Yep Pat Haden........has a Gay son...........soooooo is he not paid to do his job????? Tell him to protest on his OWN time.
Socal's AD skipping Indy meeting
- Thread starter BGI User 348
- Start date
He needs to change the subject. Season ticket holders are bailing
after he turned the home schedule to crap and raised ticket prices anyway. Season ticket holders think the Sark hire was and is a bad joke. His conference has forced teams to play a Thursday home game every year (i.e. no parking at all on campus because its a school day, no tailgating because everyone is still at work or fighting LA traffic an hour before the game, no staying out after the game because the next day is a work day, etc.). The Coliseum is a piece of crap even though season ticket holders are forced to cough up a Coliseum improvement fee with every ticket purchased. In short, he better hope Sark pulls off a miracle next season or he'll have lots of time to march in solidarity with groups who hate religion and oppose religious freedom. If he weren't such a hypocrite, he'd cancel the ND series due to ND's war on women (unless you pay women to protect themselves while shagging around, you must hate women) and hostility toward gays. Come on Hayden, be a man. Cancel the series!
after he turned the home schedule to crap and raised ticket prices anyway. Season ticket holders think the Sark hire was and is a bad joke. His conference has forced teams to play a Thursday home game every year (i.e. no parking at all on campus because its a school day, no tailgating because everyone is still at work or fighting LA traffic an hour before the game, no staying out after the game because the next day is a work day, etc.). The Coliseum is a piece of crap even though season ticket holders are forced to cough up a Coliseum improvement fee with every ticket purchased. In short, he better hope Sark pulls off a miracle next season or he'll have lots of time to march in solidarity with groups who hate religion and oppose religious freedom. If he weren't such a hypocrite, he'd cancel the ND series due to ND's war on women (unless you pay women to protect themselves while shagging around, you must hate women) and hostility toward gays. Come on Hayden, be a man. Cancel the series!
Pat Haden doesn't know word one about the Indiana Religious Freedom law. He never read it. He is responding to hysteria with the media as an accomplice. If he won't come to Indiana then he best do a little research and find out the other nineteen states that have the same exact law and stay away from those places also.
Re: He needs to change the subject. Season ticket holders are bailing
That is a lot to digest there. Whoa
Is this a USC administration position and decision, or a matter of PH interjecting personal belief into his professional responsibility. It seems to me he should act, as AD, according to the institutions of his employer.
I was in awe when haden longingly dry humped sarkisian on the sideline.
There's something about an AD leaping into his HC's arms and wrapping his legs around him....
haden is a weirdo.
There was also his very odd superman routine running down from the booth and across the field to chat with refs because sark was whining and ready to have his salad tossed...
Did they ever figure out the NCAA violation on that communication?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBpoWy3lqgY
There's something about an AD leaping into his HC's arms and wrapping his legs around him....
haden is a weirdo.
There was also his very odd superman routine running down from the booth and across the field to chat with refs because sark was whining and ready to have his salad tossed...
Did they ever figure out the NCAA violation on that communication?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBpoWy3lqgY
It was a personal decision, he was very clear in his statement this was based on his personal experiences and beliefs. Don't believe anyone has a right to say what PH should or shouldn't do except for his employer.
The Indiana law, along with the other 19 states and another 13 or so waiting in the wings, has no arrow pointed at the gay faction as the media would have you believe. In fact, the burden of the law is on the business owner. The gay faction isn't even mentioned in the Indiana law. It's not good enough that people of faith have to tolerate the gay agenda, but now they have to totally accept it with a smile on their face. This is most likely what Pat Haden thinks. Tolerance is a two way street. You tolerate my Christian beliefs and I will tolerate your lifestyle. Pat Haden can stay at USC and I won't give a darn. NDEwing18: you show me one single word in the Indiana law that promotes bigotry or hate. Show me the sentence that says a business owner does not have to serve anyone based on their skin color or lifestyle.
haden has little to no scruples. Right now he is a blithering PR shill with zero ethics.
Here's a guy that is on the Playoff Selection Committee and he's trying to influence the outcome of a game.
