Patriots Weirdos

by **angrychicken** on Wed May 14, 2014 2:06 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:

Congratulations to you and Michael. :shrug

by **angrychicken** on Wed May 14, 2014 2:15 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:Nah, no congrats in order for me. Just MS and the community he represents.

But I am sure this is all lost on you

Good for him. Thank you for opening my eyes.

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Wed May 14, 2014 2:20 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:... the community he represents...

based on your logic, every player should be celebrated because every player represents a community of some sort. i don't see an article on the front page of si for each player that champions the black community, the white community, the heterosexual community, the christian community, the athiest community, etc. would you be just as butthurt if someone suggested something derogatory about someone else because of the impact on the community that it represents or does it only apply to michael sam because of the impact on a community that you hold close to your heart.

note - i am not calling you gay or suggesting you are gay. i am asking why gay makes him better than any/everyone else?

PS - to clarify, huang is calling you gay

by **DavidGordonsFoot** on Wed May 14, 2014 2:30 pm

Is it too early to congratulate Michael Sam on being the first openly gay athlete cut from an NFL team? The Rams' defensive line is stacked.

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Wed May 14, 2014 2:47 pm

DavidGordonsFoot {l Wrote}:...The Rams' defensive line is stacked.

it's comments like this that higgy objects to. i would expect better from an admitted ladyboy lover such as yourself

by **Dick Rosenthal** on Wed May 14, 2014 2:54 pm

Here's the thing. I have watched the NFL Draft for years and I can't remember another draftee making out with his girlfriend at the news of being drafted. and that is the problem with Mos. All we ever hear is that "we're just like everyone else and we should be treated with dignity" and then they subject us to incessant PDAs and their "Gay Pride Parades" which involve every variety of freak show personality engaging in simulated and real sex acts in broad day light. Fuck them.

Also, I look forward to the gnashing of teeth and rending of garments that will occur when this slow, weak, undersized 7th rounder is unceremoniously cut in August. Maybe he can hang out with Jason Collins and they can talk about what it is like to be gay and awful at their respective professions.

Greg Louganis has got to be livid at this point "HELLO PEOPLE! I am gay, have AIDS and was actually good at my sport! Where's the love?" Of course, Magic Johnson and Isaiah Thomas will always be my two favorite openly gay professional athletes.

by **angrychicken** on Wed May 14, 2014 2:56 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
PS - to clarify, huang is calling you gay

I'm not calling him anything. I'm just trying to figure out why he thinks that Michael Sam was "ripped" (his word) here. All I see is a lame joke about Sam's gayness and a couple of other little shots. Nobody really made a statement for or against the fact that Sam is an openly gay football player. I feel like jhiggi is making overly broad accusations about the people that post here, and I feel like it is my duty to stand up for the community that I represent. His statements reek of the pot painting the kettle in the glass house a hypocrite.

p.s. - tre is not calling you gay, as he is sensitive to the subject (his brother, Ping Jang, has been known to dabble)

by **angrychicken** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:01 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:03 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:07 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

You answered your own question. Both by paraphrasing that douche LeBron and by your popped collar douche reference to your choice of higher learning.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:14 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

Not openly Gay(acknowledged by the public as being gay), so therefore it is the same thing as Jackie Robinson...
Using your logic, then Jackie Robinson was not the first black baseball player as there are numerous players that were of mixed race but appeared to be white.....

I'm not getting that deep into this debate, but it is not remotely close to being the same. Let's just say there is ZERO chance Michael Sam's number ends up retired in every stadium in football.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:14 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

You answered your own question. Both by paraphrasing that douche LeBron and by your popped collar douche reference to your choice of higher learning.

HAHAHA "douche higher learning" oh the irony

Not really.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:16 pm

Moreover, the color barrier HAD to be broken by a player with great talent or else it would not have been broken at that time.

The openly gay barrier just got broken by a guy with practice squad talent.

by **claver2010** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:17 pm

Edit: Not worth it.

But agreed with angrydick, if Sam wasn't a mo he wouldn't have been drafted. Football perspective had him as what the 4th worst invite to the combine?

by **angrychicken** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:18 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

The "problem", as I see it, has nothing to do with where either of us attended University.

by **pick6pedro** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:21 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

Not openly Gay(acknowledged by the public as being gay), so therefore it is the same thing as Jackie Robinson...
Using your logic, then Jackie Robinson was not the first black baseball player as there are numerous players that were of mixed race but appeared to be white.....

I'm not getting that deep into this debate, but it is not remotely close to being the same. Let's just say there is ZERO chance Michael Sam's number ends up retired in every stadium in football.

