People have every right to criticize Booth's views and comments.
It may or may not be allowed in this forum, but it's certainly allowed in Canada and the US. Ideas should be discussed, and sometimes challenged.
People have the right to respectfully criticize Booth's views and comments. Unfortunately there are a lot of people who have take to criticize him disrespectfully, and a mob-mentality of sorts has formed.
I also disagree with sports columnists like Botch attacking an athlete's personal views on issues outside of sports by turning them into so-called 'sports' stories. It's not significant enough to be covered in the politics section (thank God ) and it has nothing to do with sports, yet sports reporters cover it because it's controversial and it increases readership. Just like I don't want to read political columns about Stephen Harper playing rec hockey every Tuesday night, I don't want to read sports columns about athletes expressing non-sports related positions on twitter.
This kind of thing is PRECISELY why the NHL puts pressure on its players to answer with stock, boring, we-gave-110%-out-there-tonight answers when talking to the media.
But with twitter, it's a whole new world out there for celebrities now, and they can (and clearly will) put their foot in it on a regular basis, stating all kinds of things that, for the most part, divide their fanbase. They say things that make it hard for us to cheer for them, because we learn who they are as people.
It can, of course, go the other way. They can say things that make them nearer and dearer to us. Draw them closer to fans. Make us realize that we identify with them as people. See: Luongo in recent months.
That's the good and the bad of it, and it's interesting that Canucks fans get to see both ends at the same time. Say what you will about how boring it has been to not have any hockey to talk about, but it's been an interesting time to be a Canucks fan during the lockout. Much moreso than for other teams.
That about sums up my opinion in regards to Booth. He is more than welcome to his beliefs, and needn't be subjected to death threats or whatever else the crazies come up with. But he will see rightful contempt for his opinion as they infringe of the beliefs and choices of others. If he cannot stomach such opposition than kindly keep your mouth shut. He ought to realize this is Canada and we are more volatile to things like homophobic rhetoric.
Big difference between the two. Dan Hamhuis never brings it up in any interviews, or has a twitter account voicing his views.
Dan Hamhuis is a god.
Nice to see a fellow gunner on here.
Booth is entitled to speak his mind. He should not be attacked for his views unless he is attacking other people. Even then....be the bigger person. Leave him alone.
Booth is entitled to speak his mind. He should not be attacked for his views unless he is attacking other people. Even then....be the bigger person. Leave him alone.
"Be the bigger person" is a cop out. If you say or post something controversial you deserve whatever opposition derives as a result. You do not get to make hand wave comments about a school shooting on a public forum and not expect retaliation. Were he concerned, then those comments should have remained private.
I should preface this by adding "within reason." As previously stated, death threats and the like do not qualify.
Last edited by Bourne Endeavor: 01-03-2013 at 10:51 AM.
Reason: Clairfying
I don't hunt but I have no problems with hunting for food, but nobody eats bear. People who hunt just for the trophy are people I have a tough time respecting, especially when they brag about it as if it is some great feat.
Really how hard is it to kill a bear? In all the places I have lived from the north shore to the island I have had at least a dozen bears in my back yard. Blam! look a new rug. Whoopdiedoo.
Totally thought this was about him being in every trade for a super star winger (Kovalchuk, Perry, etc), which I'm fine with if we're getting a super star winger, or even about being buy out fodder.
Pretty ****** our own boosters are falling on praying and shooting to demonize someone though. Neither are my thing, at least not until the hunted animal is sausage, but these people are probably the same time of people who over react like crazy when someone says something anti-Muslim (or Sikh, or anti-semetic, or anti-, I dunno, Buddhist) or slightly xenophobic.
That about sums up my opinion in regards to Booth. He is more than welcome to his beliefs, and needn't be subjected to death threats or whatever else the crazies come up with. But he will see rightful contempt for his opinion as they infringe of the beliefs and choices of others. If he cannot stomach such opposition than kindly keep your mouth shut. He ought to realize this is Canada and we are more volatile to things like homophobic rhetoric.
actually found the article excellent. Booth has every right to say what he said - we live in a society where free expression is condoned, and believe it helps make for a better society. The only things you can't say are those advocating hate crimes and abuse of children for the most part.
THAT SAID - he is a public figure and what he said gets more attention (this whole thread for example) and if you want to express yourself publically you better expect it to be discussed publically. He seems like a nice guy, but I hate brain dead over the top Christians as much as anyone. And he has the right to say that bringing back prayer to schools might have stopped this - but I have right to respond, (as I have on 4 or 5 other non-hockey sites and newspapers) and say how much that belief system offends me and is systemic and insidious in the US, where I happen to live.
) and it has nothing to do with sports, yet sports reporters cover it because it's controversial and it increases readership. Just like I don't want to read political columns about Stephen Harper playing rec hockey every Tuesday night, I don't want to read sports columns about athletes expressing non-sports related positions on twitter.
