KC Chiefs kicker complains about "emasculation of men," gay pride & says women should be homemakers

Not sure what the poster said, but qb supported their teammate, just maybe not what he said.

Mahomes:
“There's certain things that he said that I don't necessarily agree with, but I understand the person that he is, and he is trying to do whatever he can to lead people in the right direction,
And that might not be the same values as I have.

Mahomes continued, But at the same time, I'm going to judge him by the character that he shows every single day. That's a great person, and we'll continue to move along and try to help build each other up to make ourselves better every single day."

 

Kiss of death, he's done.

 

“In support of Butker”

They basically said generic PC stuff to defuse the situation.

 

And specifically said they didn’t agree with him but he’s free to say what he wants.

 

Exactly. And isn't that pretty much what the NFL said? But folks here said the NFL condemned him. And now that Mahomes supported him ....

 

The pretzel logic that I see here on the daily is truly amazing to me.

 

Some quotes in today’s papers


“It is now, over the past few days, my beliefs or what people think I believe have been the focus of countless discussions around the globe,” Butker said in Nashville. “At the outset, many people expressed a shocking level of hate. But as the days went on, even those who disagreed with my viewpoints shared their support for my freedom of religion.”

Butker said he understands being criticized for his performance on the field. The 28-year-old said he values his religion more than football.

“It’s a decision I’ve consciously made and one I do not regret at all,” he said. “If it wasn’t clear that the timeless Catholic values are hated by many, it is now.”

“Timeless Catholic values” is code. Remember, the RCC did not recognize religious freedom and separation of Church and State until 1965 and Vatican II.


Dignitatis humanae[a] (Of the Dignity of the Human Person) is the Second Vatican Council's Declaration on Religious Freedom.[1] In the context of the council's stated intention "to develop the doctrine of recent popes on the inviolable rights of the human person and the constitutional order of society", Dignitatis humanae spells out the church's support for the protection of religious liberty. It set the ground rules by which the church would relate to secular states.


Historically, the ideal of Catholic political organization was a tightly interwoven structure of the Catholic Church and secular rulers generally known as Christendom, with the Catholic Church having a favoured place in the political structure.[3] In 1520, Pope Leo X in the papal bull Exsurge Domine had censuredthe proposition "That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit" as one of a number of errors that were "either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears, or seductive of simple minds and against Catholic truth".[4][5][6][7]


Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre cited this document as one of the fundamental reasons for his difficulties with the Second Vatican Council. It remains a focus for attacks from Traditionalists in the 21st century. The Society of St. Pius X criticized how Dignitatis humanae approached religious freedom with an argument from history:

The saints have never hesitated to break idols, destroy their temples, or legislate against pagan or heretical practices. The Church – without ever forcing anyone to believe or be baptized – has always recognized its right and duty to protect the faith of her children and to impede, whenever possible, the public exercise and propagation of false cults. To accept the teaching of Vatican II is to grant that, for two millennia, the popes, saints, Fathers and Doctors of the Church, bishops, and Catholic kings have constantly violated the natural rights of men without anyone in the Church noticing. Such a thesis is as absurd as it is impious.[13]



Dignitatis humanae - Wikipedia

 

1. NFL players have little to no control over who their teammates are.
2. Butker is very good at his job.
3. Missouri is a deep red state.
4. If players with offensive beliefs don't aim them at anyone on or around the team, it's usually a non-issue.
5. He should be really careful about invoking 87's girlfriend. Her fans do NOT play.

 

One item I haven’t seen mentioned is a majority of the graduates I would anticipate aren’t married. So this 28 year old man, made rich from playing a sport, messages were; women - they’ve been lied to, should get married, start having children fast and be housewives. And men, they just need to man-up.

 

From the Sacred Heart gift shop in DT Tampa. An antidote to the impression that we Catholics, most of us at least, want to oppress you.

Well I have to use Twitter because pic is too big. Drinking with the Saints

 

Gave me a chuckle, knowing a Catholic theologian and 'mixologist' teaches at Baylor. The University is affiliated with the Baptist General Convention of Texas, and though 'everyone knows' Baptists drink, they just don't drink in front of each other.

 

Thought similar thoughts. It is funny

 

HB said (paraphrased) … “you are being told diabolical lies”

The poster said HB said … “having a career is diabolical”

Sorry, not even close. I give the poster credit enough for the capacity to know the difference. Ergo, the poster is outright lying or is so fanatical about his position he doesn’t realize the error. Either way, not worth the discussion

I recall when Phil Donahue had George Will as a guest on his show and proceeded to try to lambaste George Will and his opinions. George Will responded “if I was as bad as you say I am, you would not have caricature me”. If HB’s speech to a Catholic audience was as bad as the uproar claims it is he wouldn’t have to be caricatured.

