ImpactCorey
-
Posts
237 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ImpactCorey
-
-
10 minutes ago, Einstein said:
The idea that the ‘public’ would ever think that a place-kickers words spoken at an off-season, non-NFL related, non-NFL endorsed, non-NFL created event would in any way represent the NFL is a tad ludicrous.
Sure they shouldn't have to, but they chose to do it anyway. Just in case someone would think they condoned this promoted commencement speak where one of their decorated players was speaking. They put out a brief message to make it clear they are not expressed views of the NFL. Why would this upset anyone?
When Kaepernick took a knee and the NFL didn't say anything there were people saying they would boycott the NFL. They didn't say "well, that's the player's views and not the NFL."
-
28 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:
The way I see it, if they feel the need to apologize to the fans for a player's comments at a commencement speech, and not apologize to the fans for extorting them, then they have their issues really screwed up.
I'm not interested in going back and forth on an unrelated topic where you clearly have an axe to grind but I do find it necessary to point out that the NFL never apologized for the comments. They simply said they were Butker's views and did not reflect those of the organization. Perhaps they will issue an apology which I would find surprising, but they have not done so yet.
-
1 minute ago, Mark Vader said:
In that case I await the moment that the NFL apologizes for raping the fans of all their capitol when they are forced to spend thousands of dollars on PSL's before they can buy season tickets.
Also, how they extort fans by forcing them to buy streaming services, because they can only watch these games on there with no alternatives whatsoever. Including playoff games.
I mean its a business and that's capitalism I suppose, but I think that's a totally different conversation.
-
14 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:
I wonder why, as well.
Was he speaking on behalf of the NFL? Was he addressing a group who is associated with the NFL?
No but I'm sure he was introduced as "NFL Kicker and Super Bowl Champion Harrison Butker" rather than "Some Random Catholic". He wouldn't have been asked to speak otherwise. It would be the same as any other company. For example if he was introduced as "Delta Airlines pilot Harrison Butker" then Delta would likely have done the same thing if there was backlash. Like it or not, your opinions reflect on your employer when their name is brought up right before you open your mouth. The NFL was just making it clear that the message in this case was Butker's alone.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:
I didn't use his wife as an example. The poster said Butker said its mutually exclusive. I said he did not say that and that he only brought up his wife who did choose.
Maybe a bad example from Butker that leads people to further attack him but honestly if gives more credence to the fact that he is demonstrating the value a woman brings to the household and people are tearing it down because it implies they cant go serve a corporate overlord bc thats the dream instead.
I suppose we can assume Butker's choice of words was not great and that he does believe all that. I'm ok with that.
However the fact is if he instead said something like:
"Some of you will have careers and that is great. Some of you will be homemakers and that is great as well. Some of you will even do both and that too is incredible. Do what brings you joy and don't feel like you have to be pushed one way or the other".
We wouldn't be talking about it. It would have been really easy for him to do that. Yet he didn't. Wny not?
I'd also love someone to explain the "diabolical lies". What lies? Given the context of the rest of his speech, it's hard not to feel like the "diabolical lies" are the ones that say women can be happy seeking careers. If that's not the lies then what?
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:
His wife made the choice. That does not imply you have to choose.
Many woman play both roles. He certainly mentions being blessed enough to allow her to completely dedicate herself to educator/mother/wife.
I think we are saying the same thing. Using his wife is a bad example of it not being mutually exclusive. In her case she chose one over the other. I would think using someone that chose to do both would be a better example of it not being mutually exclusive.
-
1
-
-
Just now, oldmanfan said:
I just found that out, and therefore retract any comments made based on this. Thanks for bringing that up.
No worries. So much information flies around, it is hard to know what is real and what is not most times.
-
1 minute ago, What a Tuel said:
You can extrapolate all you want but it still does not say that the two are mutually exclusive. Literally says its a choice and a choice that his wife did not regret.
Using his wife to prove your point is a really bad example. In fact he says for his wife it WAS mutually exclusive:
"Isabelle's dream of having a career might not have come true, but if you asked her today if she has any regrets on her decision, she would laugh out loud, without hesitation, and say, “Heck, No.”"
She had to give up not only a career, but her DREAM career to be a homemaker. That is by definition, mutually exclusive. What is stopping her from pursuing her career otherwise?
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
39 minutes ago, DrW said:
Well, I bite. Take this line from his speech:
"For the ladies present today, congratulations on an amazing accomplishment. You should be proud of all that you have achieved to this point in your young lives. I want to speak directly to you briefly because I think it is you, the women, who have had the most diabolical lies told to you."
