Monthly Archives: February 2014

Michael Sam

My previous blog was so much fun, so why don’t we dive right in and discuss homosexuality once more. Former University of Missouri athlete, Michael Sam, recently announced to the world that he is a homosexual. Supposedly, the highly touted football player told his teammates a year prior about his sexual preference, and there also have been reports that he and his ex-boyfriend used to walk around campus hand in hand. Mr. Sam said he decided to make his declaration at this time because he was concerned that the information would be leaked out before this year’s National Football League draft. I guess he didn’t think his Mizzou teammates, or the whole state of Missouri for that matter, could keep his “secret” any longer.

When an announcement like this is made there’s typically an argument about whether a person should be applauded for “coming out of the closet” or if their sexuality should be kept private. Some even say a person like Michael Sam, conceivably the future’s first openly gay NFL player, is a brave pioneer while others contend trailblazing can only damage a person’s career. I think the intriguing question actually is in regards to the locker room arrangement – more specifically the shower situation. Should straight players be forced into full exposure with Mr. Sam when knowing they are his sexual preference? There probably already are gay men earning a paycheck in the NFL, but unless that information is made public one would most-likely presume otherwise, and men showering together in a team environment would be a non-issue. I believe Michael Sam has forever changed that.

The truth as I know it is there’s no difference between gay and straight men sharing a locker room to that of straight men sharing a facility with straight women. Although the previous statement may sound a bit strange at first the fact is there would be unnecessary sexual tension created in both of those situations. In the same manner, should all the girls around the country who choose to play football or wrestle with the guys in high school and college athletics be forced, or simply even allowed, to shower with their male counterparts? Of course not. However, some might contend there is a difference between adults and underage high school students, but I would say age is not the issue. If one decides to make their sexual orientation public then that is the precise moment when many things change, including the locker room situation, not only for the individual but for everyone associated with that person. The segregation of all sexual identities, in the locker room, seems to be the only common sense solution. Maybe sometimes it’s just better to remain silent.


Senate Bill 1062

Well, I was hoping to ease into the blogosphere world, but today’s topic is huge in the state of Arizona. Senate Bill 1062 is just setting there on Governor Brewer’s desk waiting to be either vetoed, signed into law, or it could just lay there a few more days and then automatically become law. I think the latter choice would be the cowardly way, so just do something already! SB1062 is designed to permit anyone in Arizona to refuse business or service based on “religious freedom.” Most proponents of the bill claim it would protect people from having to serve those they disagree with based on their own religious beliefs. Whereas, most opponents of the potential law insist it would allow businesses the right to refuse service to anyone they deem religiously unfit, in essence allowing for legalized hate, particularly against homosexuals. The one thing both sides seem to have in common is that each group considers themselves to be the victims.

The truth as I know it is business is business, and religion is religion, so I don’t think God would condemn a business owner for providing a service to a customer who happens to have a different sexual preference than their own. For some reason, unbeknownst to me, many Christians tend to be very boisterous about their opposition to homosexuality, yet those same Christians seem willing to give unwed heterosexual couples who are living together a “moral pass.” My Bible says that sin is sin, and although we have all sinned the Good News is we can be forgiven. That being said, by no means do I think any church should ever be forced to perform gay marriages.

Recently, a cake decorating business made the news for denying service, due to their religious convictions, to a lesbian couple. I have to wonder if that same business would have refused service to liars, cheaters, or gossipers. What about those potential customers who may have been divorced, had sex before marriage, or gave birth to a child out of wedlock? Not to mention Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, or even Catholics since many of their practices differ fundamentally from that of the beliefs of most Christians. If so, I don’t think a business like that would ever be able to survive.

In many cases what we like about this country is the diversity and uniqueness of our fellow man. It is much harder to find someone just like ourselves than someone different from us. Common sense dictates SB1062 would create many more problems than it could possibly ever fix.

Welcome to my blog


Thanks for checking out my blog. Please see the “About Me” section, and then check back here soon for the 1st of many posts to come.