 

Not even close?

“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. 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? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

Again, what are the diabolical lies?

He wants to address the ladies. Says these ladies are being told diabolical lies. Literally the next thing out of Butkers mouth after diabolical lies is “sitting there thinking about promotions and titles you may get in your careers”.

So again, seems pretty rational if following along to conclude the “diabolical lie” told to these women involves the pursuit of their careers. Even the nuns thought this, and condemned that element of the speech. So if you don’t think the “diabolical lies” had to do with pursuing their careers, what is your take on what he ACTUALLY meant? Seems like if you want to suggest posters are lying or misrepresenting you’d have an alternative? Something? Anything?

 

You're rgith

One is something that you're being told/fed/indoctrinated (from HB's perspective). It's a bad environment.
The other is something you do. It's a choice.
Yes, not even close.

You're right - he said what you highlighted; and, he said right after "...but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

My take - HB believes that the Feminist mantra of "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" and - in general - that having a career in and of itself will be fully satisfying are diabolical lies. HB believes that the majority of the women at this Catholic school will find their most satisfaction and fulfillment in their roles in the family as wives and mothers.

Folks may agree, they may not; but, it's hardly a shocking comment to Catholics at a Catholic school.

 

Now we get to the crux of the matter. So, the point upon which we disagree then is this: What is biblical love and how does that shape and form our convictions in the political realm? There are a few ways to approach that. If love is the summation of the law, then who is our neighbor we are to love? And how are we to love them? How do we know what love is?

This is love, that we walk according to his commandments. -2 John 1:6​

So, love is inseparable from the commandments. So, the question remains what kind of voting obeys the commandments? I challenge you to find the commandment you think I have failed to walk in with respect to this. I think you will have a hard time finding it.

I watched a movie once, and a woman was given a choice by a Nazi officer. She had to pick which of her two children she was going to keep. The other would be taken away by the Nazis to be put to death. The choice plagued her. She was shouted down by the Nazi officer who demanded she choose one of the two children, and she crumbled underneath the pressure. She was unable to choose either one over the other. Then she was threatened with losing both children, and in a moment she chose her son over her 4 year old daughter, who was taken away never to be seen again. Her daughter was probably coldly murdered by the Nazis shortly after.



The rest of the movie is how this choice has scarred this mother for the rest of her life. Why did the choice scar her? Because of a mother's love for her daughter. At the very minimum you have not come to grips with the nature of the political options in this country if you don't think the consequences on one side of the political scale we are dealing with are as tragic as what that woman has to deal with in that movie. The fundamental difference is some sons and daughters are killed with no one to grieve them. Not even their mothers grieve their passing. It is so hard to even think about. The fact that your moral calculus is filled with Christian love, but gives this no consideration whatsoever...I question the nature of your Christian love for your neighbor.

I have said I am unsure how I will vote in November, but make no mistake, children being murdered and then dying unloved and ungrieved by their parents...the fact that this happens in our country on the scale that it does...if there is any love in our hearts that should move us to act politically it is that. That moves me because that person is my neighbor and they were not loved.

I find it extremely difficult to be lectured by someone about love when this does not even move the scale for them. And I find it extremely difficult to listen to someone when Sarasota County, Lauren Boebert, and Majorie Taylor Greene eclipse this tragedy into irrelevance. It is only irrelevant if you have hardened your heart to the cold-blooded murder of children.

I could respect your position maybe a little bit if the nature of voting for you was agonized over in the way that woman agonized over giving up her daughter to the Nazis. But I have 0 respect for your position because there is no agony over committing children to genocide in your decision making at all. That is lovelessness, and it falls short of what Jesus commanded.

You know there is nothing new under the sun. There was a bishop in the 5th century who taught exactly what you said here. He was excommunicated in 417 AD, and his teaching was determined to be a heresy in 418 AD at the Council of Carthage. Why was he excommunicated? He twisted the scriptures to his own spiritual destruction. Those words you wrote, he believed them. He taught them, and they are a spiritual assassination potion for those who readily receive them. They effectively fatten a person up for the slaughter of being held accountable for every sin they have ever committed in their entire life. When you depart from the gospel of grace to be judged on the basis of something else other than grace, that is a pity. That is exactly where the devil wants you. And he's using you to take as many others down with you as possible.