Plus, absent from his recent bs regarding the NCAA is that he fails to discuss relevant facts and there are a ton of them. Here are some highlights...:
"This was the institution's
sixth major infractions case. Most recently, the institution appeared before
the committee in June 2001 for a case involving the football and women's
swimming programs. Accordingly, USC is considered a "repeat violator"
under NCAA Bylaw19.5.2.3."
LOIC:
"In fact, the compliance director at the time ("former compliance
director") reported that there were only two compliance staff members at
the institution for most of his tenure and it was "just myself for a
couple of months.""
Then there was mayo... Then there was bush... Then there was papadakis restaurant... Then there was carroll hiring an extra coach...
"Beginning
in October 2004 and continuing until November 2005, two individuals (for the
purposes of this report, "agency partners A and B" respectively),
were in the process of forming a sports agency and marketing company, in
partnership with student-athlete 1 and his step-father and mother ("the
parents"). In the course of this relationship, agency partners A and B
gave student-athlete 1 and his parents impermissible benefits in the form of
cash, merchandise, an automobile, housing, hotel lodging and transportation. As
a result of the receipt of these benefits, student-athlete 1 competed for the
football team while ineligible. This ineligibility began at least by December
2004 and encompasses the 2005 Orange Bowl game and the entire 2005 football
season, including postseason competition."
"Finally,
as stated in the introduction of this report, USC is a "repeat violator" under
the provisions of Bylaw 19.5.2.3 and was at risk for enhanced penalties set
forth in Bylaw 19.5.2.3.2. Although the committee chose not to impose any of
these enhanced penalties, stiff sanctions are warranted in light of the serious
violations found by the committee and the fact the institution is a "repeat
violator.""
southern cal got off easy....
Here's a guy that is on the Playoff Selection Committee and he's trying to influence the outcome of a game.
Plus, absent from his recent bs regarding the NCAA is that he fails to discuss relevant facts and there are a ton of them. Here are some highlights...:
"This was the institution's
sixth major infractions case. Most recently, the institution appeared before
the committee in June 2001 for a case involving the football and women's
swimming programs. Accordingly, USC is considered a "repeat violator"
under NCAA Bylaw19.5.2.3."
LOIC:
"In fact, the compliance director at the time ("former compliance
director") reported that there were only two compliance staff members at
the institution for most of his tenure and it was "just myself for a
couple of months.""
Then there was mayo... Then there was bush... Then there was papadakis restaurant... Then there was carroll hiring an extra coach...
"Beginning
in October 2004 and continuing until November 2005, two individuals (for the
purposes of this report, "agency partners A and B" respectively),
were in the process of forming a sports agency and marketing company, in
partnership with student-athlete 1 and his step-father and mother ("the
parents"). In the course of this relationship, agency partners A and B
gave student-athlete 1 and his parents impermissible benefits in the form of
cash, merchandise, an automobile, housing, hotel lodging and transportation. As
a result of the receipt of these benefits, student-athlete 1 competed for the
football team while ineligible. This ineligibility began at least by December
2004 and encompasses the 2005 Orange Bowl game and the entire 2005 football
season, including postseason competition."
"Finally,
as stated in the introduction of this report, USC is a "repeat violator" under
the provisions of Bylaw 19.5.2.3 and was at risk for enhanced penalties set
forth in Bylaw 19.5.2.3.2. Although the committee chose not to impose any of
these enhanced penalties, stiff sanctions are warranted in light of the serious
violations found by the committee and the fact the institution is a "repeat
violator.""
southern cal got off easy....
Great for Pat and his family. Now Mr Haden has to boycott the other states that have the same law or some even more strict. Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and now Arkansas.
It doesn't matter whether it mentions gay people specifically or not.
Unlike the law passed in Illinois, for example, defense under the RFRA can be used in a suit between private parties that does not involve the government. Furthermore, while Illinois classifies sexual orientation as a protected class in terms of discrimination, Indiana does not. Under the Indiana version of the RFRA, a private party could refuse to provide service to a homosexual couple, arguing that such service would be a substantial burden to their faith. Any argument by opponents of the law that it would affect skin color is silly. Clearly, you can't discriminate against race. However, as noted earlier, Indiana has no protection for sexual orientation.
