Jump to content

[Article] NHL reportedly bans Pride Tape for 2023-24 season


RWJC

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

But the players here who didn't wear the jersey were not trying to convert gay people to be Christian or Muslim or anything else, they were not trying to stop gay marriage, they were not beating up gay people, they were not doing anything TO a gay person.  They were just saying don't make ME wear the jersey.

 

You talk about Pride related rights but there is no Charter right to make another person wear a garment supporting you personally...and nor should there be.  As I said way back in this discussion...people talking about human rights here fail to realize that no actual right of an LGBTQ person is actually affected here...unless you want to claim the right to make a non-LGBTQ person wear something with a message you want them to wear.  And that is actually a pretty serious encroachment...and that is very clear if you turn it around and want to make a gay person wear a shirt that quotes Leviticus.

 

That's why I have said the solution all along was to live and let live...in all directions.  And far more often than not you'll avoid problems.

 

No religious belief was being forced on any other person here.  Some hockey players simply didn't want to be made to wear a shirt that they felt contradicted their religion.  And if you have actually read the scriptures...the issue should probably be with the book that has these passages.

Lost me at "if I actually read the scripture"

 

I beleive in separation of church and government so would never agree anyones religion trumps a legal.right 

 

Just my view and I get it that means we probably won't agree on this one item

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sapper said:

Lost me at "if I actually read the scripture"

 

I beleive in separation of church and government so would never agree anyones religion trumps a legal.right 

 

Just my view and I get it that means we probably won't agree on this one item

 

What legal right of any LGBTQ person do you believe is being violated when a hockey player doesn't wear a rainbow jersey?

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

What legal right of any LGBTQ person do you believe is being violated when a hockey player doesn't wear a rainbow jersey?

It's an I intentional slight against a legal right .... those same players didn't say no to any other items or causes ... so they did that based on singling out a protected grounds right 

 

They could have just as easily requested another jersey to wear that night that promote a message of love ❤️ for all ... or wore anti bullying warm.up jerseys

 

There are ways to support the right of lgbtq+ peoples right to simply be without supporting the pride title

 

But to that they would have to also follow the same message of live and let live 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sapper said:

It's an I intentional slight against a legal right .... those same players didn't say no to any other items or causes ... so they did that based on singling out a protected grounds right 

 

They could have just as easily requested another jersey to wear that night that promote a message of love ❤️ for all ... or wore anti bullying warm.up jerseys

 

There are ways to support the right of lgbtq+ peoples right to simply be without supporting the pride title

 

But to that they would have to also follow the same message of live and let live 

 

 

An intentional slight against a legal right.  What does that even mean?  The chances of being able to win a law suit with respect to human rights with that kind of a description are zero.

 

I understand that you mean well and most people here do...but what you are essentially arguing for when it boils down is one or both of (a) the right for LGBTQ people to make non LGBTQ people wear shirts with messages they don't want to wear (and by the way LGBTQ people have not demanded this right - just people speaking for them mostly), and/or (b) the right of a corporation to make its employees wear shirts with political messaging they don't want to wear (and this is actually a reduction of human rights in favor of corporate rights).

 

This isn't directed at you personally but many people don't actually play these situations out to their conclusions.  They are just too focused on making sure they are on record as being one of the good guys.

 

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

 

An intentional slight against a legal right.  What does that even mean?  The chances of being able to win a law suit with respect to human rights with that kind of a description are zero.

 

I understand that you mean well and most people here do...but what you are essentially arguing for when it boils down is one or both of (a) the right for LGBTQ people to make non LGBTQ people wear shirts with messages they don't want to wear (and by the way LGBTQ people have not demanded this right - just people speaking for them mostly), and/or (b) the right of a corporation to make its employees wear shirts with political messaging they don't want to wear (and this is actually a reduction of human rights in favor of corporate rights).

 

This isn't directed at you personally but many people don't actually play these situations out to their conclusions.  They are just too focused on making sure they are on record as being one of the good guys.

 

There are many things in life one doesn't agree with ..... if people of public interest take a stand against its seen as apposing it and thats used by groups to claim its becoming normalized 

 

I don't agree the BC lions are the best cfl team. If my employer said I must were a jersey in support I'd show up in rider green ... I support the cfl.just.not.the lions

 

My whole.point is those players opting out did so in such a way that it left no doubt they dont support the issue 

 

Goes back.to my comment they could have worn anti bullying gear and stuck with everyone has the  right to be and not be bullied .....full stop

 

But I will agree.there is blame on the leauge itself with this not just players 

 

Any company promoting a support issue has to have plan B ready for those apposed to contribute without compromising their beliefs but also supporting the underlying message / goal to end.bullying and discrimation based on protected grounds 

 

After all.thats what they want for their religous views as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

 

I'm afraid that you make your opposition's point for them.

 

These hockey players wanted to be able to follow the scriptures of their Bible and not be made to wear a shirt that they feel contradicts the scriptures.  They weren't trying to limit the legal rights of any LGBTQ person.

How do you know that the players who refused to wear Pride jerseys weren't privately lobbying the league to drop Pride night altogether? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Canuck You said:

It's so funny that this thread alone proves my point..It causes divide, Had it not have been created we'd be talking about hockey most likely no matter your sexuality.

