NBA Punishment on Sterling

[Bakert]

Banned for life from any contact of any kind with the Clippers. Barred from attending any league activities. Fining him $2.5 million, maximum amount allowed under NBA Constitution. Will be donated to groups who work to reduce discrimination.

Will urge NBA Board of Governors to force a sale of team. Owners have authority based on vote of 3/4 of owners to remove him as an owner.

Said he spoke with several owners and have their full support.

Wow, Entertainment Tonight (!!) reporter asks the tough question - you have known this guy was a racist asshole for some time, why only doing something now?

Another good question - does doing this to a person who made comments in private a "slippery slope?" I think Cuban had that one planted.

Here is a story from ESPN: http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/10857580/donald-sterling-los-angeles-clippers-owner-receives-life-ban-nba

[UKFlounder]

I like it, but have to wonder how soon Sterling's lawsuit will be filed and how long it might drag out.

[Rock Hard Ten]

During the off season, there will likely be a "run" of players refusing to return to the Clippers…."blue flu"……the value of the team will decrease a a result…..his best business decision will be to sell high while he can

If a sale occurs, it will be bad news for the Lakers as the Clippers are so superior to them now…..and, the Clippers brand will be greatly enhanced

[MickintheHam]

I like it, but have to wonder how soon Sterling's lawsuit will be filed and how long it might drag out.

I doubt if filed it will drag on too long. This guy has early signs of dementia. If he doesn't die beforehand, he's not going to have a brain when he needs to testify. From my standpoint I love to see narcissistic people get cross examined.

[bigsky]

The heartwarming relationship between a demented rich octogenarian and a young social rights activist woman has been ruined. Isn't that the real tragedy?

I know my cynicism knob is turned up to 11

[Darrell KSR]

@finebaum: Adam Silver just showed Mark Emmert the difference between a leader and a carnival barker.

[CitizenBBN]

He'll sell or the owners will IMO unanimously vote to force the sale. there are some issues around the taping of a private conversation but they will have no choice.

[UKFlounder]

But if they vote to force him to sell, that may not be allowed under the NBA Constitution (supposedly they can only force sales when an owner is behind on payments/finances, but their constitution/by-laws are private) so that may just create more litigation

Perhaps I'm overstimating the likelihood of court battles, but many of the descrptions I've seen of Sterling in recent days has included the word "litigious" and I just don't see him going quietly into that good night this time (though if his health is bad, that might change his mind.)


He'll sell or the owners will IMO unanimously vote to force the sale. there are some issues around the taping of a private conversation but they will have no choice.

[backagain]

Agree with the ruling, but this opens a major can of worms. What if Sterling said he was against homosexuals because of his religious beliefs? Could the NBA ban him then? Wouldn't that be religious discrimination? Are the personal views of people fair game for their participation in commerce?

Later...

[backagain]

Sterling doesn't appear to engage in discrimination when it comes to his team. Black coaches and players within Clippers franchise. This is a strange issue.

Later...

[UKHistory]

Elgin Baylor who worked for Sterling said he was fired on the grounds of race. Sterling is a slum lord who basically treated his minority renters horribly and did as little as he could in terms of upkeep of their facilities. That legal issue was settled in 2009.

What if Sterling said that based on his faith he didn't want his mistress to socialize with black people?


Sterling doesn't appear to engage in discrimination when it comes to his team. Black coaches and players within Clippers franchise. This is a strange issue.

Later...

[MTcatfan]

Agree with the ruling, but this opens a major can of worms. What if Sterling said he was against homosexuals because of his religious beliefs? Could the NBA ban him then? Wouldn't that be religious discrimination? Are the personal views of people fair game for their participation in commerce?

Later...

The NBA could definitely vote to ban him because they are a private entity and they make their own rules and if there is a bylaw they can cite, they can do whatever they want.

According to Deadspin who is using a lawyer fully versed in the NBA bylaws says there is a "good of the game" bylaw that Silver and the owners can use to get rid of Sterling and there isn't much he can do about it. I don't think that Silver would go for the 3/4 vote to take the team unless he had legal grounds to do so.

[MTcatfan]

Sterling doesn't appear to engage in discrimination when it comes to his team. Black coaches and players within Clippers franchise. This is a strange issue.

Later...

According to the tapes he views himself as the benevolent master enriching the lives of his black folks and they owe him their status.

[CitizenBBN]

But if they vote to force him to sell, that may not be allowed under the NBA Constitution (supposedly they can only force sales when an owner is behind on payments/finances, but their constitution/by-laws are private) so that may just create more litigation

Perhaps I'm overstimating the likelihood of court battles, but many of the descrptions I've seen of Sterling in recent days has included the word "litigious" and I just don't see him going quietly into that good night this time (though if his health is bad, that might change his mind.)

He could fight it, but if all but one owner are united about it I presume they can call their version of a constitutional convention and change the rules to whatever need be done to allow his ouster. At the end of the day he's 1/32nd member of a closely held corporation, they should be able to vote about any procedure they need to oust a member. They can't steal from him, he could sue saying he was losing value due to a forced sale, but I doubt it would hold up and most important for the NBA they will have gotten PR separation from him regardless of his actions.

Like you said we'd need to see the current agreement, which we can't, but I'd be surprised if it didn't already have the sweeping powers needed to deal with such things already in place. They may not, I could be dead wrong, but they'd have written a pretty narrow document indeed to not have the means to force an ouster for such cause nor to make changes to then force it.

Could be though, I've seen crazier things, and he certainly has the money to fight it if he chooses. But all the NBA needs is to be separated from him and fighting for his ouster in court for them to get past the PR issue, and that's what is really important to them.

Would be interesting to see what kinds of injunctions and such would be put in place during such a fight. Could they get one to stick that the team be turned over to a steward of some form? Could be very interesting.