Furthermore, the language of the law has to be weighed with the intent of the law. The federal RFRA was passed following a Supreme Court decision regarding the use of peyote by Native Americans. Three of the largest supporters of the RFRA - the three people who Mike Pence decided to surround himself with in photo ops when signing the bill into law - all have been vocal about the fact that the law would permit denying service to homosexuals.
At some point, society determines that there are certain things that are unworthy of falling under a religious exemption defense. For example, it is illegal, despite one's sincerely held religious beliefs, to discriminate against interracial couples. It has nothing to do with "tolerating" your religious beliefs or not. Religious exemptions have limits (and you should be thankful they do).
Originally posted by Sorin90:
Good for Pat for supporting his family, regardless of what anyone else thinks!
Great for Pat and his family. Now Mr Haden has to boycott the other states that have the same law or some even more strict. Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and now Arkansas.
--------------------------------
You can add Georgia to that list soon.
Good for Pat for supporting his family, regardless of what anyone else thinks!
Great for Pat and his family. Now Mr Haden has to boycott the other states that have the same law or some even more strict. Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and now Arkansas.
--------------------------------
You can add Georgia to that list soon.
Nice try. Repeating talking points won't win the argument. The Indiana law is pattered exactly after the federal law. The author of the federal law has given 100% approval of the way the Indiana law is stated. There is nowhere in the Indiana law that states you can refuse service to anyone. Why is it so important to single out gays? What about little people as a class? What about occult weddings? Using the race issue is a worn default argument. Christians and scripture would not approve of discriminating any person because of color. It does disapprove of gay marriage. Get it? Scripture....gay marriage....Christian beliefs. The Christian value system is the last fortress against legitimizing gay marriage. That's why it has to go. Just for the record. Indiana will soon pass a law allowing Christmas in public schools. Religious discussions of Christmas. Let the boycotting begin. Mike Pence has caved in. BTW: these hypocrites like Cuomo from NY, who has banned state travel to Indiana, has a trip planned to Cuba where gay marriage is illegal. Apple products have no problem making millions in Middle East countries where gays are executed and women are treated like dirt. Funny how that works.
jack : well said.
when values and beliefs can be conviently put aside or changed to accomodate to gain some reward ( which can also be problem avoidance) , for some personal gain, then in truth there really are no values nor beliefs. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE as a society, and it has been the case for some time.
I chuckle when people who profess Christianity, alter a belief because it was 'from biblical times' and is no longer appropriate.
My question is "when did Biblical Times" end? Duh! We are living in Biblical Times!
God is not a God of confusion. I know there is a God and it is not me! So I do not try to improve on his word!
"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;..."
Isa 5:20
when values and beliefs can be conviently put aside or changed to accomodate to gain some reward ( which can also be problem avoidance) , for some personal gain, then in truth there really are no values nor beliefs. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE as a society, and it has been the case for some time.
I chuckle when people who profess Christianity, alter a belief because it was 'from biblical times' and is no longer appropriate.
My question is "when did Biblical Times" end? Duh! We are living in Biblical Times!
God is not a God of confusion. I know there is a God and it is not me! So I do not try to improve on his word!
"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;..."
Isa 5:20
"God is not a God of Confusion?" Pers, you really need to read your Bible. There are two wholly distinct Gods referenced in the Bible. The God of the OT is one that is angry and petty and vindictive. It is the whole "fire and brimstone" God. The God of the NT is loving and forgiving. If this is the same God, than he is one that is greatly confused unless, of course, this is an evolving God but that violates the whole concept of omnipotence ad omniscience.
Irish Jack, what I can only hope for is that you figure out someday that homesexuality is not a "lifestyle." It is a human trait, just as is race, ethnic background, etc. People do not choose to be gay, they are born that way.
The Indiana law is the worst of the now-20 states that has passed these type of discriminatory laws. Certainly the citizens of Indiana can pass this type of law but they can't bitch and moan when people react and choose not to do business with them. I'm due to travel to SB this Fall for a reunion. I will make it a point to inquire with every restaurant and store that I go to as to whether or not they discriminate against gays. This will be a pain in the ass but it is important to me to take a stand.
By the way, the Bible doesn't reference "gay marriage." Also, the Catholic Church prohibits remarriage after divorce. How many of those i support of this new Indiana law have chosen to remarry after divorce?
