QUALIFING out of STATE......HOW DID THEY DO

[coolstuff]

For those of you that do not know the meaning of the "shim" reference

Y'all can flame me, call me names, question my parenthood, whatever.....

But THAT creeps ME out!

[Skarp]

That being said, I strongly disagree on every level with efforts to deny same sex marriage. I have yet to hear a reason that has the tiniest merit. Because of what the Bible says? Someone please explain to me why I have never heard, in 50 years, of any desire to have adultery made a criminal act. Is that not in the Bible as well. Folks talk of some "harm" that same sex marriage between people they will never even see, much less have contact with, will have on families. Worried about harm to families? How many families are affected directly and profoundly by adultery, yet all the talk and desire and effort to use religious belief as a basis for enacting a law focuses on something that folks typically have no knowledge of as far as particular instances. I'm sure folks will assume that adultery has played some huge role in my life and that is the reason I feel this way. Nope. Never experienced it with my parents, my wife of 19 years or even girlfriends prior to being married. I have seen it break up a number of families we have known through sports over the years. Religious folks have the same right to lobby for change as anyone else. I just wonder about their choice if they are truly concerned about "the family."

A couple of thoughts on that (since there may be one or two people on here that I haven't already thoroughly pissed off).

1) The question isn't whether there exist substantial and satisfactory reasons to oppose gay marriage (although there arguably do). Marriage is a state-sanctioned, legal arrangement that conveys certain rights and benefits (and necessarily imposes corresponding obligations). So the question is whether gay marriage is an arrangement that the state should recognize a legitimate interest in incentivizing. The government doesn't (or at least shouldn't) go around creating rights and imposing obligations absent good and legitimate reasons for doing so (and "I want it" doesn't qualify).

Historically, and accurately, the man/woman marital relationship has been recognized as promoting societal stability--primarily via raising subsequent productive and socially responsible generations, etc. These are legitimate interests of the state.

Gay marriage proponents argue in terms of their rights and their wants, as if gays who wish to marry are being deprived of something they are fundmentally entitled to. They don't (or at least far less frequently) argue in terms of how the society at large will benefit from the change in law they are advocating.

To illustrate the mindset, I have (well, had) a gay friend who was incensed that a particular faith-based adoption agency refused to adopt kids into same-sex households. She said that it was discriminatory. But she, like gay marriage advocates, missed the point entirely, because she was looking at the issue through the lens of her wants and her sense of entitlement, and not through the lens of evaluating the purpose of adoption, and carefully considering which interests should control (namely, the kids' interests). When I pointed that out, she says "studies show that kids are just as well adjusted in gay households, blah, blah, blah." And I said studies show whatever their advocates want them to show, but I don't have to look at studies, because I have it directly and repeatedly from her own mouth that gays are oppressed, gays get a raw deal, gays suffer violence at the hands of bigots, etc., and she cannot now claim that there is no difference in quality of environment in the context of adoption. (She had no response for that, other than to stop going to lunch with me).

2) "Harm" is necessarily a subjective determination. Many consider harm to include injury to the moral fiber of the community...and religious persons necessarily define morality according to the tenets of their faith. Since homosexuality is proscribed as sinful and harmful by most religions, it is fairly predictable that the state sanctioning of gay marriage would be opposed by religious persons on the grounds that it would cause harm to the community. Your definition of harm may differ, but it carries no more weight than theirs.

Now I don't really have an opinion about whether gay marriage would be harmful, but I know I've heard about a million arguments in my life about how this or that conduct is such a little thing, or how showing this or that on television is only slightly more than what is already allowed, and therefore is essentially harmless. And those arguments have pretty much always prevailed. So it's been death by a thousand cuts, with the result being that our society doesn't look anything like it did even 20 years ago in terms of what conduct is tolerated and what our kids are exposed to daily on even basic television, etc. So when conservatives or religious persons scream bloody murder at some apparently small and insignificant matter that is certainly "harmless," it is that avalanche of very harmful (in their opinion) change that they are opposing.

3) Most religious groups do oppose adultery, and many states (particularly southern states) had laws against adultery on the books for most of their history. Those were overturned by 9 people in Washington, however, so the battle has moved on. Again, I'm not saying that I support such a law, but I do think communities should be free to determine for themselves what is harmful (they, after all, have to live with the outcomes of those determinations...the Supreme Court doesn't).

4) California teams did pretty well. There...my post is relevant to the topic.

[Fasterpitch]

Just a little long winded...................

[Skarp]

Just a little long winded...................

Ancient Chinese Proverb: better long on wind than short on brain.

But I suppose neither is better yet...good for me the former is correctable.

[Sam]

Nobody has a right to be married....you have the ability to be married....if someone else wishes to marry you.....

I think the gays should have the ability to be married and be just as miserable as the rest of us. Let them get married...go through custody battles....legally seperate their assets....make them accountable for their actions....no problem.

[anonlooker]

1 LADY MAGIC
2 SOUTHERN FORCE
3 FIRECRACKERS
4 ST LOUIS CHAOS-FURRER
5 AZ STORM
5 OC BATBUSTER
7 NW BLAZE
7 WASHINGTON SIDEWIDERS
9 ORLANDO NO FEAR BLACK
9 TEAM FLORIDA
9 SHAMROCKS
9 EXTREME 91
13 MIDWEST LAKERS
13 RR GOLD
13 EAST COBB COBRAS
13 ARK OREGON LEGACY
17 SAN DIEGO LEGACY BLACK
17 GOLD COAST HURRICANES
17 TN EXPLOSION
17 EUGENE THUNDER

16 out of the Top 20, not from Cali. ( Not sure about Extreme 91)

It should be noted that your list is for 16U, and that many girls in California who could be playing 16U are actually playing up 18 and 18G. And many of those have already verballed and have their college deals in place.

So if you were to bring all those girls back into 16U for nationals, I can assure you CA teams would fare much better.

[Fasterpitch]

WOW.....A EXCUSE FOR EVERYTHING............


IF THIS........IF THAT. IF they were not in KY then it does not count.



WOW...it never ends and it keeps getting funnier.....

[anonlooker]

I suppose we could always just go back and re-examine the title of the thread and blame it on the fact that CA teams qualify in state, but have to go out of state to qualif.

[Skarp]

WOW.....A EXCUSE FOR EVERYTHING............


IF THIS........IF THAT. IF they were not in KY then it does not count.



WOW...it never ends and it keeps getting funnier.....

Most things in KY don't count. What's your point? No seriously...what in the hell are you trying to prove in this thread?

16U is a nothing division in California. Everyone knows that (except, apparently, you). All the top players and everyone else good enough move directly from 14 to 18 and 18g. Not an excuse...just a fact. Deal with it.

[anonlooker]

Let's see FP, as a parent, would you prefer your DD play in 16U Nationals KY last week, or in OKC at 18G Nationals this week, with scholarship already in hand?

And yes, this is a dummy test.