[CitizenBBN]

According to the tapes he views himself as the benevolent master enriching the lives of his black folks and they owe him their status.

I dated a girl like that once. ;)

[backagain]

This case is more clear cut because it is race, but I can see other issues arising that could be more difficult to handle.

Later...

[Darrell KSR]

This case is more clear cut because it is race, but I can see other issues arising that could be more difficult to handle.

Later...

Pro-choice?

Anti-semitic?

Republican?

NRA-friendly?

Anti-Obama?

You raise interesting points.

[CitizenBBN]

This case is more clear cut because it is race, but I can see other issues arising that could be more difficult to handle.

Later...

As a closely held corporation the NBA should be able to make about any rules they want regarding ownership of the shares. the owners aren't employees, they are shareholders, there are far fewer legal protections for such a relationship.

If they were a public company or the owners were employees they'd have more trouble, but this case is more like the Boy Scouts barring homosexuality than it is an employee discrimination case IMO.

Even though his comments were not meant to be public, his actions have hurt the value held by his fellow shareholders, and they have recourse. If nothing else they can argue the damage done to their value, which may not happen if it were some other comment.

[CitizenBBN]

Pro-choice?

Anti-semitic?

Republican?

NRA-friendly?

Anti-Obama?

You raise interesting points.

IMO they can oust a member for any of those. They are closely held, not employees protected by discrimination law, etc.

What constrains such things isn't the law at all, but the free market. They can oust anyone who is a NRA member etc., but it's not economically wise to do so so they don't. It's very wise to oust a flaming racist right out of the Simon Legree handbook so they will.

but at law even if they don't have that much power I'd think they have a case based on economic damages. If they can prove having NRA members as owners creates harm then they could defend having that policy, but if they can't show it's causing them any economic harm maybe they can't/shouldn't be able to.

I'll be interested in how it plays out. I imagine in the dullest way possible with him agreeing to sell.

[backagain]

The key here is "private entity". The NBA can make its own rules. But it still sets the stage for some major politically correct battles.

Later...

[ukpumacat]

Agree with the ruling, but this opens a major can of worms. What if Sterling said he was against homosexuals because of his religious beliefs? Could the NBA ban him then? Wouldn't that be religious discrimination? Are the personal views of people fair game for their participation in commerce?

Later...

All of those are interesting points. However, we all know the real issue here. The NBA is steeped in African-American and Hip-Hop culture. To say what he said is simply not going to be tolerated in that league. Right. Wrong. PC or Not. It won't be tolerated.

[bigsky]

He embarrassed the other owners. Can't do that. Must be punished for that.

[Darryl]

How long was Chris Paul's suspension for demanding the Clippers hire an African American coach?

I can't recall.

Darryl

[blueboss]

How much is the Clippers franchise worth?...today?

[UKFlounder]

Here us a discussion of some possible legal aspects or ramifications. It says the Clippers may be worth between $600 million and $1 billion.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140429/donald-sterling-nba-adam-silver-clippers-lawsuit-lifetime-ban/

[Padukacat]

I think he has to sell if hes smart, but im not real keen on a guy being forced to sell because of a private convo he had where he said racist things. I think the guy is hideous, and what he said was totally crazy, and he is past the point of return unless he wants to run the franchise value to crums. But still, are we blind enough to not realize these things are said by ppl in similar positions? Im guessing his players have said similar things about him. I wouldnt want to work for the guy either but im really not surprised and in shock like most. Doesnt sound like the people close to him were either, im sure they suspected he said such things in private. I do see why nba owners and the nba must do what they can to rid themselves of this, but its odd to think they just tell the owner hes out.

[MTcatfan]

How long was Chris Paul's suspension for demanding the Clippers hire an African American coach?

I can't recall.

Darryl

That is way different than saying not to bring blacks to the games...and on a scale of 1 to 100 in the spoken racism spectrum Paul's comment was about a 2.5 and Sterling's tirade is about a 100.

[Darryl]

That is way different than saying not to bring blacks to the games...and on a scale of 1 to 100 in the spoken racism spectrum Paul's comment was about a 2.5 and Sterling's tirade is about a 100.

I think Sterling is an idiot. If a Caucasian player had made the same statement about wanting to hire only a white coach, what
would it rank in the spoken racism spectrum? I think Chris Paul showed his racism every bit as much as Sterling did. Only he did
it in a public forum.

Darryl

[Padukacat]

I guess I missed the whole Chris Paul thing? Maybe he did it to spite sterling because he knew how he was. Got a YouTube link? I'm lazy

[CitizenBBN]

I think he has to sell if hes smart, but im not real keen on a guy being forced to sell because of a private convo he had where he said racist things. I think the guy is hideous, and what he said was totally crazy, and he is past the point of return unless he wants to run the franchise value to crums. But still, are we blind enough to not realize these things are said by ppl in similar positions? Im guessing his players have said similar things about him. I wouldnt want to work for the guy either but im really not surprised and in shock like most. Doesnt sound like the people close to him were either, im sure they suspected he said such things in private. I do see why nba owners and the nba must do what they can to rid themselves of this, but its odd to think they just tell the owner hes out.

He shouldn't be forced to sell by the government or some law, I agree, but a group of partners can and should be able to force out a partner they think is bad for the business, whether that has become public knowledge or not.

At law firms and CPA firms and every other kind of such partnership or family business etc. people are forced out all the time for things that never become public including just being an ass no one wants around. They can't be robbed of their ownership value, they have to be compensated for it per pre set rules or negotiation, but that kind of thing is a necessary mechanism. Partners/owners become lazy, do poor work, terrorize employees or make things a bad work environment, they can't be locked in to a deal where the other owners/partners have no recourse.