As to the "Christian value system" being the last bastion against the legitimization of gay marriage, what value system are you talking about? Are we discussing the Christian value system of the Inquisitiion and the Crusades? Are we talking about the Christian value system displayed in in the South with the Jim Crow Laws? Are we talking about the Christian value system as applied by the pedophilic priests?
The Christian Faith has been manipulated by so many and for so many different reasons. There is no basis for anyone to stand up and try and use "Christian value system" as an excuse to hate and discriminate. If you find it so offensive that two people of the same gender can love one another, than perhaps you can at least be intellectually honest enough to admit you hate and not try and hide behind the Cross.
This post was edited on 4/1 8:48 AM by Irish Duck
This post was edited on 4/1 9:28 AM by Irish Duck
This post was edited on 4/1 10:54 AM by Irish Duck
This post was edited on 4/1 2:00 PM by Irish Duck
Irish Jack, what I can only hope for is that you figure out someday that homesexuality is not a "lifestyle." It is a human trait, just as is race, ethnic background, etc. People do not choose to be gay, they are born that way.
The Indiana law is the worst of the now-20 states that has passed these type of discriminatory laws. Certainly the citizens of Indiana can pass this type of law but they can't bitch and moan when people react and choose not to do business with them. I'm due to travel to SB this Fall for a reunion. I will make it a point to inquire with every restaurant and store that I go to as to whether or not they discriminate against gays. This will be a pain in the ass but it is important to me to take a stand.
By the way, the Bible doesn't reference "gay marriage." Also, the Catholic Church prohibits remarriage after divorce. How many of those i support of this new Indiana law have chosen to remarry after divorce?
As to the "Christian value system" being the last bastion against the legitimization of gay marriage, what value system are you talking about? Are we discussing the Christian value system of the Inquisitiion and the Crusades? Are we talking about the Christian value system displayed in in the South with the Jim Crow Laws? Are we talking about the Christian value system as applied by the pedophilic priests?
The Christian Faith has been manipulated by so many and for so many different reasons. There is no basis for anyone to stand up and try and use "Christian value system" as an excuse to hate and discriminate. If you find it so offensive that two people of the same gender can love one another, than perhaps you can at least be intellectually honest enough to admit you hate and not try and hide behind the Cross.
This post was edited on 4/1 8:48 AM by Irish Duck
This post was edited on 4/1 9:28 AM by Irish Duck
This post was edited on 4/1 10:54 AM by Irish Duck
This post was edited on 4/1 2:00 PM by Irish Duck
I have no problem with Haden boycotting. This is one of those issues that emerges from time to time where there are important values on both sides, and where (in some instances) proxies are using those values to achieve other ends. Religious freedom (especially when we disagree) is a core right in this country. Nondiscrimination has been, and will continue to be, a critical challenge we face as a nation and a world. These are two titans. It bothers me that clergy are marched out on CNN to say no "real" religious belief includes any form of discrimination. Really? So religious freedom is ok where you agree it's ok? Conversely, it bothers me that the hate mongers lined up at the law signing. It seems to be that many hope this bill discriminates against the LGBT community. I think we are close to getting this right. We just need to hug it out.
Repeating talking points won't win the argument? Good - I can say the same thing back at you. Repeating talking points of supporters won't win the argument either. See how easy that is?
You can ignore the differences I've pointed out, but there are legal scholars who have highlighted those differences and have concerns.
You can say that there is nothing in the Indiana law that permits refusing service to anyone, but when the governor surrounds himself at signing with the three biggest proponents of the bill who have all been on record as indicating that the Indiana RFRA can be used as a sword against homosexuals, then it's clear what the intent was. The language doesn't have to be in the law itself. Courts read laws in conjunction with other laws and in conjunction with legislative intent.
Christians and scripture would not approve of discriminating against any person because of color? You must not know some of the arguments behind slavery and segregation that certain Christians have used in the past. Sorry - it's not a worn default argument at all. As I noted above, society has to balance people's religious freedom with behaviors that society does not want to tolerate. This issue appears to be on the border.
