Kin
New member
Admittedly I'm not expecting a great deal of rigorous intellectual consistency here but getting a statement like this from a player I think does a great job of highlighting the problem inherent both with the players and the NHL's messaging on this. He is choosing, by his own words, not to endorse "something". But what is that something? Is it just being gay? Or having some measure of pride in being gay as opposed to shame? A word that often comes up among defenders of this position is "lifestyle" but your sexual orientation doesn't define your lifestyle. There are celibate gay people and married with kids gay people and gay people who are out there having sex with a bunch of different partners just as it's true with straight people.
And where's the courage of his convictions? If you think what you're being asked to "endorse" here is bad enough that you're not willing to take part, why would you think it should be welcomed into the game of hockey? Either this is a bad thing you need to take a stand against or it isn't.
Someone really needs to sit down with Gary Bettman and ask him three very simple and very fair questions:
1. Would he be just as open to players expressing their "individual rights" objecting to, say, something like MLK day on the basis of them being racist.
2. If not, what's the tangible difference in the NHL's eyes?
3. If either question 1 or 2 have a meaningful answer, can Hockey really be said to be open to everyone?
At some point the league has to take a meaningful and clear position here.
And where's the courage of his convictions? If you think what you're being asked to "endorse" here is bad enough that you're not willing to take part, why would you think it should be welcomed into the game of hockey? Either this is a bad thing you need to take a stand against or it isn't.
Someone really needs to sit down with Gary Bettman and ask him three very simple and very fair questions:
1. Would he be just as open to players expressing their "individual rights" objecting to, say, something like MLK day on the basis of them being racist.
2. If not, what's the tangible difference in the NHL's eyes?
3. If either question 1 or 2 have a meaningful answer, can Hockey really be said to be open to everyone?
At some point the league has to take a meaningful and clear position here.