IMO the owners could force him out for as little as him making these kinds of comments had they never come to light at all if they so chose. If you were a partner at a law firm and one of the partners was a raving racist who had not yet been exposed but who talked like this in owner's meetings and elsewhere, wouldn't you want some recourse? On both moral grounds as a person not wanting to have that kind of person as a partner as well as business grounds that he could easily be exposed?

There should be no legal requirement to force him out dictated by the government, but the other owners need a mechanism to approve who buys teams and have a recourse when an owner has become a problem for the league.

Those other owners have value they should be able to protect. A business partnership (or similar legal structure like shareholders in a closely held corporation) isn't a suicide pact. If 31/32nds of the voting shares think the other 32nd needs to go for the betterment of the entity that seems pretty fair to me. he has to be compensated fairly (in this case by getting paid for his team) but other than that he's out.

I agree with you strongly though that there shouldn't be some outside force to make that happen. It's up to the owners, but I think they'll move to force him out if they have any brains at all or care about the NBA's overall value, which they do.

[Padukacat]

So has this ever been close to happening?

[CitizenBBN]

So has this ever been close to happening?

now that I have no idea. I don't follow the machinations of the leagues very closely.

I'm confident though that over the years individual owners on teams and maybe even a majority owner have been 'encouraged' to sell out and move on. Most of these things are never so public. People "resign" or sell out to "pursue other interests" and "spend time with family" and it slips their mind to mention how much they were encouraged to do so by others. lol.

[TonyRay]

Will players that make offensive comments be treated similarly?

[anderwt]

Sterling has been a racist for awhile..lot a of good points in this thread from both sides..it's 2014 so this type of racism should not be tolerated.. I see where BA and Darryl are coming from as well..slippery slope all the way around IMO

[MTcatfan]

I think Sterling is an idiot. If a Caucasian player had made the same statement about wanting to hire only a white coach, what
would it rank in the spoken racism spectrum? I think Chris Paul showed his racism every bit as much as Sterling did. Only he did
it in a public forum.

Darryl


I'll just vehemently agree to disagree. I just can't express enough the difference between what Sterling said and stating you want your boss to be of your same race. I will also say that there is probably a ton of minorities that have experienced racism that have wished something similar with a boss, teacher, manager etc. I know I have been in similar situations with teachers before, especially when the couple of times I have been subjected to racism by someone that has had power over me.

[jazyd]

Question...mick mentioned Sterling has dementia. If any have been around someone who has dementia or early Alzheimer's you know they say and do things that make no sense

Now I realize he has had problems with his rentals and Baylor accused him of things after being fire and suing based on being fired because of age.

Could he have been set up? If he truly felt that way about blacks why would he be dating one...while still married.....if he knew what he was doing. Could he have been, in his mind, back 20 or 30 years in his past? Because people do that with this disease as I watched and listened to my mom do that for several years.

Not sure thst was his problem but it seems odd to me he would date someone of a race he hates.

And Paul is just as bad. And as someone mentioned to me today did Sprewell get banned for life when he tried to choke his white coach?

[CitizenBBN]

jazy -- I think dementia here may be a very real possibility, and as you said if you've been around it you've seen the sweetest, nicest people cuss like sailors, become violent etc. My grand aunt had it and she was the most kind lady around, she never said a harsh word. She started cussing like you can't believe, became hateful and cruel, then would go to being that same lady. She also did the time thing where she thought it was the 50s or whatever. The whole brain starts short circuiting.

I have no idea if he's ill or just is who he is, but if he's ill his comments shouldn't be held against him, they can't control them and more important a lot of research shows this isn't them being 'true' in some way, it's the brain short circuiting in ways they can't control.

[MickintheHam]

Local psychologist here suggested he showed some signs of dementia. That doesn't forgive his years as a slum lord and other past racist behaviors.

[BudCat_upthecreek]

Dealing with Full Blown Alzheimer's now, been thru a number of yrs of dementia before. It is horrible & unpredictable disease, but comment "that all he had ask was for her to not put the pictures up, did not care what she did, but have ask you to not put up pictures & advertise on social media" plus the fact she just happened to record that conversation leads me to believe she already knew what his reaction would be. Sorry but doesn't fit with dementia type conversation, seems to me she knew exactly what his reaction was going to be from previous request.

Plus past lawsuit dealing with tenants, past racists behavior. Sterling was probably set up, believe she knew exactly what button to push. But she got him so now he'll be forced to deal with it. Someone got exactly the result they wanted IMO.

[ukpumacat]

Mercy.

- Are we sure Donald Sterling has dementia? Link? I know people in the Clippers organization and have never heard this before. What I have heard for over a decade is that Sterling is a racist pig. No dementia needed. Pretty sure Rush Limbaugh started this rumor but I have not seen or heard this confirmed anywhere. Just people finding a reason to defend him. No idea why someone would want to. The guy is a pig. Everyone knows it. People have wanted him out for years, and this just finally gave them proof and public backlash enough to do it.

- Someone asked how could Sterling date a minority and be a racist. The same way slave owners screwed african-american women all the time. Incredibly racist slave owners. Openly racist ones. Simple answer: their lust overpowers their hatred.

- Chris Paul never said he wanted a black coach. Even if he did, its not the same. Not even close. But he never did. That was a bogus rumor started by the NY Daily News. No quotes. No links. Just "sources told us". Whatever. I know for a fact Chris Paul wanted Mike Malone as the Clippers coach. And he's white.

[Darryl]

Mercy.

- Are we sure Donald Sterling has dementia? Link? I know people in the Clippers organization and have never heard this before. What I have heard for over a decade is that Sterling is a racist pig. No dementia needed. Pretty sure Rush Limbaugh started this rumor but I have not seen or heard this confirmed anywhere. Just people finding a reason to defend him. No idea why someone would want to. The guy is a pig. Everyone knows it. People have wanted him out for years, and this just finally gave them proof and public backlash enough to do it.

