Yes.
Do you believe you should have the right to not hire an active member of the kkk who has a spotless criminal record.
Yes.
Do you believe you should have the right to not hire an active member of the kkk who has a spotless criminal record.
Heard they met while competing in a relay event. The baton passing didn't quite go as planned....and you know the rest.
So it's "a human interest story" because what two consenting adults do in the bedroom or wherever? Quite frankly, I don't find that interesting at all. Don't these guys dress the same way, eat the same food, speak the same language, etc. It becomes a human interest story because of sex. Give me a break. News Flash: Straight people don't care, and throwing in their faces does more to hurt your "cause" than it helps. And, this is a track and field forum, not a life style "tell all." Being "in the closet" is a choice, not a necessity. This is 2017, not 1980.
John Utah wrote:
Jeremy Idaho wrote:What about the employment angle? Should employers be allowed to fire and/or not hire someone specifically becuase they eat a lot of junk food?
Yes.
Do you believe you should have the right to not hire an active member of the kkk who has a spotless criminal record.
Backing up to before discussion of freedom, rights, and the regulation of rights, your inquiry "why is it good?" and then follow up comment on the freedom to live on coke and donuts implies to me that you are insinuating that the decision to engage in a homosexual relationship (I clarify engage in a relationship because, as has been stated earlier in the thread, being gay is not a choice) is somehow equivalent to the decision to live on coke and donuts. Is my interpretation correct? If so, could you please elaborate on how you understand this equivalency?
As a side note, I make a comment like "good for them" whenever I hear of people in a happy relationship, and that was my interpretation of the original comment that you got hung up on.
plorabs wrote:
Nooway wrote:Figures they are sprinters...
No sh!t - distance runners can't get any action.
whats really sad is distance runners have been friend zoned by both the left and right hand...
T&F Nut wrote:
So it's "a human interest story" because what two consenting adults do in the bedroom or wherever? Quite frankly, I don't find that interesting at all. Don't these guys dress the same way, eat the same food, speak the same language, etc. It becomes a human interest story because of sex. Give me a break. News Flash: Straight people don't care, and throwing in their faces does more to hurt your "cause" than it helps. And, this is a track and field forum, not a life style "tell all." Being "in the closet" is a choice, not a necessity. This is 2017, not 1980.
Enough people care enough to make it a story. This thread would not exist otherwise.
OMG! Remember when male/female sprinters dated and then broke up? *hit got crazy during practice and meals. Now add the fact that they actually have to practice together!
Wonder if they room together on away trips?
Until recently track was the last of the manly man sports that you could watch in your man cave without any weirdness. But our sport has been taking hit after hit in the news recently with prominent gender bending current and former athletes.
No wonder participation rates are falling. How many red-blooded American youths are going to want to sign up for track now? Think on that.
plorabs wrote:
Nooway wrote:Figures they are sprinters...
No sh!t - distance runners can't get any action.
Nothing more to say after this. This comment should have been the end of this thread.
John Utah wrote:
Why is that good for them?
I guess it shouldn't really surprise me that you don't understand why being in a happy relationship with another person is good for someone.
Hard to run on "Pure Hate" if you are happy.
This post was removed.