(06-24-2022 01:37 PM)Claw Wrote:  Biden moves to remove Title IX rights for women in favor of gender identity protections

Quote:Biden's Department of Education under education secretary Miguel Cardona has released a proposal for changes to Title IX which includes erasing biological sex from issues of sex discrimination. The proposal would conflate protections for biological sex with gender identity, and see no differentiation between the two.

I would expect a legal challenge if they go through with this. The state of Florida and few others in line.

I hope so. Why play schools from soy blue state. Do they really matter?

Fine. We'll keep all the good football, basketball, and baseball.

You can keep the hockey (that one stings a tiny bit) and soccer.

(06-24-2022 03:22 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  Fine. We'll keep all the good football, basketball, and baseball.

You can keep the hockey (that one stings a tiny bit) and soccer.

Years ago I was on business in Rhode Island during the NCAA basketball tournament. There was no internet available. No smart phones.

I wanted to know what happened on the opening Thursday rounds. Get to the hotel and the local news is on. GREAT!! Sports is coming on. THEY DID 5 MINUTES ON THE NCAA HOCKEY TOURNAMENT!!! Then finally about 2 minutes on the basketball tournament. I would have been angry but I was mostly just confused.

...the only color that TALKS is GREEN... and if there is some to be made, folks will cross whatever boundaries are set to grab it... [STILL waiting for the 'money emoji', GTS!!! ]

Nope too much money

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

What would teams in swing states do? Play each other?

I don't know how much the NCAA can do. Most of its members are state-funded institutions.

The professional ranks will likely refrain from awarding certain events like neutral-site championships and all-star games to states where abortion has been banned, and could use that as leverage to pull/award those if states are considering banning it or legalizing it.

Blue states banning schools from Red States is dumb. Imagine the outcry if it was the other way around, if the state of Texas or South Carolina banned some liberal school from Oregon or California.

(06-24-2022 10:39 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  NO

Sorry Frank but this an issue for some people that goes WAY beyond college football. I don’t think you can underestimate how powerful this is for many people (on both sides). I looked at social media to see the reactions of my very divided family. I have family members who were this morning on their knees in tears praising God for this. Others who were demanding some very angry rhetoric and signals about what were going to about this. Both are college football fanatics. They could very easily place bans on any playing of games forever let alone even speaking to each other again. I’ve never seen an issue like this. When Texas outlaws this…don’t expect any games vs the Horns and Oregon and UCLA to happen.

I'd also be curious to see if we see any athletes walk away from their teams if their team decides to put out a message supporting abortion rights.

Honestly, who cares about at this point? Money will bridge the divide, somewhat. Liberal Democrats and Conservative Republicans will continue to defame and slander each other until there's finally a hot civil war in this country. Once that happens, sports will be the last thing on people's mind.

(06-24-2022 06:05 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Blue states banning schools from Red States is dumb. Imagine the outcry if it was the other way around, if the state of Texas or South Carolina banned some liberal school from Oregon or California.

Red states should ban baby killer blue states if anything

(06-24-2022 08:55 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  Honestly, who cares about at this point? Money will bridge the divide, somewhat. Liberal Democrats and Conservative Republicans will continue to defame and slander each other until there's finally a hot civil war in this country. Once that happens, sports will be the last thing on people's mind.

Kind of a contradiction. Money will overcome everything in this political battle…then it won’t because there’s a civil war.—nothing in between?

(06-25-2022 12:38 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(06-24-2022 08:55 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  Honestly, who cares about at this point? Money will bridge the divide, somewhat. Liberal Democrats and Conservative Republicans will continue to defame and slander each other until there's finally a hot civil war in this country. Once that happens, sports will be the last thing on people's mind.

Kind of a contradiction. Money will overcome everything in this political battle…then it won’t because there’s a civil war.—nothing in between?

Money can only bridge the divide for so long. The hatred the right and left have for each other is too great at this point. Plus, with the way inflation is going right now, our money will eventually become worthless. The middle ground in this country doesn't exist anymore. There may be independent voters, but they still vote for the right or left depending on the issue.

This is what happens when you let IDIOTS like Collin K have a platform in sports. Politics and sports don’t mix. The more political it becomes the more you drive fans away. Great strategy.

(06-24-2022 10:42 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Only if there is a civil war...ofcourse that is always possible

People need to stop and think when they mix sports and politics. War is the Sport of Politicians, well now that we no longer have kings and queens in charge! The ancient Olympics featured skill sets needed in combat. Preventing internal division has always been an odd mix of seeking a balance between Federalism used for commerce and defense, and State's Rights used for issues pertinent to its electorate, which included mores. When one group of States align to dictate mores to another group and restrain trade to enforce it we have a catalyst for conflict. When its nationalized it can ignite. 1837 until 1861 it simmered. In part this was true because of the speed of news and reasonable people seeking a solution to the impasse. That war needed to be fought because it was about fundamental justice.

People don't decide to go to war. They defend themselves as best they can against threats. Politicians create war by imposition of a Declaration of war. It happens when the military is used to enforce its will upon people who do not hold the same views. If war comes again inside this nation it will be because a minority of super wealthy elites have purchased the government and weaponized it against those who do not hold their views. It will be about the fundamental rights of citizens to self determination, meaning civil liberties once guaranteed and then capriciously rescinded by a government not of the people, and of Federalism superseding its balance with the states. If it happens this war will ultimately be about fundamental justice as well. I pray we never push it that far because it won't resemble the orderliness of the last one, if you can call that one orderly. The next one will be total social chaos in that it will literally be neighbor against neighbor with states backing different sides and federal forces confusing things further, and in the end only our enemies will ultimately win.

So these reckless SOB's who think they are making some gesture by weaponizing interstate commerce (which actually binds us) need to be sent to time out like the petulant children they are before their mouths overload everyone's derriere.

(06-25-2022 10:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-24-2022 10:42 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Only if there is a civil war...ofcourse that is always possible

People need to stop and think when they mix sports and politics. War is the Sport of Politicians, well now that we no longer have kings and queens in charge! The ancient Olympics featured skill sets needed in combat. Preventing internal division has always been an odd mix of seeking a balance between Federalism used for commerce and defense, and State's Rights used for issues pertinent to its electorate, which included mores. When one group of States align to dictate mores to another group and restrain trade to enforce it we have a catalyst for conflict. When its nationalized it can ignite. 1837 until 1861 it simmered. In part this was true because of the speed of news and reasonable people seeking a solution to the impasse. That war needed to be fought because it was about fundamental justice.

People don't decide to go to war. They defend themselves as best they can against threats. Politicians create war by imposition of a Declaration of war. It happens when the military is used to enforce its will upon people who do not hold the same views. If war comes again inside this nation it will be because a minority of super wealthy elites have purchased the government and weaponized it against those who do not hold their views. It will be about the fundamental rights of citizens to self determination, meaning civil liberties once guaranteed and then capriciously rescinded by a government not of the people, and of Federalism superseding its balance with the states. If it happens this war will ultimately be about fundamental justice as well. I pray we never push it that far because it won't resemble the orderliness of the last one, if you can call that one orderly. The next one will be total social chaos in that it will literally be neighbor against neighbor with states backing different sides and federal forces confusing things further, and in the end only our enemies will ultimately win.

So these reckless SOB's who think they are making some gesture by weaponizing interstate commerce (which actually binds us) need to be sent to time out like the petulant children they are [b]before their mouths overload everyone's derriere[/b].

As my HS Coach used to say Don't let your alligator mouth overload your hummingbird butt.