- Someone asked how could Sterling date a minority and be a racist. The same way slave owners screwed african-american women all the time. Incredibly racist slave owners. Openly racist ones. Simple answer: their lust overpowers their hatred.

- Chris Paul never said he wanted a black coach. Even if he did, its not the same. Not even close. But he never did. That was a bogus rumor started by the NY Daily News. No quotes. No links. Just "sources told us". Whatever. I know for a fact Chris Paul wanted Mike Malone as the Clippers coach. And he's white.

Fair enough. Like I said, Sterling is an idiot.

Darryl

[Darrell KSR]

I was creeping on my 21-year old son's twitter account, and saw him tweeting to a friend.


"I'm glad we have idiots like Sterling because his actions further stigmatize racism. He's paving his own road out of relevancy."

via mobile app

[CitizenBBN]

Mercy.

- Are we sure Donald Sterling has dementia? Link? I know people in the Clippers organization and have never heard this before. What I have heard for over a decade is that Sterling is a racist pig. No dementia needed. Pretty sure Rush Limbaugh started this rumor but I have not seen or heard this confirmed anywhere. Just people finding a reason to defend him. No idea why someone would want to. The guy is a pig. Everyone knows it. People have wanted him out for years, and this just finally gave them proof and public backlash enough to do it.

- Someone asked how could Sterling date a minority and be a racist. The same way slave owners screwed african-american women all the time. Incredibly racist slave owners. Openly racist ones. Simple answer: their lust overpowers their hatred.

- Chris Paul never said he wanted a black coach. Even if he did, its not the same. Not even close. But he never did. That was a bogus rumor started by the NY Daily News. No quotes. No links. Just "sources told us". Whatever. I know for a fact Chris Paul wanted Mike Malone as the Clippers coach. And he's white.

Just talking out loud on my part, I have no idea what his deal is but would certainly not be surprised if he was just a racist pig.

I do find it a little odd to have those dating choices but he seems to see himself as some kind of benevolent guy who is helping out the "black folk", doing good works by employing them and such, very much the old school view that blacks are children and slavery is what's best for them b/c they can't get along on their own.

My guess is 90% racist pig, 10% mind snapped, maybe 95/5.

[UKHistory]

In this case dementia might be showing the true person as opposed to the fake persona he might try to convey in public.

Honestly the things he said to his girlfriend are not nearly as bad as what he said during that court case. I kind of scratch my head why these comments are so much worse than what he said during that old lawsuit. And the are all bad--don't get me wrong.

As far as getting forced out by partners in a private venture. In the public you can get fired pretty quick. In the public sector your partners can push you out. Right or wrong if a person took a stand that negatively hurt the profits of a business, that person is going to get bought out. Compensated equitably put still pushed out.


Local psychologist here suggested he showed some signs of dementia. That doesn't forgive his years as a slum lord and other past racist behaviors.

[MTcatfan]

FYI...After puma informed me that the Chris Paul wanting a black coach thing was BS, I did a little research. I put Chris Paul black coach in google, and in the first TEN pages of results there was not ONE article from a legitimate news source, that mentioned that Chris Paul ever said such a thing. Now the results are about half and half this current Sterling issue and the Chris Paul black coach things, but for the black coach thing the results are all basically blogs I have never heard on quoting "multiple NBA sources", or message boards calling Chris Paul racist saying he wanted a black coach when he never actually said such a thing.

[suncat05]

I agree that the guy needs to go. Zero doubt about that point, or why.
Here is my problem with this situation: this was a private conversation between two adults, which may have been illegally recorded. Again, this allegedly was a "private conversation", not held out in a public venue. Hence, his reasonable expectation to privacy may have been violated.
So violating his rights in this manner is okay with some of you, as long as the results are what you want?
Again, I am not taking up for this guy, and I agree he needs to go. Needed to go a long time ago. But the manner in which this all came about absolutely scares the living crap out of me. I question the idea that violating this guy's reasonable expectation to privacy is right, what the motive for doing so is, and the people and manner in which it was done.
As far as I am concerned, EVERYONE involved in this situation is reprehensible.

[jazyd]

Some things don't add up

NAACP was giving this guy an award, how does that happen to an avowed racist

His girlfriend says she recorded everything because he couldn't remember what he says or does

Baylor sues for his job claiming age discrimination and then brings out racist comments. How could Baylor work in that enviroment if the guy was that openly racist

How could Rivers take the job if Sterling was known to be such a racist

If he was so open about it, why didnt the league...which is almost all black players....do something earlier

I have a hard time seeing a guy who doesn't want black people in his arena with his girlfriend when he is sitting with her and it is obvious what she is. Puma says it's like the slave owner screwing his slave, sorry not the same because that owner did it privately and not out in the open.

It he was a racist, and he probably is to an extent, sounds like everyone turned their heads because so many were making millions but now they have to protect their imagine.

[ukpumacat]

I have a hard time seeing a guy who doesn't want black people in his arena with his girlfriend when he is sitting with her and it is obvious what she is. Puma says it's like the slave owner screwing his slave, sorry not the same because that owner did it privately and not out in the open.

It he was a racist, and he probably is to an extent, sounds like everyone turned their heads because so many were making millions but now they have to protect their imagine.

Slave owners screwed slaves in the open all of the time. It was a common practice. Also, his girlfriend does not look black. WHy that matters to him I have no idea. Chuck said it best, his view of black people was just off.