Pers, I'm not sure why you think my situation is so bad. Enlightenment is a wonderful thing. The ability to escape from petty superstition is beautiful. Your comment is an apparent acknowledgment that you are unable to intellectually and logically support our position. That is what is truly unfortunate.
petty superstition is code for "I do not believe anyone should be religious or get anything for being religious and I will discriminate against them and hate them for trying"
There is a reason that speech, religion and freedom of the press are in the First Amendment. I find it ironic that liberals defended that POS Larry Flynt so often and many of those same libs are now pushing for discrimination against religion.
And they see nothing wrong with their hypocrisy.
True freedom means putting up with things you personally despise or disaprove of.
For conservatives who hated Porn they were forced to accept that Flynt had a right to distribute his garbage.
Now Libs are going to have to accept that religion is more important then the hurt feelings of a gay couple who cannot get their wedding cake made by a fundamentalist christian.
And they see nothing wrong with their hypocrisy.
True freedom means putting up with things you personally despise or disaprove of.
For conservatives who hated Porn they were forced to accept that Flynt had a right to distribute his garbage.
Now Libs are going to have to accept that religion is more important then the hurt feelings of a gay couple who cannot get their wedding cake made by a fundamentalist christian.
That was quite the jump in logic, onlyonenow. You might want to consider opening your mind to the fact that others may disagree with you. I know many people with deep and abiding faiths that do not entail hatemongering. We may disagree on spiritual issues based upon the difference between faith and logic but we can still respect each other's differing points of view. I respect them because they are willing to discuss, defend, and explain their religious beliefs and not just hide behind what someone told them about the Bible.
Why don't we just all get over ourselves. Whether you agree with Hayden or not, Whether you agree with the law our, we should all agree with what one member of the CFP committee said. "I certainly understand and respect Pat's position. Everyone has the right to express their personal opinions and Pat, to his credit, has exercised his," Hancock wrote. "As a father and also as a human being, I respect him for that."
Just leave it at that
Just leave it at that
That law was created to prevent what happened in those bakery cases out West a few years ago. If a baker objects to same sex marriage for religious reasons, he shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for one. Nor should a church be forced to rent their church out for one, against their wishes. The Bill of RIghts protects religious freedom. That's why this law was created, to ensure that.
The gay lobby with all its media influence is distorting the issue.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
The gay lobby with all its media influence is distorting the issue.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
mbd, you should have listened to DieHard's advice rather than making a statement that does nothing to legitimize your position. By the way, if you are going to try and make an distinction between private businesses and churches, remember that one of those gets significant tax breaks from the government. If churches don't want to be subject to anti-discrimination laws, than start paying taxes and become a private business.
Except the governor of Indiana is stating that that's not why the law was created (despite the fact that he surrounded himself with 3 people who publicly have stated that denying LGBT people certain services is a reason behind the law).
Unless a church rents itself out for anyone getting married, it's not going to be compelled to host a wedding service of two people not related to the faith of the church.
There's a natural tension between civil rights and liberties, especially religious liberties. Admittedly, I don't know how to solve that tension (it's an unsolvable problem, in my opinion). The best we can do is to draw varying lines in the sand which won't please everyone.
That law was created to prevent what happened in those bakery cases out West a few years ago. If a baker objects to same sex marriage for religious reasons, he shouldn't be forced to bake a cake for one. Nor should a church be forced to rent their church out for one, against their wishes. The Bill of RIghts protects religious freedom. That's why this law was created, to ensure that.
The gay lobby with all its media influence is distorting the issue.
^I see the point here.^
People are trying to equate this with segregating or denying gays their rights. Not true. The gay lobby reaction to this has been so predictable and overblown just like the way people reacted to chik-fil-a. Unlike blacks under Jim Crow who were barred from access, gays can go to the next business and give their business to someone more willing to be tolerant.
This post was edited on 4/1 12:11 PM by Syd4ND
The gay lobby with all its media influence is distorting the issue.
^I see the point here.^
People are trying to equate this with segregating or denying gays their rights. Not true. The gay lobby reaction to this has been so predictable and overblown just like the way people reacted to chik-fil-a. Unlike blacks under Jim Crow who were barred from access, gays can go to the next business and give their business to someone more willing to be tolerant.
This post was edited on 4/1 12:11 PM by Syd4ND
Irish Duck, everyone is guaranteed freedom of religious expression by the Bill of Rights. Whether you run a business or a church should be irrelevant.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
