The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 05, 2009, 11:17am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,895
It doesn't give the appearance of anything if it isn't brought up, and it wouldn't be brought up if our society had its priorities in order and had a more realistic interpretation of true freedom and a contemporary outlook on human sexuality. It's only anyone's business if it comes out and there's a conflict. And if no one knows, there's no conflict. And no one should know, or even ask.

Also--and I know that this is bad news for some of the obsessed--sex is not immoral. Sex is a necessary joy, not an evil. In fact, anything that anyone does with another consenting partner or partners is not immoral. Nor is it anyone's concern but theirs. It's 2009. Things change. It's easier for the morally concerned or obsessed to ignore something that's supposed to be private than it is to draw it out. So why don't they just ignore it, rather than draw it out?

"Free country" means freedom for all, not merely those who claim moral superiority. That includes freedom to have any kind of sex one consents to having with anyone who consents to having it with them. It does not afford any faction the right to impose their religious dogma on all of us. Acting on interpretations of religious dogma is a choice that certain people make. Ignoring it, or filtering out the madness is the choice some other people make. When the dogmatic impose that religious dogma on all of us, well, then we go backward as a society, like we have.

We're laughingstocks all around the modern world. Cases like Clinton's, Letterman's and even Mark Sanford's make us look like fools when it causes a national uproar.

All that considered, because we are so backward and immature about sex as a society, things like this indiscreet umpire pose conflicts. If sex weren't misperceived as being a bigger deal than it is, maybe it could pass. But until that point where we grow up and act real about human sexuality, judges having sex with prosecutors, or some such thing, cannot be allowed to go on.

So this one woman professional umpire should not be having sex with players, and should go down for doing so. (Pardon the pun.)
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
top 10 female athletes bum783 Softball 2 Tue Apr 14, 2009 10:57am
New Correctable error casebook play 2.10.1 - NCAA treatment CallMeMrRef Basketball 7 Wed Feb 18, 2009 02:42pm
Female Officials coach41 Basketball 15 Mon Nov 06, 2006 09:08pm
Female Ref's brandan89 Basketball 14 Thu Jun 23, 2005 10:24pm
Deferring to parnter vs the rookie treatment bigzilla Basketball 84 Sat Feb 05, 2005 08:11pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1