Agreed. It's not equivalent in scope as the gay community or lgbt or whatever are not segregated from the rest of society. All that I am saying is that it is similar in that it is a historic event that hopefully will aim to reduce one form of systematic oppression. Not trying to split hairs on whether or not this is LITERALLY the same thing as the Jackie Robinson event.

Gays were systematically opressed from jobs in the NFL? news to me.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:23 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

Not openly Gay(acknowledged by the public as being gay), so therefore it is the same thing as Jackie Robinson...
Using your logic, then Jackie Robinson was not the first black baseball player as there are numerous players that were of mixed race but appeared to be white.....

I'm not getting that deep into this debate, but it is not remotely close to being the same. Let's just say there is ZERO chance Michael Sam's number ends up retired in every stadium in football.

Agreed. It's not equivalent in scope as the gay community or lgbt or whatever are not segregated from the rest of society. All that I am saying is that it is similar in that it is a historic event that hopefully will aim to reduce one form of systematic oppression. Not trying to split hairs on whether or not this is LITERALLY the same thing as the Jackie Robinson event.

The definitions of "oppression" have changed dramatically in the past 70 years.

by **angrychicken** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:26 pm

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

Not openly Gay(acknowledged by the public as being gay), so therefore it is the same thing as Jackie Robinson...
Using your logic, then Jackie Robinson was not the first black baseball player as there are numerous players that were of mixed race but appeared to be white.....

I'm not getting that deep into this debate, but it is not remotely close to being the same. Let's just say there is ZERO chance Michael Sam's number ends up retired in every stadium in football.

Agreed. It's not equivalent in scope as the gay community or lgbt or whatever are not segregated from the rest of society. All that I am saying is that it is similar in that it is a historic event that hopefully will aim to reduce one form of systematic oppression. Not trying to split hairs on whether or not this is LITERALLY the same thing as the Jackie Robinson event.

Gays were systematically opressed from jobs in the NFL? news to me.

Seriously. How do you explain Troy Aikman?

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:38 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

Not openly Gay(acknowledged by the public as being gay), so therefore it is the same thing as Jackie Robinson...
Using your logic, then Jackie Robinson was not the first black baseball player as there are numerous players that were of mixed race but appeared to be white.....

I'm not getting that deep into this debate, but it is not remotely close to being the same. Let's just say there is ZERO chance Michael Sam's number ends up retired in every stadium in football.

Agreed. It's not equivalent in scope as the gay community or lgbt or whatever are not segregated from the rest of society. All that I am saying is that it is similar in that it is a historic event that hopefully will aim to reduce one form of systematic oppression. Not trying to split hairs on whether or not this is LITERALLY the same thing as the Jackie Robinson event.

The definitions of "oppression" have changed dramatically in the past 70 years.

The definition of almost every word changes through out time. Just because it has changed doesn't mean that it has vanished and is no longer a problem.

Yes, but this change means that oppression for Michael Sam doesn't mean not being able to eat or piss anywhere in half of the country. Those differences in definition, when combined with the fact that everyone knows that there are already many gay players in the locker room, are why his situation isn't remotely in the ballpark of that of Jackie Robinson.

by **Dick Rosenthal** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:39 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
Dick Rosenthal {l Wrote}:Here's the thing. I have watched the NFL Draft for years and I can't remember another draftee making out with his girlfriend at the news of being drafted. and that is the problem with Mos. All we ever hear is that "we're just like everyone else and we should be treated with dignity" and then they subject us to incessant PDAs and their "Gay Pride Parades" which involve every variety of freak show personality engaging in simulated and real sex acts in broad day light. Fuck them.

Also, I look forward to the gnashing of teeth and rending of garments that will occur when this slow, weak, undersized 7th rounder is unceremoniously cut in August. Maybe he can hang out with Jason Collins and they can talk about what it is like to be gay and awful at their respective professions.

Greg Louganis has got to be livid at this point "HELLO PEOPLE! I am gay, have AIDS and was actually good at my sport! Where's the love?" Of course, Magic Johnson and Isaiah Thomas will always be my two favorite openly gay professional athletes.