Why everyone put up with it and worked in the environment anyways is a great question. I think the answer is partly what you just said…everyone was making money. Bigger than that, I think the reason was because everyone just ignored him. He was not a very hands on owner. People (especially Doc) thought you could win in spite of him and they were right. Its not just the racist thing. He was a known terrible owner. Why would DOc, et al work for him knowing he was such a terrible owner (and that was common knowledge amongst EVRYONE)? Because they thought they could do it in spite of him.

I am well aware like everyone else that reverse racism exists. I am also well aware that everyone in the NBA and media is taking the "nose in the air" approach to this. A lot of it is for politics and public relations. However, the things the guy said are awful…and I don't think he should be defended in any way, shape or form. Throwing more mud out there (about Chris Paul, dementia, Sprewell, Elgin Baylor, etc) is a distraction to the fact that the guy is a racist…plain and simple. Why anyone would want to defend him is odd to me.

[UKHistory]

I
As far as I am concerned, EVERYONE involved in this situation is reprehensible.

Yep. Some awful people no question.

[MTcatfan]

Some things don't add up

NAACP was giving this guy an award, how does that happen to an avowed racist

His girlfriend says she recorded everything because he couldn't remember what he says or does

Baylor sues for his job claiming age discrimination and then brings out racist comments. How could Baylor work in that enviroment if the guy was that openly racist

How could Rivers take the job if Sterling was known to be such a racist

If he was so open about it, why didnt the league...which is almost all black players....do something earlier

I have a hard time seeing a guy who doesn't want black people in his arena with his girlfriend when he is sitting with her and it is obvious what she is. Puma says it's like the slave owner screwing his slave, sorry not the same because that owner did it privately and not out in the open.

It he was a racist, and he probably is to an extent, sounds like everyone turned their heads because so many were making millions but now they have to protect their imagine.

1. The NAACP thing was due to the amount of money he has donated to their group, nothing else. From what I have read over the years to help counteract his deplorable slum lord reputation he donated tons of money to the NAACP.

2. Hadn't seen that, no comment until I read a little more about it

3. I think in Baylor's case it was a job, he was getting paid nicely, and he claims that he was always trying to win DESPITE Sterling. Plus sometimes people put up with really horrible situations when self-preservation is what they need and as you know those old-timers in the NBA didn't make much money so maybe in his life at the time he had to have the GM job to make ends meet, and since he sucked so bad, he knew no one else would hire him as an executive, so he was stuck in the job until he finally was fired.

4. Again, not sure how much he knew or cared, 21 million will make you look the other way a little bit, ESPECIALLY when you get a contract that only lets the owner sign your check and the players checks. That may be why he asked for so much authority when he was hired.

5. Also Sterling really wasn't that well known of a racist imho and not really that open about it to his players...Now when you read everything that has happened in his past you can see he has been racist for a long time, but most of that happened BEFORE the 24/7 news cycle, and social media. I mean really unless you were interested in reading articles about Sterling and his racist past it was really below the normal fans radar. As a minority reports of racism always have a greater interest to me, so I happen to read a lot of articles about racism when it happens, so I was actually aware of the racist stuff over the years, but at the time it happened all that was basically reported was say an article in sports illustrated, and maybe a 500 word blurb on the AP wire. Now with the existence of TMZ, Deadspin, Twitter, Instagram, Vine, this stuff goes from 1 or 2 websites to viral in about an hour, and back when Sterling was getting caught being a racist, going viral didn't exist.

6. The slave owner thing as private by today's standards, but in a lot of cases it wasn't all that private by the standards of their days. Historically there are lots of examples of the slave owner taking slaves to bed where it was a well known "secret" amongst the slaves, family and other plantation owners.

[MTcatfan]

I agree that the guy needs to go. Zero doubt about that point, or why.
Here is my problem with this situation: this was a private conversation between two adults, which may have been illegally recorded. Again, this allegedly was a "private conversation", not held out in a public venue. Hence, his reasonable expectation to privacy may have been violated.
So violating his rights in this manner is okay with some of you, as long as the results are what you want?
Again, I am not taking up for this guy, and I agree he needs to go. Needed to go a long time ago. But the manner in which this all came about absolutely scares the living crap out of me. I question the idea that violating this guy's reasonable expectation to privacy is right, what the motive for doing so is, and the people and manner in which it was done.
As far as I am concerned, EVERYONE involved in this situation is reprehensible.


You are right everyone is reprehensible...I guess to me it just shows you that you need to always be the person you are in public AND in private. So basically never say anything in private you wouldn't say in public. I am not a perfect person, and I do say some things in private that are wrong, but I have never said anything that rivals what Sterling said, and I basically hope that my character would always show through whether I was in public or private. Sterling has always been a racist and basically skated by, so this couldn't have happened to a more deserving person, so I have no issues with it at all.

[ukpumacat]

Sterling has always been a racist and basically skated by, so this couldn't have happened to a more deserving person, so I have no issues with it at all.

Exactly. It may have been obtained illegally or otherwise, but I couldn't be happier who it happened to. Guy has been let off the hook for years.

[jazyd]

Who is defending him, I am not. I am saying a lot doesn't add up., and it shows how far people will turn their heads, regardless of color, to make millions. I have no use for the NBA or the Clippers after this. And I don't want to hear they didn't know because it was in the past. Baylor was one of the best who ever played, if rivers didnt know what Baylor was saying then he is an idiot. He knew, he wanted lots of money, he knew the Celtics were finished and he wanted a younger talented team, so he turned his head, made millions and hoped he would continue being thought of as a great coach. He is no different than a whore


Slave owners screwed slaves in the open all of the time. It was a common practice. Also, his girlfriend does not look black. WHy that matters to him I have no idea. Chuck said it best, his view of black people was just off.