Exactly…..and sadly, people don’t see it.    There has never been so much division since they shoved inclusion down our throats.  
Classic divide and conquer. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ROBsolete said:

How do you know that the players who refused to wear Pride jerseys weren't privately lobbying the league to drop Pride night altogether? 

 

I don't know that for a fact but I doubt it and even if they were the question would still remain as to how that would limit the legal rights of any LGBTQ person.

 

Edited by Kevin Biestra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has nothing to do with inclusivity or the LGBTQ+ community other than what the owners can profit off of it. 
The NHL thought this would be good for business but when the bigots got emboldened by their cowardly leader the calculation turned to potentially making less money especially as they look to expand in places like Texas and Utah. 
Corporate cowardice will always be the policy if they think bravery will affect profit. This is a billionaires boys club. Like most billionaires the owner’s ethics are almost purely transactional. 

Edited by DrJockitch
  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
  • ThereItIs 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DrJockitch said:

Corporate cowardice will always be the policy if they think bravery will affect profit. This is a billionaires boys club. Like most billionaires the owner’s ethics are almost purely transactional. 

 

I think you hit the nail on the head. I suspect the move to ban pride tape came from a majority of the owners, most of whom, it is fair to say, are fiscal and social conservatives. If they can't figure out a way to make money from something, they get rid of it and look for more revenue streams to tap. It is kind of a conundrum, in that while all the owners are likely right wingers, ALL 25 US-based teams are located in cities that are predominantly liberal in terms of federal presidential voting. This is no surprise as most big cities in the US lean more to the left than to the right, and you would think they might be more tolerant and open to Pride initiatives and symbols of inclusion than not. In Canada, four of seven cities are mostly Liberal, one (Vancouver) is split between Liberal and the NDP, and two are primarily right wing Conservative (if you guessed Calgary and Edmonton, good on you). Put another way, 30 of 32 NHL teams are located in primarily left leaning cities where one would expect a higher degree of tolerance and acceptance of something as innocuous as brightly coloured tape. So in the end we shouldn't kill the messenger (Bettman) when the majority of owners quite obviously demanded this incredibly petty move. It's just another example of the golden rule, where he who has the gold, makes the rules.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Redhdlois said:

Exactly…..and sadly, people don’t see it.    There has never been so much division since they shoved inclusion down our throats.  
Classic divide and conquer. 

I hope they cancel the national anthems next. More Us vs Them, amirite? No Olympic participation either. That's classic divide and conquer.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ROBsolete said:

I hope they cancel the national anthems next. More Us vs Them, amirite? No Olympic participation either. That's classic divide and conquer.

Go a step further and get rid of professional sports,  as it just pits city against city.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ROBsolete said:

I hope they cancel the national anthems next. More Us vs Them, amirite? No Olympic participation either. That's classic divide and conquer.

 

Do we cancel national anthems altogether or do we model inclusion by playing the anthems of all of our players? In Vancouver that would mean anthems for Canada, the USA, Sweden, Latvia, Russia, Switzerland, Czechia and sometimes Belarus, if Klimovich and Tolopilo are ever in the lineup. On second thought, just get rid of national anthems completely as they serve no useful purpose other than to get everyone's attention prior to puck drop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Curmudgeon said:

 

Do we cancel national anthems altogether or do we model inclusion by playing the anthems of all of our players? In Vancouver that would mean anthems for Canada, the USA, Sweden, Latvia, Russia, Switzerland, Czechia and sometimes Belarus, if Klimovich and Tolopilo are ever in the lineup. On second thought, just get rid of national anthems completely as they serve no useful purpose other than to get everyone's attention prior to puck drop. 

BTW, I'm not advocating to get rid of these things. Just trying to show that literally anything and everything can, and probably has, been used to divide people. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ROBsolete said:

I hope they cancel the national anthems next. More Us vs Them, amirite? No Olympic participation either. That's classic divide and conquer.

Totally irrelevant and separate things, That's tradition like how NHL teams play against each other (USA and Canada make up the league)?,  It's hockey related..Going on your statement we might as well start singing the Russian anthem, The Sweden one, The Finland one, Hey Gotta represent Bains also..so the Indian one and the rest of the word so we don't leave anyone out ..why not the Ukraine one also since our tax money is being funded there...All in together now!..Then we can wave an LGBT flag around after all the anthems and start the game the next day? 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

The only people who think there's no connection between sports and politics are the dumbest of the dumb.  Especially with hockey.  Old folks don't remember the '72 Summit Series because it was good, clean hockey.  They remember it because we beat the Soviets.  Same thing with USA in 1980

The connection and animosity grew organically. It wasn't forced on fans repeatedly. Forcing issues will usually breed the opposite reaction. 

Edited by Rekker
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Redhdlois said:

Exactly…..and sadly, people don’t see it.    There has never been so much division since they shoved inclusion down our throats.  
Classic divide and conquer. 

I for one am also tired of the pregame Native ceremonies. I am not racist, not even close. Just tired of having agendas shoved down my throat at hockey games, graduation ceremonies, heck even some staff meetings. Keep forcing it on us and it will have a negative effect. I am witness to more and more disdain for these ceremonies. But of course, your pegged as a racist if you even broach the subject of wanting these things to stop. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...