: “If the people decided by vote on the matter, should that not settle the issue? Or have we come to a point in America where a minority special interest can protest and use the court system to mandate their whims and desires?”
    ______________________________________

    In America, the majority is not permitted to put the fundamental rights of the minority up for a vote. In fact, the framers of the constitution decried the tyranny of the majority over the minority and created fundamental rights that cannot be taken away.

    Just because the initiative process in California allows a citizen to stand outside a Walmart and gather enough signatures to put a proposition on the ballot does not mean the proposition is constitutional.

    Half of all California propositions are later determined to be fully or partially unconstitutional, and then thrown out. Proposition 8 is a perfect example.

  139. packerhater says: Mar 26, 2013 6:58 PM

    Its sad the he or anyone would reward people who don’t get help for thier sickness.

  140. prmpft says: Mar 26, 2013 7:01 PM

    so gay is ok to say – but Full Access Gaiety (if it were an acronym) would be unacceptable. Interesting to be sure.

  141. sanityinsd says: Mar 26, 2013 7:01 PM

    @trulywilde66

    And thanks to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the liberal insanity in California will continue to overturn rational thought from the voices of its people.

  142. vegasviking33 says: Mar 26, 2013 7:03 PM

    The bible says no. Then I say no. But at the end of the day I can care less.

  143. packerhater says: Mar 26, 2013 7:04 PM

    harrisonhits2 says:Mar 26, 2013 3:46 PM

    Some of the tougher people I’ve ever run into have been gay who made no secret of it. It takes guts to stand up to the prejudice they face.

    We’re all human and its time to stop discriminating against gays.

    Then we need to stop discriminating against drugies , those who have sex with animals , those who inbreed (packer fans know what im talking about) those who have multible sposes , after all they were all born that way.

  144. prmpft says: Mar 26, 2013 7:10 PM

    So if I choose to be a murderer, pedophile, practitioner of bestiality, practitioner of incest, or abhorrent of any kind – it is OK because I chose to do that and should get financial benefits for my life partner because I chose to do something that is not acceptable in any way except by those who do the same thing. And the NFL – via it’s employees – will support that? Got it.

  145. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 7:18 PM

    osteelers says:
    Mar 26, 2013 6:20 PM
    gregm5s7 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 5:52 PM
    I’m so glad the laws of our country aren’t based on a book with a talking snake

    ______________________________

    Where do you think most of our laws come from?

    ____________

    Common sense. Do you really think we need religion to tell us to not rob, assault or murder each other?

  146. vegasviking33 says: Mar 26, 2013 7:20 PM

    Who are we to tell people they can’t do something because we have personal beliefs to the contrary?

    Who are we to tell Randy Moss he isn’t the greatest receiver of all times if he believes he is? Hmmmm…..

  147. osteelers says: Mar 26, 2013 7:25 PM

    nyyjetsknicks says:
    Mar 26, 2013 7:18 PM
    osteelers says:
    Mar 26, 2013 6:20 PM
    gregm5s7 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 5:52 PM
    I’m so glad the laws of our country aren’t based on a book with a talking snake

    ______________________________

    Where do you think most of our laws come from?

    ____________

    Common sense. Do you really think we need religion to tell us to not rob, assault or murder each other?

    __________________

    I was going to comment, but you a Jets fan and just LOL instead.

  148. jetsjetsjetsnow says: Mar 26, 2013 7:28 PM

    Hasn’t he already basically come out already?

  149. cbryan777 says: Mar 26, 2013 7:33 PM

    You are so talented Mike, but far too predictable….and does “pursuit of happiness” come with any delineation?

  150. trulywilde66 says: Mar 26, 2013 7:34 PM

    To sanityinsd: “And thanks to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the liberal insanity in California will continue to overturn rational thought from the voices of its people.”

    I guess I need to remind you the liberal insanity you decry also voted to pass Proposition 8, which banned same sex marriage in California. The same liberal insanity voted against legalizing marijuana for recreational use.

    The 9th Circuit is a court that represents western states, not just California. They voted to uphold a lower court ruling that determined Prop 8 was unconstitutional. I believe the SCOTUS will do the same.

  151. nyyjetsknicks says: Mar 26, 2013 7:39 PM

    osteelers says:
    Mar 26, 2013 7:25 PM
    nyyjetsknicks says:
    Mar 26, 2013 7:18 PM
    osteelers says:
    Mar 26, 2013 6:20 PM
    gregm5s7 says:
    Mar 26, 2013 5:52 PM
    I’m so glad the laws of our country aren’t based on a book with a talking snake

    ______________________________

    Where do you think most of our laws come from?

    ____________

    Common sense. Do you really think we need religion to tell us to not rob, assault or murder each other?

    __________________

    I was going to comment, but you a Jets fan and just LOL instead.

    __________________

    This is what someone does who argument just got destroyed.

  152. trulywilde66 says: Mar 26, 2013 7:43 PM

    prmpft says: “So if I choose to be a murderer, pedophile, practitioner of bestiality, practitioner of incest, or abhorrent of any kind – it is OK because I chose to do that and should get financial benefits for my life partner because I chose to do something that is not acceptable in any way except by those who do the same thing. And the NFL – via it’s employees – will support that? Got it.”