My primary opposition to you has always been spiritual in nature. You can take the 3 biggest heretics in the early church, Pelagius, Marcion, and Arius and to some degree you agree with every single one of them. These are ancient pawns of Satan who led many men to hell, and it is as if all three of them got resurrected into the same body and started posting on Gatorcountry.

Now these destructive heresies always have an appearance of truth in them. There is always some element of truth in them that makes them seem right. So, you have hit on something true with the Pelagian heresy you promote. Jesus certainly spoke about right living, and he urged people to live upright and holy lives. It is the idea that we are saved because of our works that is the huge problem and makes what you teach deadly. For example:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. -Ephesians 2:8-9​

You miss the brightest beams of God's glory if you miss salvation by grace, and the apostle Paul specifically says we are not saved by works, so that no one can boast. Why? Because it is human nature for human beings to want to steal God's glory for themselves. This was the temptation of the serpent in the garden, and it is the same temptation that he has extended to you.

I believe a preacher in the 17th century hit the nail on the head regarding the nature of faith and repentance:

The two great graces essential to a saint in this life are faith and repentance. These are the two wings by which he flies to heaven.
​

He was right to call these two wings graces because they are both given to us by God:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. -Ephesians 2:8-9

When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, even to Gentiles God has granted repentance that leads to life.” -Acts 11:18
​

These doctrines lead to humility because salvation is not of ourselves but it is a gift of God so that no one can boast. I am just a Christian. I am imperfect in many ways, but God is my perfect savior. And because God has been gracious to me, I can be gracious to others. When salvation is of works, you are not living in grace, and grace towards others does not come easily. And I think that is why you attack other posters, especially conservative posters, and have reputation that proceeds you for doing so.

Consider this. You are bringing things up that are decades old? Why? One of them in particular is something I recanted long ago. I said I was mistaken and wrong. I have said I do not believe that anymore. But you want to bring that up again? Do you actually expect God to forgive your sins if you bring up things that people have recanted and admitted were wrong years ago? This is why I don't buy the idea that you actually practice Christian love. You do not obey the Lord Jesus. You do not love. If you loved...by walking in the commandments then you would have considered this before posting what you did:

Whoever covers an offense seeks love, but he who repeats a matter separates close friends. -Proverbs 17:9​

I am sorry, I just can't be lectured by someone about living a life of love for others when they so consistently fail to live by this verse. Your reputation for being the kind of person to dig up moral failures (sometimes real, sometimes imagined) proceeds you. This is not standalone. This is a pattern. You do not love conservative Christian posters. If you really loved them as you no doubt would claim, then you would not put so much effort into uncovering and spotlighting people's offenses on this message board.

You can be forgiven, but forgiveness is only on God's terms as stated according to God's gospel. Forget this works righteousness business that you think is going to save you. There is no hope for that. You are only going to get in the same way I am going to get in, and that is if the Lord Jesus forgives your sins. That is only by grace, the grace of faith and the grace of repentance. And the only way you will find grace is if you repent of the self-righteousness of trying to save yourself by works. You need to humble yourself as one who has nothing and beg purely on the basis of grace for faith and repentance. Only then will you be saved.

If you are ever saved, I will not bring up your sins from decades ago because God's forgiveness separates our sins from us as far as the east is from the west. If you make it in, then I would rejoice with you. But right now you are an enemy of the gospel.

More heresy...sigh. A preacher I know used to say that if sinners will go hell, then at least make them jump over your body. I have tried, and I wash my hands being innocent of your blood.

 

What a read. I share Mike Lewis’ suspicion that the conspiracy may be a little too neat, but an interesting read nonetheless. I had no idea SSPX was this big. I know the Latin Mass is; Butker took a shot at Francis in his speech about it.

Interesting read

 

The palate cleanser for elite professional place kickers

 

outstsnding post. He went undrafted by the NFL but continued to work and made a team. Now he’s a Super Bowl champ, All-Pro, and even mentioned as potential HOF’er (rare for a kicker).

“…..Tucker is the most accurate kicker in NFL history at 90.2 percent and holds the record for the longest successful NFL field goal at 66 yards.”

And also….

“….a classical trained bass-baritone who can sing opera in seven different languages. He has been asked to perform by both the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra and Opera Orchestra of New York”

that’s amazing. To be one of the best kickers ever, and also to be at that level of an operatic singer.

And his quote regarding his other activities…..
“A can of soup can make a massive difference in somebody's day or their week or their month, so to be able to be a part of feeding just one person or a family, it's really important,"