Why everyone put up with it and worked in the environment anyways is a great question. I think the answer is partly what you just said…everyone was making money. Bigger than that, I think the reason was because everyone just ignored him. He was not a very hands on owner. People (especially Doc) thought you could win in spite of him and they were right. Its not just the racist thing. He was a known terrible owner. Why would DOc, et al work for him knowing he was such a terrible owner (and that was common knowledge amongst EVRYONE)? Because they thought they could do it in spite of him.

I am well aware like everyone else that reverse racism exists. I am also well aware that everyone in the NBA and media is taking the "nose in the air" approach to this. A lot of it is for politics and public relations. However, the things the guy said are awful…and I don't think he should be defended in any way, shape or form. Throwing more mud out there (about Chris Paul, dementia, Sprewell, Elgin Baylor, etc) is a distraction to the fact that the guy is a racist…plain and simple. Why anyone would want to defend him is odd to me.

[Bakert]

That doesn't forgive his years as a slum lord and other past racist behaviors.

And I think that's the point. This didn't happen to him because he said some things in private to his girlfriend, this happened because there has been a long pattern of this over the years. Somewhere I read that Silver was asked why the NBA had never acted on the prior issues and his response was that there had never been an admission of guilt on Sterling's part in the various suits brought against him. In other words, he plead out without admitting guilt so the NBA was unable to move.

As I told someone else, the FBI didn't want to get Capone on tax evasion, but it was all they had. My guess is that the NBA, or at least Silver, has wanted to get Sterling for some time. He finally gave them the cause they needed to get it done.

[JPScott]

So has this ever been close to happening?

After the point shaving allegations came to light against Alex Groza and Ralph Beard, not only were they banned for life from the NBA but they were also co-owners of the Indianapolis Olympians franchise and they were forced to sell their share immediately.

Unfortunately for them, due to the scandal the stock price had already dropped and the shares were virtually worthless.

[suncat05]

I get what you guys are saying. And I agree, the guy needed to go. We're all in agreement there.

So, if it had been some law enforcement agent that violated his right to privacy in his own home, would you guys be okay with that? But because it was his 'paramour', then it's totally okay? You can't have it both ways, at least not like that. And let's be clear here, the guy was not under any investigation for any criminal wrongdoing when this was said, at least not that I'm aware of. But because it came about through a girlfriend, even though while in the privacy of his own home, some of you are okay with it?
So, under 'some' circumstances it's okay to violate another person's reasonable expectation to privacy as long as the desired results are achieved.
What if it had been YOU? Or a member of YOUR FAMILY?
It is very apparent to me that a crime may have been committed against him. All of his reprehensible past behavior notwithstanding, some of you are okay with violating his civil rights? If so, then this is beyond sad to me. It means nothing is sacred anymore. Values have eroded to being almost meaningless.
And as I stated before, EVERYONE involved out there in this situation is just reprehensible.

The FBI didn't get Capone. It was the Treasury Department that nailed Al Capone. There wasn't anybody smart enough in the FBI at that time that could do it.

[CitizenBBN]

So violating his rights in this manner is okay with some of you, as long as the results are what you want?


Absolutely not, and if they were violated he may have recourse.

I'll put my views in law enforcement terms, in large part bc it is the best example of this issue IMO. It's the Exclusionary Rule. Officer finds evidence of a crime but is ruled to have done so illegally, in the courts that evidence is then excluded, potentially letting the crime go unpunished.

In my ideal world the evidence is in, b/c the two issues are separable. The fact that the warrant wasnt' spelled right doesn't let someone get away with a crime. the evidence is used, the crime is prosecuted. the second act, the violation of his rights, is separately actionable against the city/state/whoever and he is due some kind of damages for it, but the "damages" he gets is monetary and not that he gets to avoid prosecution for the robbery or murder or whatever.

Same here. He may have some kind of action against the person for the damage done, but you can't put the genie back in the bottle so it's impractical to say he gets a pass for being a flaming racist b/c we found out he was due to this covert and maybe illegal act.

It's not ideal, nothing is in this area of law, but the real economic damages done to the NBA and the owners and all those who earn a living off the Clippers cannot be washed away by saying he was recorded illegally, thus the fact that it was done can't have bearing on their actions to protect their interests.

I will also add that I don't know if he was wronged or not in that I don't know Cali law on private taping of conversations. If it was a government entity he has a whale of a case, but it's a matter of state law what crime was committed if any in this case.

I don't like that his privacy was violated, but the fact that it was doesn't IMO restrain his partners in any way, it should come back on the person who violated his rights and she ay owe more money than she'll ever be able to pay.

[suncat05]

Good points, some of which I was going to bring up in further discussion, but you arrived there first.

I think we all pretty much agree on the result, but the "getting there" angle is going in about five different directions.

[MickintheHam]

I get what you guys are saying. And I agree, the guy needed to go. We're all in agreement there.

So, if it had been some law enforcement agent that violated his right to privacy in his own home, would you guys be okay with that? But because it was his 'paramour', then it's totally okay? You can't have it both ways, at least not like that. And let's be clear here, the guy was not under any investigation for any criminal wrongdoing when this was said, at least not that I'm aware of. But because it came about through a girlfriend, even though while in the privacy of his own home, some of you are okay with it?
So, under 'some' circumstances it's okay to violate another person's reasonable expectation to privacy as long as the desired results are achieved.
What if it had been YOU? Or a member of YOUR FAMILY?
It is very apparent to me that a crime may have been committed against him. All of his reprehensible past behavior notwithstanding, some of you are okay with violating his civil rights? If so, then this is beyond sad to me. It means nothing is sacred anymore. Values have eroded to being almost meaningless.
And as I stated before, EVERYONE involved out there in this situation is just reprehensible.