    If you choose to be a murderer you have broken a penal code and taken away the right of your victim to live. If you act on your pedophilia you have harmed a child. If you practice bestiality you have harmed an animal.

    If you marry a consenting adult of either sex, who have you harmed? No one.

    There is no right to murder, there is no right to pedophilia, there is no right to bestiality, because all of those things cause harm.

    However, 14 separate times the SCOTUS has declared the right to marriage is not only a fundamental right, it is “the most fundamental right” a person has: to marry the person of their choice.

  153. cowboysfansteve says: Mar 26, 2013 7:44 PM

    Let same sex couples be together, but a marriage is between a man and woman. Plain and simple. If same sex couples want something of meaning. Call it a union. Not marriage.

  154. BringBackTheFlex says: Mar 26, 2013 7:55 PM

    “Defining the term as a marriage between two persons would prevent the parade of horribles that so often is cited by those who opposed same-sex marriage.”

    Sure. And a father marrying his 16 year old daughter shouldn’t bother any one at all. Or a sister marrying her brother. Two sisters getting married. Just let people do what they want to.

  155. goldenperspective says: Mar 26, 2013 7:55 PM

    Just because I don’t support gay marraige I am a bigot? Thats funny. I’ve hired gay people before and treated them with the same respect as all of my other employees. I have even had discussions with them about this very issue, in a respectful manner. I think you are mistaking my firmness in my beliefs with bigotry. In fact, me being called a bigot , narrow minded, and stupid makes you the bigot my friend. Just because my beliefs are that gay marriage is wrong, does not mean I am throwing mud at gay people or calling them names, or discriminsating in anyway.

  156. kmack831 says: Mar 26, 2013 7:56 PM

    Very mixed on this as i have friend that are gay. And im a Homeboy for Brendon (PutoSANTACRUZ!!!)

    In the NFL or any locker room, i think the diffcult part is being unconfortable… You think Any women wants to shower in front of 52 other guys… that she wont fell them checking her out… Eye Favring her… That understandable.

    Same feeling for staight men with a gay teammate. How do you not feel violated, or stop him from checking you out, hitting on you, making you uncomfortable?

    Does that mean a special shower and locker room for that player?

    Does that change the way he tackles and stay on top longer or how you tackle, grab, engage someone…

    If you live women, and your married or in a relationship… if you see a smoking hot women most of us tent to glance… Human nature. How would a gay teammate turn that off? And not check out everyone in the shower… size them up?

    If someone wants to be gay, good for them. But the special interest, special rights, recognigtion… Why cant it just be “DONT ASK, DONT TELL”

    Do your job, and what you do at home is your biz?

    So is there a Civil Union, or other term that can be used? On the form now it has a spot for Husband and a Spot for Wife. now its going to be a new form? Husband/Husband…etc

    Is a solution to call it Marriage 2.0… Civil Union? Give them same Tax breaks?

    If things are different, but they want the equal rights of being married, then anything wrong with calling it “New Union” “Civil Union” “GLBTG UNION or GLBTGMarriage”

    Why cant a catagory be added to describe what it is? If Marriage is defined as a Man and a Woman. And this is not a man and a woman. Then call it something different and give the same rights. can we make a deal on that?

    We all want people to pursue happieness, and Freedom of choice. If the issue is calling it the same thing and it is close but not the same thing… call it something else… Hair…Hare Were or Where?

  157. jameyjame says: Mar 26, 2013 7:58 PM

    do people at your job come out and say they are gay?, or even straight for that matter? keep it at home, and if we find out we find out. why the need to make a spectacle of it?

  158. nite2al says: Mar 26, 2013 8:11 PM

    If same-sex couples can adopt a kid (which still amazes me), then why it the heck can’t they be married?!?!?

  159. trulywilde66 says: Mar 26, 2013 8:35 PM

    cowboysfansteve says: “Let same sex couples be together, but a marriage is between a man and woman. Plain and simple. If same sex couples want something of meaning. Call it a union. Not marriage.”

    ____________________________________

    You seem to forget the government provides benefits to married couples that are not available to couples in same sex unions. If the government wants to discriminate in that way it must explain why it has chosen to do so. The reasons must be rational and based on more than moral disapproval.

    Providing the benefits of marriage while withholding the word “marriage” is discrimination and is based on nothing more than moral disapproval.

    Don’t believe me? Take a gander at the majority of the above comments comparing being gay to murder, pedophilia and bestiality.

  160. gdbroker says: Mar 26, 2013 8:39 PM

    I am shocked and disgusted by the amount of ignorance, hatred and bigotry being spouted on this page. Simply disgusting.

    For those saying it’s just about love, explain that to a same sex partner who is in a committed relationship but unable to marry each other, who can’t collect benefits if the other passes away. A right married couples have.

    There are so many levels that people are just plain wrong or ignorant about on this topic it just amazes me. How does a same sex couple getting married affect you? Why the fear and hatred? I just don’t get it.

