Promoting personal characteristics, political views, and products, among athletes in the public eye.

[cipher]

Thanks.

Unfortunately it is the subject of that thread when some choose to dislike an athlete for his/her religious or any other characteristics, but I will move my response here.

There is nothing wrong with someone saying that they dislike Bubba because of his religious beliefs and the way that he may choose to promote them. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and we have no right to tell someone they are wrong for not wanting to hear about religion. If someone does something that gets on your nerves or makes you dislike their actions, then that's how you feel about it.

Yeah I think there is something wrong with disliking a person for these reasons morally. I am going to disagree with you on this. Sure someone "can" feel this way, but should they? What about a person's personal beliefs and talking about them now and then is offensive to someone? Bubba is not cramming it down peoples throats the way that Tebow was. That was annoying, because it was seemingly all he talked about. Let me put it this way. Would you think it is right of me as a person of faith to say I don't like an athlete because he/she is gay and promotes that? One of my favorite female soccer players is a lesbian and promotes it on twitter and in other avenues. I have no problem with that. That is great that she can promote something that defines her. It would not be moral of me to dislike her for doing so and for her sexuality. Nobody can tell me that you cannot compare these two things either. Religion is every bit as intimate of a defining characteristic as sexuality is and I would say it is even more intimate. I don't want to call these things "choices" or "lifestyles" there are simply characteristics that no matter the origin define us.  The problem is that those who disagree with them see them as negative characteristics.  If you don't want to hear from them on it I would ask you why?  What is it going to do to you?  Why does it get on your nerves?

I guess the main question for this new thread though is does it bother you when someone in the public eye discusses or promotes religion, sexuality, politics or even if they take to social media for the promotion of a sponsor?  How much is too much?

[boogielicious]

It can be annoying.  Just as other things like swearing too much or arrogance can be annoying.  My wife didn't want Watson to win the Masters because of a tweet he made on gay marriage last year.  That is the nature of being a public figure.  What you say and do can and will be held against you by a percentage of the public no matter what that may be.

It goes both ways too.  If we support Watson's right to discuss his beliefs, we should also support someone's saying they don't like it.  We don't have to agree, but we need to defend their right to say it all the same.

[cipher]

It can be annoying.  Just as other things like swearing too much or arrogance can be annoying.  My wife didn't want Watson to win the Masters because of a tweet he made on gay marriage last year.  That is the nature of being a public figure.  What you say and do can and will be held against you by a percentage of the public no matter what that may be.

It goes both ways too.  If we support Watson's right to discuss his beliefs, we should also support someones saying they don't like it.  We don't have to agree, but we need to defend their right to say it all the same.

I can go with that.  I just hope that those that find these things annoying are truly finding it as such because it is truly overbearing. I don't find Watson or Rapinoe as such. At the same time I really like the way guys like Fowler and Aaron Rodgers carry themselves. They have a similar world view as Watson, but choose to speak through their actions more than they do with words.

[newtogolf]

When a athlete or person in the public eye starts sharing their personal views on religion, politics, etc with the public they have to expect that those views will endear part of the public even more while pushing others away.

I personally believe the 1st Amendment has been compromised by political correctness and the heavy liberal bias that exists in the media today.

If Bubba is religious and wants to share that part of his personal life with others why is it any different than John Daly sharing his passion for food, booze, cigarettes and women.  There seems to be little tolerance towards those who are committed to their religion.

I am agnostic and support gay marriage but I respect that others can have a differing opinion.  I don't want public figures to only give opinions that are politically correct or popular.

[MS256]

In the realm of entertainment (including sports) it makes no difference to me what beliefs a person has. If I enjoy watching their performances I'll watch.

If I started boycotting everybody I disagree with I wouldn't be watching very many movies or TV shows or listening to very much music.

Doesn't even bother me in the least if other people do choose to dislike people for their beliefs.

As I said in the other thread it does surprise me when people obviously consider Christianity a negative. Being surprised doesn't mean I have a problem with their right to have that opinion and express it anyway they choose.

I am surprised because I don't know a single person personally that thinks that way, whether they are a Christian or not. The overwhelming majority of people I know would actually be more likely to support somebody because they are a Christian. The rest would consider it a complete non-factor.

Just shows the difference in culture between the places I have lived and other places. It would be extremely hard to find many (or any) people in the area where I live that would call themselves Atheists even if they don't actively follow any religion.

[boogielicious]

When a athlete or person in the public eye starts sharing their personal views on religion, politics, etc with the public they have to expect that those views will endear part of the public even more while pushing others away.

I personally believe the 1st Amendment has been compromised by political correctness and the heavy liberal bias that exists in the media today.

If Bubba is religious and wants to share that part of his personal life with others why is it any different than John Daly sharing his passion for food, booze, cigarettes and women.  There seems to be little tolerance towards those who are committed to their religion.

I am agnostic and support gay marriage but I respect that others can have a differing opinion.  I don't want public figures to only give opinions that are politically correct or popular.

I agree the media plays a part, but disagree that it is liberal bias.  Fox News clearly contributes to the "attack everything they say and we disagree with" mentality of the media.  Conservative media plays a huge part in this.

[Kieran123]

Quote:

If Bubba is religious and wants to share that part of his personal life with others why is it any different than John Daly sharing his passion for food, booze, cigarettes and women.  There seems to be little tolerance towards those who are committed to their religion.

There is a big difference here.

One promotes sexism, homophobia, slavery and prejudices

One of them promotes bad habits

I think, to conclude - the person promoting does not bother me, the religion bothers me.

