What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Chris Kluwe explains gay marriage to Matt Birk (1 Viewer)

the moops

Footballguy
This is pretty awesome. Deadspin

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. Mind####ing 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 ####### ####balls. 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 ####. 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 cluster#### 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. #######.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow. I don't agree with some of what he said, but I like the way he said it. Can we invite him to join the FFA?

 
Kluwe is the Jim Irsay of punters. Just shut the #### already.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
 
This is pretty awesome. Deadspin

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. #######.
Does a punter really count as an NFL player?
i just got him in the 22nd round on Monday's draft.
 
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
Uh yeah it is. Might wanna brush up on your 1st am law.He is a rep, ie a state actor. Pressuring a private group to do he dirty work for u doesn't allow said violation.
 
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
Uh yeah it is. Might wanna brush up on your 1st am law.He is a rep, ie a state actor. Pressuring a private group to do he dirty work for u doesn't allow said violation.
I think I'm pretty up to speed. The delegate wrote a letter to private business. He didn't so much as threaten any state action much less take any. Putting it on official letterhead doesn't turn it into constitutional violation
 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?

Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?

Such hypocrisy.

 
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
Uh yeah it is. Might wanna brush up on your 1st am law.He is a rep, ie a state actor. Pressuring a private group to do he dirty work for u doesn't allow said violation.
I think I'm pretty up to speed. The delegate wrote a letter to private business. He didn't so much as threaten any state action much less take any. Putting it on official letterhead doesn't turn it into constitutional violation
It doesn't matter that nothing was threatened. When a state official calls upon a private employer to inhibit free speech it sets a terrible precedence, similar to the McCarthy era.
 
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
Uh yeah it is. Might wanna brush up on your 1st am law.He is a rep, ie a state actor. Pressuring a private group to do he dirty work for u doesn't allow said violation.
I think I'm pretty up to speed. The delegate wrote a letter to private business. He didn't so much as threaten any state action much less take any. Putting it on official letterhead doesn't turn it into constitutional violation
It doesn't matter that nothing was threatened. When a state official calls upon a private employer to inhibit free speech it sets a terrible precedence, similar to the McCarthy era.
That's not the test for a clear violation of the First Amendment
 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
Hell no he doesn't get a pass.Most are in full support of Kluwe/Ayanbadejo... and Burns' price to be paid comes election time.Quit looking for something to cry about.
 
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
Uh yeah it is. Might wanna brush up on your 1st am law.He is a rep, ie a state actor. Pressuring a private group to do he dirty work for u doesn't allow said violation.
I think I'm pretty up to speed. The delegate wrote a letter to private business. He didn't so much as threaten any state action much less take any. Putting it on official letterhead doesn't turn it into constitutional violation
It doesn't matter that nothing was threatened. When a state official calls upon a private employer to inhibit free speech it sets a terrible precedence, similar to the McCarthy era.
That's not the test for a clear violation of the First Amendment
I think it is. I'm not a free speech attorney, so I'm not sure, but I think that if a government official, in his capacity as a government official, calls upon a private employer to inhibit the free speech of a private employee, that is a clear violation of the First Amendment, and Kluwe is correct.
 
awesome stuff.

Too bad there aren't more people like Chris Kluwe and less people like Emmett C. Burns Jr.(D)

 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
you expect the national media to take up a story about a state representative pissing match with a punter? Thank god you don't run a newsroom.
 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
you expect the national media to take up a story about a state representative pissing match with a punter? Thank god you don't run a newsroom.
I don't think he's talking about the spat with the punter.
 
This is awesome. Professional athletes need to take the next step and come out of the closet. I think the only out pro is that Rugby player, there was a 30 for 30 (or something like that) about him I believe.

I can't wait to see some cons get their panties in a bind because a couple players from their favorite tough guy sport are pro gay marriage.

 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
Hell no he doesn't get a pass.Most are in full support of Kluwe/Ayanbadejo... and Burns' price to be paid comes election time.Quit looking for something to cry about.
No crying here...it will be interesting to see how this ends up. Stay tuned.Funny how sensitive some Democrats get when the shoe is on the other foot...
 
This is awesome. Professional athletes need to take the next step and come out of the closet. I think the only out pro is that Rugby player, there was a 30 for 30 (or something like that) about him I believe.I can't wait to see some cons get their panties in a bind because a couple players from their favorite tough guy sport are pro gay marriage.
Coming out of the closet would be good for an athlete individually from the perspective of gaining name recognition, publicity, endorsements, etc., but it would not be good for the team he is on. It would also likely have a negative impact on his value if/when he hits free agency.I think you'll see it at some point in the not-too-distant future from a veteran player at the end of his career.
 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?

Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?

Such hypocrisy.
Hell no he doesn't get a pass.Most are in full support of Kluwe/Ayanbadejo... and Burns' price to be paid comes election time.