The FBI didn't get Capone. It was the Treasury Department that nailed Al Capone. There wasn't anybody smart enough in the FBI at that time that could do it.

I have been involved in lawsuits where I was unknowingly taped. It was one of my co-plaintiffs. I didn't like it at first. But, in the end, justice was served.

[UKHistory]

I don't what the California laws are regarding taping a person without consent. Sterling is free to sue the woman, if it is illegal in California, for all she has--or for what he has already given her.

That woman is a dead beat gold digger and if she can be sued and or found guilty in a court of law by all means that should happen.

I certainly have concern over law enforcement illegally tapping phones, sifting through garbage etc.

The difference is that if the police illegally wire tap you and then try to use that information your rights kick in. In this case no legal charges are going to be filed against Sterling so the issue of whether his statements are admissable or could be used to incriminate himself don't apply.

This woman is a gold digger and horrible person. He is horrible. There are not any heroes here. And frankly Sterling is known as a racist. Why this story got the traction it did and what he did in 2009 did not set off a firestorm is unclear.

Slow news day? This happened during NBA playoffs instead of the world series.

[ukpumacat]

I don't what the California laws are regarding taping a person without consent. Sterling is free to sue the woman, if it is illegal in California, for all she has--or for what he has already given her.


It is illegal in California.

[CitizenBBN]

It is illegal in California.

So the remedy here is for her to be prosecuted criminally as well as sued civilly for her actions.

[UKHistory]

Criminal prosecution could get more satifaction than any civil suit for Sterling. A jury should convict--but it is California. The woman has nothing and is suing him for close to 2 million.


So the remedy here is for her to be prosecuted criminally as well as sued civilly for her actions.

[Doc]

My opinion is and always has been that there are racist folk. There always will be racist folk. I rather know who the racist folk were so I'm glad that this comes out. I'd prefer that if a business didn't want to serve blacks or gays or women etc.. that they put out a sign saying they did so I could take my business elsewhere. I believe in the world today that if that happened those businesses would soon feel the economic pinch. IMO I would have loved to see Silver declare every single player and employee of the Clipper a free agent at the end of the year if they wanted to be. A free agent w/o compensation to the club, if the player or employee wants to stay they can but if not they are free to go. IMO that hurt where it should. Chris Paul or Blake Griffin don't want to play for the racist pig, great. Go play for somebody else and Sterling gets nothing in return. Kills the value of the team so HE losses. Instead Sterling pays fine of 2.5 million (which is chicken feed for a billionaire), forced to sell the team for a huge profit for what he paid (so he makes millions) OR sells/gives to his wife/daughter (and still runs it --wink wink) OR spends years in litigation because he is an old crotchy SOB lawyer and thats what he likes doing.

[MTcatfan]

Absolutely not, and if they were violated he may have recourse.

I'll put my views in law enforcement terms, in large part bc it is the best example of this issue IMO. It's the Exclusionary Rule. Officer finds evidence of a crime but is ruled to have done so illegally, in the courts that evidence is then excluded, potentially letting the crime go unpunished.

In my ideal world the evidence is in, b/c the two issues are separable. The fact that the warrant wasnt' spelled right doesn't let someone get away with a crime. the evidence is used, the crime is prosecuted. the second act, the violation of his rights, is separately actionable against the city/state/whoever and he is due some kind of damages for it, but the "damages" he gets is monetary and not that he gets to avoid prosecution for the robbery or murder or whatever.

Same here. He may have some kind of action against the person for the damage done, but you can't put the genie back in the bottle so it's impractical to say he gets a pass for being a flaming racist b/c we found out he was due to this covert and maybe illegal act.

It's not ideal, nothing is in this area of law, but the real economic damages done to the NBA and the owners and all those who earn a living off the Clippers cannot be washed away by saying he was recorded illegally, thus the fact that it was done can't have bearing on their actions to protect their interests.

I will also add that I don't know if he was wronged or not in that I don't know Cali law on private taping of conversations. If it was a government entity he has a whale of a case, but it's a matter of state law what crime was committed if any in this case.

I don't like that his privacy was violated, but the fact that it was doesn't IMO restrain his partners in any way, it should come back on the person who violated his rights and she ay owe more money than she'll ever be able to pay.



Perfect take on the whole record conversation thing...that is my opinion stated better than I stated.


Also I give Doc a +1 on his comment!

[blueboss]

Criminal prosecution could get more satifaction than any civil suit for Sterling. A jury should convict--but it is California. The woman has nothing and is suing him for close to 2 million.

The wife is sueing the girlfriend for a couple million, Ole Don gave her three or four cars, a boat, and at least one dwelling. The wife says Ole don used their money for the purchases and she wants her half back.

[blueboss]

My opinion is and always has been that there are racist folk. There always will be racist folk. I rather know who the racist folk were so I'm glad that this comes out. I'd prefer that if a business didn't want to serve blacks or gays or women etc.. that they put out a sign saying they did so I could take my business elsewhere. I believe in the world today that if that happened those businesses would soon feel the economic pinch. IMO I would have loved to see Silver declare every single player and employee of the Clipper a free agent at the end of the year if they wanted to be. A free agent w/o compensation to the club, if the player or employee wants to stay they can but if not they are free to go. IMO that hurt where it should. Chris Paul or Blake Griffin don't want to play for the racist pig, great. Go play for somebody else and Sterling gets nothing in return. Kills the value of the team so HE losses. Instead Sterling pays fine of 2.5 million (which is chicken feed for a billionaire), forced to sell the team for a huge profit for what he paid (so he makes millions) OR sells/gives to his wife/daughter (and still runs it --wink wink) OR spends years in litigation because he is an old crotchy SOB lawyer and thats what he likes doing.