The same way I hate cancer, but not people with cancer

I feel bad for people with cancer, the same way I feel bad for people who believe in the bible.

[14ledo81]

Let me put it this way. Would you think it is right of me as a person of faith to say I don't like an athlete because he/she is gay and promotes that?

There seems to be little tolerance towards those who are committed to their religion.

As I said in the other thread it does surprise me when people obviously consider Christianity a negative.

This pretty much sums up my feelings on this.  Seems to be a double standard many times.

[cipher]

Originally Posted by Kieran123

I think, to conclude - the person promoting does not bother me, the religion bothers me.

The same way I hate cancer, but not people with cancer

I feel bad for people with cancer, the same way I feel bad for people who believe in the bible.

Wow, at least you are honest about it.  That is very unfortunate though that you equate religious beliefs to cancer.  One could however sadly say that of anything they dislike.

[Kieran123]

Wow, at least you are honest about it.  That is very unfortunate though that you equate religious beliefs to cancer.  One could however sadly say that of anything they dislike.

There are worse things said in the bible. But for many, the bible is considered the truth no matter how disgusting and shocking the subject or content, where my words are just an opinion.

[14ledo81]

I think, to conclude - the person promoting does not bother me, the religion bothers me.

I think I may actually be ok with this.  As long as others are fine with this:

"the person promoting does not bother me, the homosexual lifestyle bothers me."

[Ernest Jones]

I, generally speaking, don't really watch the post match interviews, they rarely contain any insight and are mostly cookie cutter sound bites and PR blather. I'll usually see the post round interviews as people come off the course as those are hard to avoid but once that final putt drops I turn off the TV and go make the wife happy.

Nobody's being forced to watch Bubba proselytize so whatever. Reminds me of the old George Carlin about free speech.

[newtogolf]

I agree the media plays a part, but disagree that it is liberal bias.  Fox News clearly contributes to the "attack everything they say and we disagree with" mentality of the media.  Conservative media plays a huge part in this.

Agreed in the sense that both they represent extremes, liberal and conservative.  The liberal media has attacked religions and religious beliefs which is why I singled them out.

[iacas]

I just hope that those that find these things annoying are truly finding it as such because it is truly overbearing.

Why does it have to be overbearing to be "annoying"? Can't someone be annoyed at the mere mention of whatever topic it is they dislike?

You can't say "everyone gets an opinion" and then say "but you only get your opinion if it's truly overbearing."

I personally don't care about post-round religious comments. I think it's stupid to mention it (He or She or They don't care about your golf), but I can't get riled up over any and all stupid comments anyone makes or I'd never be at rest. :)

[Golfingdad]

But for many, the bible is considered the truth no matter how disgusting and shocking the subject or content

I don't think this is fair or true.  Well, if you're talking globally, then, yeah, maybe there are some extremists out there like this, but in general, I don't believe this to be even close to true.

How many people in the US would actually strongly believe that a woman who gets divorced must be stoned to death?  I'm going to say, at most, one.  (And that would be the guy she just divorced)

It's a good argument against people that use the "it's in the Bible" reason for believing something - like opposing gay marriage - but I don't think that any normal, sane people actually take 100% of the Bible as truth.

[Kieran123]

I don't think this is fair or true.  Well, if you're talking globally, then, yeah, maybe there are some extremists out there like this, but in general, I don't believe this to be even close to true.

How many people in the US would actually strongly believe that a woman who gets divorced must be stoned to death?  I'm going to say, at most, one.  (And that would be the guy she just divorced)

It's a good argument against people that use the "it's in the Bible" reason for believing something - like opposing gay marriage - but I don't think that any normal, sane people actually take 100% of the Bible as truth.

So, to conclude, take what parts of the bible you want?

[cipher]

Why does it have to be overbearing to be "annoying"? Can't someone be annoyed at the mere mention of whatever topic it is they dislike?

You can't say "everyone gets an opinion" and then say "but you only get your opinion if it's truly overbearing."

I personally don't care about post-round religious comments. I think it's stupid to mention it (He or She or They don't care about your golf), but I can't get riled up over any and all stupid comments anyone makes or I'd never be at rest. :)

I just don't think they are usually being honest then about what annoys them in this situation. I think they are then annoyed at the characteristic not necessarily the mention of it. They should at least be honest like @Kieran123 about it. Disliking a person and being annoyed by them are being muddled a bit(not saying you are).  I am just trying to say that I think disliking the person for the premise of  the characteristic is not a place I would go nor do I think others should.

I don't think this is fair or true.  Well, if you're talking globally, then, yeah, maybe there are some extremists out there like this, but in general, I don't believe this to be even close to true.

How many people in the US would actually strongly believe that a woman who gets divorced must be stoned to death?  I'm going to say, at most, one.  (And that would be the guy she just divorced)

It's a good argument against people that use the "it's in the Bible" reason for believing something - like opposing gay marriage - but I don't think that any normal, sane people actually take 100% of the Bible as truth.

The sad part is those of us that have faith are often thrown in with those rare types.

[Kieran123]

I think I may actually be ok with this.  As long as others are fine with this:

"the person promoting does not bother me, the homosexual lifestyle bothers me."

Homosexuality is not a religion. Homosexuality is not a choice. Homosexuality is not a multi billion dollar corrupt regime that still puts its hand out for more. Homosexuality is not fear mongering.

Homosexuality is two people of the same gender that are attracted to one another.