Quit looking for something to cry about.
No crying here...it will be interesting to see how this ends up. Stay tuned.Funny how sensitive some Democrats get when the shoe is on the other foot...
You are the one being sensitive. ;)
 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
Hell no he doesn't get a pass.Most are in full support of Kluwe/Ayanbadejo... and Burns' price to be paid comes election time.Quit looking for something to cry about.
No crying here...it will be interesting to see how this ends up. Stay tuned.Funny how sensitive some Democrats get when the shoe is on the other foot...
WTF are you talking about? Who here is defending the politician?
 
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
Hell no he doesn't get a pass.Most are in full support of Kluwe/Ayanbadejo... and Burns' price to be paid comes election time.Quit looking for something to cry about.
No crying here...it will be interesting to see how this ends up. Stay tuned.Funny how sensitive some Democrats get when the shoe is on the other foot...
WTF are you talking about? Who here is defending the politician?
My thought as well. A bigot is a bigot regardless of party affiliation.
 
People need to put aside their feelings on the topic and recognize how awesome this letter was.
It certainly was a well articulated point, but what the heck does Emmett Burns do as a response to this now? The obviously sensible thing to do would be to admit you are wrong, and that despite differing opinions on the subject of gay marriage, you are happy that these athletes take such pride in current events and wish them the best on Sunday. But of course no politician can do that, so what will the response be? Do they ignore this and let it go?
 
'modogg said:
'Beerguzzler said:
People need to put aside their feelings on the topic and recognize how awesome this letter was.
It certainly was a well articulated point, but what the heck does Emmett Burns do as a response to this now? The obviously sensible thing to do would be to admit you are wrong, and that despite differing opinions on the subject of gay marriage, you are happy that these athletes take such pride in current events and wish them the best on Sunday. But of course no politician can do that, so what will the response be? Do they ignore this and let it go?
Let's not get carried away here, it's a letter from an NFL punter. You ignore it.(and I liked the letter)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
'gcoast3 said:
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
Not really. He's a baptist minister. You never know what you are going to get.
 
'Jobber said:
'Radio Free Homer said:
'gcoast3 said:
'BigSteelThrill said:
'gcoast3 said:
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?

Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?

Such hypocrisy.
Hell no he doesn't get a pass.Most are in full support of Kluwe/Ayanbadejo... and Burns' price to be paid comes election time.

Quit looking for something to cry about.
No crying here...it will be interesting to see how this ends up. Stay tuned.Funny how sensitive some Democrats get when the shoe is on the other foot...
WTF are you talking about? Who here is defending the politician?
My thought as well. A bigot is a bigot conservative regardless of party affiliation.
There we go.
 
'gcoast3 said:
'BigSteelThrill said:
'gcoast3 said:
Where are all the folks that hated and protested on Chick-fil-a?Because Emmett Burns is a Democrat he gets a pass from the national media?Such hypocrisy.
Hell no he doesn't get a pass.Most are in full support of Kluwe/Ayanbadejo... and Burns' price to be paid comes election time.Quit looking for something to cry about.
No crying here...it will be interesting to see how this ends up. Stay tuned.Funny how sensitive some Democrats get when the shoe is on the other foot...
This is schtick right? :mellow:
 
'Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
no?here the government is using its power to supress somebody's speech. If posting the ten commandments in a school can be seen as a violation of the first amendment, then I would put this in the same light.
 
'Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
no?here the government is using its power to supress somebody's speech. If posting the ten commandments in a school can be seen as a violation of the first amendment, then I would put this in the same light.
It's kind of a stretch.
 
'Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
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, ...
Uh, not really. Stick to punting Perry Mason. But I enjoyed the blue bits.
no?here the government is using its power to supress somebody's speech. If posting the ten commandments in a school can be seen as a violation of the first amendment, then I would put this in the same light.
Entire,y different clause.And the government isn't using any power. A state delegate wrote a letter. You don't lose the right to express(asanine) opinions when you hold public office. There is no punishment for an act of speech and no benefit conditioned on speech. It might offend our Miltonian notions of the importance of Free Speech, but I can assure you that there isn't anything approaching 1stAmendment violation.
 
His intent is irrelevant. It is the effect of a state action that creates a ripe controversy. A lawmaker has the same right to call onthe Ravens to discipline or fire an employee as you or I have to call on ESPN to fire Rush Limbaugh. Considering that this guy is one of many legislators, there is just no chance of any real actionable threat. If he had been a prosecutor, maybe you could use this as evidence if he later prosecuted the Ravens for something but there's nothing inherently unconstitutional in an elected representative voting a certain way because he doesn't like what someone said, or distrusts Muslims or whatever (and in fact we can't even inquire into a legislators motives, because they are protected by legislative immunity). It's the action that counts.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top