Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Hide the children! The Worldnutdaily is in full freakout mode because a gay rights group is sponsoring a day at the San Diego Padres baseball stadium.
"San Diego Pride supporters and volunteers will be recognized for organizing the group event with a scoreboard welcome and the Gay Men's Chorus of San Diego will sing the National Anthem," the Major League Baseball team has announced on its website."This action by the San Diego Padres management has greatly tarnished their record as being a family friendly organization. They have truly offended the moral and religious sensibilities of literally thousands of fans. I will never look at the Padres the same way that I have over the past 40 plus years here in San Diego, enjoying its image as being pro family. It is really sad," said Phil Magnan, the director for Biblical Family Advocates.
Well of course this means that the Padres are "anti-family" because, as everyone knows, gays don't have families; I guess they're brought by the stork and dropped in a pumpkin patch. Hey Phil, how about all those families who have gay people in them? They're brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, aunts and uncles - and yes, mother and father too. I find it fascinating that those families just magically disappear from your definition of "family."
And what exactly are they worried about here? Do they think that kids will hear the gay men's chorus sing the national anthem and suddenly think that having gay sex is patriotic? That they'll think, "Wow, these guys have great harmonies. I bet they get that from buggering one another. I'm gonna have to try that"? I've got news for you, Phil: if your kid is straight, seeing a gay man's chorus isn't gonna turn him gay. And if he's gay, seeing 162 ballgames a year isn't gonna change that either.
James Hartline, who publishes the The James Hartline Report and addresses issues involving homosexuality, said his objections to the promotions will take shape in a protest at the game, where he's expecting several hundred fans to participate.He's also confirmed that a team of concessions workers plans to walk off their jobs then, even though it will cost them hundreds of dollars in income, to protest the team's plans.
Hartline reported that Set Free Ministries partners with the Canning Hunger Organization to contract with ARAMARK to provide labor for concession stands at Petco Park, home of the Padres.
Nearby five dozen workers from that company and another one have announced plans to walk off the job on July 8 in protest of the "gay" event. Ministries development director J.D. Loveland said he and his workers were angry and frustrated that the "radical homosexual event" was being held on the same day the team already had planned a children's giveaway.
"We asked our men and women if they would be willing to bring their kids to Petco Park if they knew that their kids would be exposed to the San Diego Gay Pride event. Every single one of our clients said they would not. The vote was unanimous to walk off of the job on July 8th rather than be a part of the gay pride event at the stadium," explained Loveland.
OMG! They might see gay people. Quick everyone, bury your heads in the sand so you won't see them! Oh dropkick me, Jesus, through the goalposts of life.
Comments
I hate baseball, but I just bought tickets for that game. Gotta support MY family!
Posted by: the invisible dragon under the bed | July 2, 2007 10:24 AM
Heh heh, "ball games."
Posted by: Brandon | July 2, 2007 10:31 AM
Oh, thanks, Brandon! {cleaning a mouthful of diet coke off the computer screen...}
Posted by: BobApril | July 2, 2007 10:57 AM
Once again, "family" gets used as a code word for "raving bigot".
Posted by: Eamon Knight | July 2, 2007 10:58 AM
Wow, these guys have great harmonies. I bet they get that from buggering one another. I'm gonna have to try that.
Actually, it would be no small accomplishment for them to have great harmonies while fellating each other on the third base line.
Posted by: terryf | July 2, 2007 11:44 AM
"I hate baseball, but I just bought tickets for that game. Gotta support MY family!"
I'm sorry, hating baseball is against my religion, you're therefore anti-family and I have to protest your existence by eating a hot dog and drinking a watered down beer.
Meanwhile you're going to burn in baseball hell--which I think is in Kansas City--for all eternity.
How is it that these people (the world net daily people) are not openly mocked by everyone?
Posted by: Rasputin | July 2, 2007 11:47 AM
"Exposed" to a Gay Pride event? When in the world are they going to begin to understand that it isn't catching?
Never mind. Rhetorical question.
Anyway, I wonder of those concession workers understand the concept of cutting of their nose to spite their face?
Posted by: Elaine | July 2, 2007 11:52 AM
Remember, MLB parks across the country had Faith days at their parks last summer (unfortunately, my favorite team and player are featured in that article).
Maybe they could schedule them on the same day?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 2, 2007 12:26 PM
Gotta love the image being projected by the concession workers. Here are people who are either 1) trying to put their lives back together or 2) working so that others can do so, but they are refusing to work because children and GLBT people might be in the same stadium. Never mind their responsibility to Aramark - clearly they aren't considering the long-term damage to their "ministry" by such action. Do you really think a company as big as Aramark will continue working with a church organization, and in the process try to be good corporate citizens, if there is a threat workers from that organization will simply walk off if any part of the community they don't like show up at a game?