According to my daughter with a minor in rhetoric (she can talk the paint off the wall), now you would expect one or more examples. Butker continues:
"How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career?"
At least to me, that makes clear what he thinks of women who have a career (whether with or without children).
I think the "diabolical lies" part is the most telling.
Let's assume that Butker believes you can have a career AND be a good mother. Then what are the diabolical lies he speaks of? He wouldn't have chosen that opening if that is what he truly believed.
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Bill from NYC said:
Not necessarily but these are dangerous animals, and I think that owners should be held civily, or even at times criminally responsible for their attacks on innocent people.
And btw, YOU not I made the analogy to dogs and transexuals.
Bravo. That is some next level gaslighting. Only 2 posts up can be proved otherwise. Ok.
-
7 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:
That is different. They are not living under a false premise so no, it would not bother me. There have been instances of bad acts involving men pretending to be women. I even read a story about an inmate who "identified" as a woman impregnating female prisoners.
If I claim to "identify" as a German Shepherd, will you send me a box of dog treats?
Bad actors should not vilify an entire group. Sticking with your overly simplistic dog analogy, because some Pit Bulls have been trained to be dangerous and there are many reports of them attacking children, should we wipe out the existence of Pit Bulls?
-
8 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:
May be true but the same could be said of putting a child through unnecessary trials in their social life.
You guys act as if this is a concrete subject, as if you either have gender dysphoria or not. There is no middle ground with you in which someone may feel confused but ultimately affirm their born gender but in the meantime they have a significant pressure from the certain groups that this makes them "unique" and "special" and "heroic" and who wouldn't want to feel those things? Then how dumb do they feel when they ultimately change their mind? Maybe some cant bear to change their mind?
I'm not sure who you are lumping me in with when you say "you guys". Trust me. I am well-aware of and versed in the nuance. I will gladly address the nuance. Did Butker address it with his absolute remark about the deadly sin of "Pride"?
I'd bet my life savings that Butker was not referring to the risk of suicide when he made that statement.
-
2
-
-
7 minutes ago, RkFast said:
Has anybody bothered to ask actual MOTHERS if they feel that being a mom and making sure their children have a safe and nurturing home is "the most important thing" to them? Id bet a lot of money the vast majority of them...even ones with big time careers outside the home...would say that it is. Becuase all I know is that Im a "father and provider" and there is ABSOLTUELY NOTHING ON THIS PLANET that comes remotely close to that title for me.
Did your life not start until that moment? Was everything before that meaningless?
Its weird that Butker is against IVF when life doesn't start until you're married.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:
Transgender and gender dysphoric youth have a much higher chance of suicide. It is literally dangerous. Whether or not they are right with their feelings or justified in portraying themselves is secondary to that fact. There should be a lot more care in what we expose children to.
It is dangerous because people like Butker exist that don't accept their existence.
-
2
-
1
-
-
I think the league may be on to something with all of the tackling restrictions when even a place kicker demonstrates this level of CTE.
-
3
-
-
Points. Gets taunting penalty.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 1/29/2024 at 9:05 PM, Green Lightning said:
Planning not to. Enough of Mahomes fat helmet and FN Swift. Dislike both teams and underwhelmed with Usher. I'll score some major points with the wife who doesn't understand why anyone would love something that so upsets you. She has a point.
I hope the surprise guest is the Style Boyz and they do The Donkey Roll together.
-
This is great news! He was previously the waterboy right?
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, Bob Jones said:
I'm 60+ and had never heard of this song til right now. Just went to YT to check it out, and it's pretty much garbage, IMO.
They play THAT song at every Bills game?! Yeah, I'd question it too.
I call shenanigans. Nobody over 60 shorthands youtube to YT. Nice try kid.
-
1
-
5
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, bobobonators said:
How is it wild? It has to do with the game day experience. The song is not a classic and has no bearing to anything Buffalo, so why continue playing it every home game? Is the song deserving of being a Bills tradition on gameday? It’s a valid question in my opinion.I'm not here to argue for or against this song at game day. Nor will I say I even like it. However, this particular song has shown up on top 50 rock songs of ALL time as recently as 2021. It is played all over the WORLD at sporting events. I don't know if that makes it "classic" but it certainly isn't a flash in the pan.
-
2
-
3
-
-
Bass is so bad.
-
Diggs has to catch that.
-
2
-
-
how bad was Haack at practice that they decided to stick with Martin?
-
well that's game.
Couldn't Haack it. Matt released.
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Maybe with his rugby experience, Travis Clayton can punt.