PDA at gay pride parades is a bit much in my personal (heterosexual) opinion. The rest of this post is complete horseshit and idiocy, not to mention that gay pride parades have nothing to do with an athlete who was drafted kissing his girlfriend. I am SURE that I can find a link of a player being drafted into the nfl kissing his girlfriend... In five seconds of searching I found an NBA player televised kissing his GF.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08rirsA8YaM

Idiocy, except for the fact that it is completely accurate and you acknowledged as much in your failure to mount even a modicum of an argument. But I don't care about that. I don't care if homos want to marry each other and root each other silly. Makes no difference to me. I'd just like them to stop trying get fisting taught during sex ed class and to be able to go back to using the term miserable 74 as an insult without being accused of being a klan member. The truth is, miserable 74 describes a personality type that simply can't be covered by jackbag or douchenozzle, etc. Take for example, higgi. At first I thought he was a half-literate docuhenozzle, then I though he was an empty headed jackbag, but now I think we can all agree he is miserable 74. Words are important.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:42 pm

Dick Rosenthal {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
Dick Rosenthal {l Wrote}:Here's the thing. I have watched the NFL Draft for years and I can't remember another draftee making out with his girlfriend at the news of being drafted. and that is the problem with Mos. All we ever hear is that "we're just like everyone else and we should be treated with dignity" and then they subject us to incessant PDAs and their "Gay Pride Parades" which involve every variety of freak show personality engaging in simulated and real sex acts in broad day light. Fuck them.

Also, I look forward to the gnashing of teeth and rending of garments that will occur when this slow, weak, undersized 7th rounder is unceremoniously cut in August. Maybe he can hang out with Jason Collins and they can talk about what it is like to be gay and awful at their respective professions.

Greg Louganis has got to be livid at this point "HELLO PEOPLE! I am gay, have AIDS and was actually good at my sport! Where's the love?" Of course, Magic Johnson and Isaiah Thomas will always be my two favorite openly gay professional athletes.

PDA at gay pride parades is a bit much in my personal (heterosexual) opinion. The rest of this post is complete horseshit and idiocy, not to mention that gay pride parades have nothing to do with an athlete who was drafted kissing his girlfriend. I am SURE that I can find a link of a player being drafted into the nfl kissing his girlfriend... In five seconds of searching I found an NBA player televised kissing his GF.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08rirsA8YaM

Idiocy, except for the fact that it is completely accurate and you acknowledged as much in your failure to mount even a modicum of an argument. But I don't care about that. I don't care if homos want to marry each other and root each other silly. Makes no difference to me. I'd just like them to stop trying get fisting taught during sex ed class and to be able to go back to using the term miserable 74 as an insult without being accused of being a klan member. The truth is, miserable 74 describes a personality type that simply can't be covered by jackbag or douchenozzle, etc. Take for example, higgi. At first I thought he was a half-literate docuhenozzle, then I though he was an empty headed jackbag, but now I think we can all agree he is miserable 74. Words are important.

This was really funny. Especially knowing that jiggi has no idea what the references to "74" mean

by **DavidGordonsFoot** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:42 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

what a fucking coward.

by **2001Eagle** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:42 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

Congrats! Did you know Sean? or Will?

: images.jpg (8.3 KiB) Viewed 14186 times

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:44 pm

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

Congrats! Did you know Sean? or Will?

images.jpg

Point of order, that's in Boston. But funny nonetheless.

by **2001Eagle** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:45 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
2001Eagle {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

Congrats! Did you know Sean? or Will?

images.jpg

Point of order, that's in Boston. But funny nonetheless.

Demurrer: he said "around the Cambridge area." BHCC definitely qualifies.

by **pick6pedro** on Wed May 14, 2014 3:50 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

Not openly Gay(acknowledged by the public as being gay), so therefore it is the same thing as Jackie Robinson...
Using your logic, then Jackie Robinson was not the first black baseball player as there are numerous players that were of mixed race but appeared to be white.....

I'm not getting that deep into this debate, but it is not remotely close to being the same. Let's just say there is ZERO chance Michael Sam's number ends up retired in every stadium in football.

Agreed. It's not equivalent in scope as the gay community or lgbt or whatever are not segregated from the rest of society. All that I am saying is that it is similar in that it is a historic event that hopefully will aim to reduce one form of systematic oppression. Not trying to split hairs on whether or not this is LITERALLY the same thing as the Jackie Robinson event.

The definitions of "oppression" have changed dramatically in the past 70 years.

The definition of almost every word changes through out time. Just because it has changed doesn't mean that it has vanished and is no longer a problem.

Yes, but this change means that oppression for Michael Sam doesn't mean not being able to eat or piss anywhere in half of the country. Those differences in definition, when combined with the fact that everyone knows that there are already many gay players in the locker room, are why his situation isn't remotely in the ballpark of that of Jackie Robinson.

completely disagree. Everything is relative, so while the oppression gays experience today does not literally compare to the levels of oppression seen 70 years ago, relatively speaking to the oppression other groups face throughout society the gays are still extremely oppressed. Because everything is relative the Sam event is in the ballpark of the Jackie Robinson event, just not to the same extent of the Robinson event.