The real irony here is that, in all likelihood, the workers from the church group are the sort - homeless, recovering addicts, etc. - who themselves could face significant bigotry if their own "lifestyle choices" were known to attendees at games. I could easily see some "civic leader" decrying the hiring of former addicts or prostitutes to work at a stadium where children are present.
Not to mention, and I don't want to scare Mr. Magnan or Mr. Hartline, gay people actually go to the ballpark on days when they don't announce themselves. That's right, children might be exposed to gay or lesbian people at the stadium at ANY TIME. In fact, they might be exposed to GLBT people when they order food in a restaurant, or go to Target with their parents, or get a shot at the doctors, or EVEN IN THEIR SCHOOLS!
Posted by: CPT_Doom | July 2, 2007 12:41 PM
And here I was thinking that San Diego was so much more progressive than here in Philly, where the Phillies have been hosting "gay days" for the last couple of years. Sure, there was grumbling in the beginning, but nothing like what worldnut is describing. That doesn't mean we don't have our anti-gay gadflies whose intent is to attend gay events just for the purpose of disrupting them. Philadelphia's resident group calls themselves "Repent America" (it's always got a religious component, eh?), but at least our local police department keeps Repent America's protesters segregated, rather than allowing them to disrupt the event for both gays and our straight friends.
Posted by: gary l. day | July 2, 2007 1:20 PM
Of course it does. I can't conjure any other reason to oppose it. No matter what rhetoric they spin, they can't get away from the religious elements.
Posted by: Godless Geek | July 2, 2007 2:03 PM
I don't want to shock anybody, but I have a gay friend who's a major NASCAR fan. I don't think there will be a Gay Pride Day at Talladega any time soon, though.
Posted by: Pieter B | July 2, 2007 4:09 PM
Baseball, NASCAR, is it just me, or do homosexuals seem to be infiltrating the entertainment industry?
Posted by: kehrsam | July 2, 2007 5:38 PM
Hell, Pieter, the National Gay Finals Rodeo was held in freakin' Oklahoma City about twenty years ago! There were an awful lot of jokes about 'steers and queers,' though.
Posted by: Coragyps | July 2, 2007 5:41 PM
I will never look at the Padres the same way...
Does a team named for Catholic priests still have any positive image left, athletic performance aside??
Posted by: Grumpy | July 2, 2007 5:46 PM
Heads up...Shrub has just commuted Libby's prison sentence.
Sorry for the off-topic comment.
Posted by: raj | July 2, 2007 6:33 PM
Doesn't NASCAR have to be entertaining or something before it can be counted as part of the entertainment industry?
Posted by: JC | July 2, 2007 6:58 PM
I've got news for Phil, baseball has always been gay: bats, balls, hot dogs, the 7th inning singing, can't play in the rain, all those guys scrunched together in a low cut shelter, come on.
Posted by: Science Avenger | July 2, 2007 9:47 PM
"And if he's gay, seeing 162 ballgames a year isn't gonna change that either."
The All-Star game could turn anyone straight.
Posted by: PhysioProf | July 2, 2007 9:57 PM
I can see why these so-called 'pro family' groups are scared of expanding the hate crime laws to protect homosexuals.
How would they opperate without the right to hate and persecute total strangers who have nothing to do with their lives?
Posted by: ristin | July 2, 2007 10:25 PM
I can see why these so-called 'pro family' groups are scared of expanding the hate crime laws to protect homosexuals.
How would they opperate without the right to hate and persecute total strangers who have nothing to do with their lives?
Posted by: ristin | July 2, 2007 10:26 PM
ristin,
I agree. Look at the KKK and how they've become synonymous with "evil" by the majority of the current population even though in the past their views used to be the majority (and biblically supported, too!). Sure, the KKK still has freedom of speech and the right to organize, but any "meaningful" (read: violent) actions by them are outlawed.
Xtians (and all those in other homophobic religions) fear becoming the next KKK.
Posted by: Monimonika | July 2, 2007 11:14 PM
This action by the San Diego Padres management has greatly tarnished their record as being a family friendly organization.
I can't make any sense out of that either. Even if we substitute "family" with "Phil" and Phil thinks they "tarnish their record as a Phil friendly organization" it still makes no sense because the San Diego Padres management are allowed to be friendly to more people than just Phil.
They have truly offended the moral and religious sensibilities of literally thousands of fans.
Yeah, as if moral and religious sensibilities aren't offended by anything else at baseball games and as if Phil wouldn't go into bat looney mode every time he sees teh word "gay" even if it had nothing to do with baseball.
Posted by: 386sx | July 2, 2007 11:26 PM
Actually quite a few teams have been having 'gay days' for years. They don't get mentioned on the tv broadcasts -- and, sadly, neither NY team does as far as I know -- but this is nothing new for baseball, though given San Diego, and the servicemen that flock to the games from local bases, it may be interesting. (I'd love to see one where the Colorado Rockies were the opponent, since the Rockies are -- or were -- the most 'Christian' of teams.)