  161. goldenperspective says: Mar 26, 2013 8:48 PM

    Don’t believe me? Take a gander at the majority of the above comments comparing being gay to murder, pedophilia and bestiality.

    All of those acts could be described accurately as perversions. Sex was created for procreation and a husband and wife to enjoy under a marraige approved by God. God also does not permit a man to sodomize his wife. That too is perverted.

  162. fordwuzanazi says: Mar 26, 2013 9:13 PM

    Lincoln wuz gay and everyone around him back then knew it and it wuz no big deal and he wuz president.

  163. Deb says: Mar 26, 2013 9:17 PM

    goldenperspective says:

    Sex was created for procreation and a husband and wife to enjoy under a marraige approved by God.
    ————————————————-
    And so Christian couples who are not able to procreate are not allowed to have sex? Then all couples stop having sex after the female goes through menopause? Right. Sex does serve other purposes than procreation.

    God gave each of us free will. If you and I choose to be believers, we have that right. If others choose not to believe, they have that right. It’s not for any of us to tell others who to be, how to live, or whom to marry. Live, let live, and leave the rest to God.

  164. raleighdevil says: Mar 26, 2013 9:23 PM

    Lincoln was not gay.

  165. buccobrigade says: Mar 26, 2013 9:27 PM

    Let’s just legalize gay marriage already so we can move on and work on stopping baby murdering a.k.a. abortion. Oh wait, that’s not a liberal cause. I guess we won’t ever talk about that anymore in the mainstream. We only discuss and support liberal causes in the mainstream media.

  166. jimmysee says: Mar 26, 2013 9:41 PM

    chrismatthewsucks says:
    Mar 26, 2013 3:40 PM

    *”“I’m actually here as a patriot — as a patriot to uphold the Constitution of the United States. . . .*”

    Oh yeah? where excatly in our constitution says anything about marriage?

    ————————————————————

    It’s called the “equal protection clause.”

    The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that “no state shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

    Permitting only certain types of people the benefit of marriage is a denial of equal protection.

    And as for “states rights” hysterics — the states do not get to apply their own interpretations of Constitutional issues.

    It doesn’t work that way.

  167. mike7948 says: Mar 26, 2013 9:57 PM

    I am really surprised at how many people are so ignorant of this situation.

    States right? Yes marriage is left to the states but discrimination can be stopped by the federal government. I am sure you are also going to tell me how incredibly DOMA is because it is done by the federal government right? you will have no problem with SCOTUS throwing DOMA out tommorow, I am sure you were so disgusted when it was signed in 1996 right, kept saying states rights then?

    Not in the constitution? Uh..life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or maybe the 14th amendment.

    Religion? ok so only religious people get married? I know plenty of people that aren’t religious that get married. Why should your religion dictate to someone else what they should do? Oh and just another tip that could help you in life, the earth is older than 6,000 years old.

    Why is government involved in this? Well besides the constitutional issues, married people get lots of benefits from the federal government; filing joint tax returns as well as hospital rights and hundreds more.

    Why can’t someone marry a dog or marry anyone? Because we say it is between two people. Marriage is a contract- are you also worried about people entering into contracts with dogs in other areas?

    Slippery slope? This isn’t a real argument, we are a democracy of smart people, we have procedures in place to make sure slippery slopes are decided by a system full of checks and balances.

  168. yajas says: Mar 26, 2013 10:19 PM

    dondiraider says: “Have you ever studied the bible?”

    It was a book written by human beings who had no more divine knowledge than you or I. But it was written in a time of significantly less factual knowledge by groups of people with their own agendas.

    Plenty of people base their life on it and that may be fine for them. But if you’re blessed with the gene that allows you to think for yourself and easily conclude how you should treat other human beings, then you can skip the book.

  169. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 10:21 PM

    well said!

  170. dondiraider says: Mar 26, 2013 10:25 PM

    you should take the time to read it,,,,you owe it to yourself….you will learn that God created EVERYONE and LOVES EVERYONE.

  171. goldenperspective says: Mar 26, 2013 11:27 PM

    ————————————————-
    And so Christian couples who are not able to procreate are not allowed to have sex? Then all couples stop having sex after the female goes through menopause? Right. Sex does serve other purposes than procreation.

    God gave each of us free will. If you and I choose to be believers, we have that right. If others choose not to believe, they have that right. It’s not for any of us to tell others who to be, how to live, or whom to marry. Live, let live, and leave the rest to God.
    ———————————————————-
    I apologize. I should have put a comma.

    Sex was created for procreation, AND a husband and wife to enjoy under a marraige approved by God.

  172. rc33 says: Mar 27, 2013 10:51 AM

    So this “waiting to come out” gay NFL player emerges the same week the Supreme Court is ready to make two key rulings on the same subject? Just a coincidence, I’m certain.
    In a related item, we’re still waiting for Harry Reid to divulge the name of the guy that claimed Romney didn’t pay taxes for 10 years. Elections over, might as well let us know.
    I’m not suggesting that the “taxes weren’t paid guy” and the “waiting to come out gay guy” don’t exist, I’m flat-out guaranteeing it.
    The media truly believes we are all gullible idiots.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!