There are many other reasons why Robinson's event was more impressive, but make no mistake, the Sam event is in the same realm.

The first openly gay football player gets drafted into the NFL. How many black baseball players did it take?

Moron.

by **angrychicken** on Wed May 14, 2014 4:05 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
There are many other reasons why Robinson's event was more impressive, but make no mistake, the Sam event is in the same realm.

Strongly disagree. Michael Sam's name will be the answer to an obscure trivia question, and this "event" will have very little, if any, effect on gay rights. Keep up the good fight, though. I support you, but you wouldn't know that because of the assumptions that you have made.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 4:14 pm

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
2001Eagle {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
And to AC's comments, its nice to see that BC's "phenomenal" education has churned out so many socially aware alums.

Ahhhh...now I see what the problem is here.

Again, look through other posts and you will realize that I took my talents to a University around the Cambridge area instead of BC.... So I have no clue where you view the problem as coming from?

Congrats! Did you know Sean? or Will?

images.jpg

Point of order, that's in Boston. But funny nonetheless.

Demurrer: he said "around the Cambridge area." BHCC definitely qualifies.

I was going to make a point of order on your arcane procedural use of a pleading that only exists in two states anymore, but I will let it slide since your point is correct. AFFIRMED ON OTHER GROUNDS.

by **twballgame9** on Wed May 14, 2014 4:15 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:The Sam event is a historic event that is similar to an athlete breaking the color barrier and should be respected at that same level.

No it is not. Gay athletes were in the NFL before Michael Sam. There were no black players in MLB before Jackie Robinson (other than some dude from the 1880s).

Not openly Gay(acknowledged by the public as being gay), so therefore it is the same thing as Jackie Robinson...
Using your logic, then Jackie Robinson was not the first black baseball player as there are numerous players that were of mixed race but appeared to be white.....

I'm not getting that deep into this debate, but it is not remotely close to being the same. Let's just say there is ZERO chance Michael Sam's number ends up retired in every stadium in football.

Agreed. It's not equivalent in scope as the gay community or lgbt or whatever are not segregated from the rest of society. All that I am saying is that it is similar in that it is a historic event that hopefully will aim to reduce one form of systematic oppression. Not trying to split hairs on whether or not this is LITERALLY the same thing as the Jackie Robinson event.

The definitions of "oppression" have changed dramatically in the past 70 years.

The definition of almost every word changes through out time. Just because it has changed doesn't mean that it has vanished and is no longer a problem.

Yes, but this change means that oppression for Michael Sam doesn't mean not being able to eat or piss anywhere in half of the country. Those differences in definition, when combined with the fact that everyone knows that there are already many gay players in the locker room, are why his situation isn't remotely in the ballpark of that of Jackie Robinson.

completely disagree. Everything is relative, so while the oppression gays experience today does not literally compare to the levels of oppression seen 70 years ago, relatively speaking to the oppression other groups face throughout society the gays are still extremely oppressed. Because everything is relative the Sam event is in the ballpark of the Jackie Robinson event, just not to the same extent of the Robinson event.

There are many other reasons why Robinson's event was more impressive, but make no mistake, the Sam event is in the same realm.

So you agree, but you are going to say you don't agree just to keep up appearances. Got it.

by **gallopingghost** on Wed May 14, 2014 4:25 pm

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:
angrychicken {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
PS - to clarify, huang is calling you gay

I'm not calling him anything. I'm just trying to figure out why he thinks that Michael Sam was "ripped" (his word) here. All I see is a lame joke about Sam's gayness and a couple of other little shots. Nobody really made a statement for or against the fact that Sam is an openly gay football player. I feel like jhiggi is making overly broad accusations about the people that post here, and I feel like it is my duty to stand up for the community that I represent. His statements reek of the pot painting the kettle in the glass house a hypocrite.

p.s. - tre is not calling you gay, as he is sensitive to the subject (his brother, Ping Jang, has been known to dabble)

I view the little gay jokes and few shots that you reference as Sam being ripped. Not only is it not funny, nor original to rip on Sam for being gay, I think that it is also inappropriate due to the significance of this event.

In no way, shape or form am I being hypocritical, I am just saying that I am disappointed in the ignorance displayed by some posters here.

So how did you feel about all of the jokes about Tim Tebow and his faith? Was Tebow being ripped?

You need to stop being humorless.

Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Re: Patriots Weirdos

Who is online