Now I wish some owner would do for a gay player what Branch Rickey did for Jackie Robinson, and announce his full support for his coming out.
It's a shame the only openly gay -- while he played -- baseball player is no longer around to be at one of these games. He was Glenn Burke, an outfielder-pinch runner for the Dodgers and A's in the late 79s and early 80s. Unfortunately he was like most Dodger '4th outfielders,' great defensively, very fast, but couldn't hit well enough to break into the starting line-up.
I was working as a temp in the major league offices shortly before baseball resumed after the strike and tried to suggest that MLB should take a gay-friendly position, but a co-worker said "I guess they're waiting for ***" to come out. (They were talking about a near-Hall of Fame quality OF/Pinch Hiter, long retired but still active around the game, whose 'closet door' was made of glass. Won't give his name, but he had more than 500 hits for four different teams.)
Posted by: Prup aka Jim Benton | July 3, 2007 10:37 AM
Keep your hate speech in Pharyngula, please.
Posted by: Brandon | July 3, 2007 5:24 PM
You guys are hypocrites... How about when Catholic parades were protested in SF by gay groups because the gays couldn't take the fact that the Catholics didn't accept their perverse lifestyle?
Take a look in the mirror, you guys all preach this "its the 21st century", "those Christians are so close-minded", "fanatical", etc.
You look at "the Christians" as unaccepting but *you* cannot *accept* the fact that they don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle and have the right to protest it. You talk about homosexuals being "marginalized", but just want the Christians to shut up and go away for simply having a separate view.
Look, there are opposing views and homosexuality is not accepted by everyone. It is, however, being shoved down our throats.
Posted by: John | July 4, 2007 4:50 PM
John -
How exactly are we being hypocritical? Just as you are welcome to mock gays who protest bigoted morons, we are welcome to mock the protesting, bigoted morons. I daresay there is not a single person who has commented here, who would not argue voraciously, that these folks have a right to protest this event. That does not mean that we can't mock them.
Look, there are opposing views and homosexuality is not accepted by everyone. It is, however, being shoved down our throats.
Look, there are opposing views about moronic bigotry and moronic bigotry isn't accepted by everyone. Assholes like you however, are keen on shoving it down everyones throats, by restricting the rights of a segment of our society.
Posted by: DuWayne | July 4, 2007 5:04 PM
John - where did anyone say the Christians didn't have the right to protest? I just read through all the comments - even the more radical commenters said nothing close to that, let alone Ed himself. I did see quite a few people heaping scorn on what WorldNetDaily, Biblical Family Advocates, James Hartline, and SetFree Ministries had to say, but no one denied their right to say it.
I will note, however, that if their criticism and arguments can't stand up to our comments, then perhaps they would have been smarter to keep silent.
Posted by: BobApril | July 4, 2007 5:04 PM
(high five to DuWayne for the simultaneous takedown)
Posted by: BobApril | July 4, 2007 5:07 PM
Brandon wrote:
Brandon, I'm sorry if that was offensive, but can you do me the favor of pointing out which part in particular was "hate speech"? Was it the "Xtian" spelling? The use of the word "homophobic" in the description? In all honesty I really do want to know what you are specifically talking about. I will also welcome explanations of Brandon's statement from others.Also, can you (or someone else) give me context on the Pharyngula reference? It would greatly help me in avoiding a repeat.
Thank you.
-Monimonika
Posted by: Monimonika | July 5, 2007 7:08 PM
You just compared two billion people, the vast majority of who are completely innocent, to a terrorist organization. I consider that to be hate speech. The commentors at Pharyngula enjoy that much more than we do. That's all I was saying.
Posted by: Brandon | July 5, 2007 7:24 PM
Thank you, Brandon, for replying. I understand your statement now and give my sincere apology for making the connection.
I am sorry.
However, let me try to explain what I really wanted to say. When I typed out "KKK", I was actually thinking about the "white-supremacy mentality" specifically, not about the terrorist aspect. I know, very dumb of me to not see the obvious implications. *slaps self*
Basically, racial discrimination is now considered socially unacceptable and, generally, those who voice their belief in white-supremacy get lumped together with the KKK even if they don't necessarily advocate violence or resort to terrorism.
Also, the description "those in other homophobic religions" was not meant to refer to some religions in general, but to those specific religious sects which loudly state that homosexuality is sinful/an abomination/evil/a mental disease. I know, you're not a mind-reader, so the blames all on me for this one.
Thanks again for the explanation! It was greatly appreciated (especially since I honestly was not expecting a reply).
Posted by: Monimonika | July 6, 2007 12:32 AM
No problem, thank you for being so cordial. If I had known you'd be so polite, I'd have started out being nicer myself.
Posted by: Brandon | July 6, 2007 4:09 AM
Dude. When some gay guy is shoving his cock down your throat, let me know. Until then, the above is utter nonsense. Others exist. Fucking deal with it.
Posted by: MartinM | July 6, 2007 4:46 AM