I think I read where he paid 12.5 million for the team back in the 80's and it's worth close to a billion. If he sold it for a billion and then paid the roughly 390 million in capital gains taxes he still clears over 550 million... not a bad day, but of course that has to suck knowing you just had to pay close to 400 million in taxes.

the 2.5 million fine is a joke, however they said the fine money would be donated to some civil rights groups to help the fight against racism

[Doc]

the 2.5 million fine is a joke, however they said the fine money would be donated to some civil rights groups to help the fight against racism

yep but its the maximum fine they can levy. That's why IMO its better to gut the value of the team by liquidating its assets (the players) thru free agency. Where is the value of any team? Its the players and the brand. Well if the league voids the contracts it gives the players what they want (I can't see any player wanting to play for Sterling) and devalues the team far greater than $2.5 million.

[TonyRay]

Does this NBA owner get in trouble over this?

3447

[BudCat_upthecreek]

Mercy.

- Are we sure Donald Sterling has dementia? Link? I know people in the Clippers organization and have never heard this before. What I have heard for over a decade is that Sterling is a racist pig. No dementia needed. Pretty sure Rush Limbaugh started this rumor but I have not seen or heard this confirmed anywhere. Just people finding a reason to defend him. No idea why someone would want to. The guy is a pig. Everyone knows it. People have wanted him out for years, and this just finally gave them proof and public backlash enough to do it.

- Someone asked how could Sterling date a minority and be a racist. The same way slave owners screwed african-american women all the time. Incredibly racist slave owners. Openly racist ones. Simple answer: their lust overpowers their hatred.

- Chris Paul never said he wanted a black coach. Even if he did, its not the same. Not even close. But he never did. That was a bogus rumor started by the NY Daily News. No quotes. No links. Just "sources told us". Whatever. I know for a fact Chris Paul wanted Mike Malone as the Clippers coach. And he's white.

Again couldn't agree more.Great Summation!!!! Woman SCORNED, she knew he was cutting her off, also knew exactly what button to push & pushed it while taping conversation. Got what she wanted & he got what he deserved, no place in NBA for Sterling....dementia, LOL.

IMO Chris Paul has been a Gentlemen & Team Leader during this B/S.

Bad deal the way it went down(due to Privacy thing) but end result getting him out of NBA right thing. Best thing for game.

[jazyd]

Bud, he should have been gone before but the league turned their greedy heads. Now the have to take action, must protect the imagine

Now, here is a problem. Certain media are already targeting the owner of the Magic. Why? Nbecause he doesn't believe in gay marriage which is his right and based on his are private beliefs beliefs. Now any conservative who has dared express their belief as an owner will be targeted by the liberal media. Will the league stand up to the media? As suncat said, are private conversations or beliefs no longer sacred? Will someone try to catch black players saying something in private thst will get them banned or suspended?

The league has shown what they are as has a Rivers and many others, money is what really matters until something like this blows up in their holier than thou face

QUOTE=BudCat_upthecreek;187896]Again couldn't agree more.Great Summation!!!! Woman SCORNED, she knew he was cutting her off, also knew exactly what button to push & pushed it while taping conversation. Got what she wanted & he got what he deserved, no place in NBA for Sterling....dementia, LOL.

IMO Chris Paul has been a Gentlemen & Team Leader during this B/S.

Bad deal the way it went down(due to Privacy thing) but end result getting him out of NBA right thing. Best thing for game.[/QUOTE]

[MTcatfan]

Who is targeting the Magic owner? I see a couple of articles from people speculating, and wondering about "pandoras box" but in a gay marriage magic owner google search, I did not see one article actually calling for the NBA to do anything about him.

That said I would think that no one would be kicked out for their religious/political views as long as they stay respecful. I mean really I am sure that the Magic owner isn't the only owner opposed to gay marriage and that is their right. The only time there would probably be an issue would be if say he is taped calling gays the "f" word or the "q" word, and saying "hateful" things about gays. Being opposed to gay marriage is not in of itself "hateful", but it can go over the top if not careful.

Will some people protest him, will some people scream and yell, like some do for Michael Jordan, but Michael Jordan is not being run out of the league due to all of Nike's sweat shops, so I don't think opposing gay marriage is going to get you run out of the NBA.

Now that doesn't mean that the NBA itself may tell him to shut up if he gets to vocal since the NBA has gay fans, but unless he got really stupid I can't imagine there would ever be the 3/4ths of the owner vote to kick an owner out over opposition to gay marriage, whereas in the Sterling thing the vote is going to be 100% imho.

[TonyRay]

Who is targeting the Magic owner? I see a couple of articles from people speculating, and wondering about "pandoras box" but in a gay marriage magic owner google search, I did not see one article actually calling for the NBA to do anything about him.

That said I would think that no one would be kicked out for their religious/political views as long as they stay respecful. I mean really I am sure that the Magic owner isn't the only owner opposed to gay marriage and that is their right. The only time there would probably be an issue would be if say he is taped calling gays the "f" word or the "q" word, and saying "hateful" things about gays. Being opposed to gay marriage is not in of itself "hateful", but it can go over the top if not careful.

Will some people protest him, will some people scream and yell, like some do for Michael Jordan, but Michael Jordan is not being run out of the league due to all of Nike's sweat shops, so I don't think opposing gay marriage is going to get you run out of the NBA.

Now that doesn't mean that the NBA itself may tell him to shut up if he gets to vocal since the NBA has gay fans, but unless he got really stupid I can't imagine there would ever be the 3/4ths of the owner vote to kick an owner out over opposition to gay marriage, whereas in the Sterling thing the vote is going to be 100% imho.

, Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich resigned under pressure after gay rights activists demanded that he step down or recant his support of traditional marriage laws. Eich donated $1,000 to support Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that amended the state's constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. "I don't want to talk about my personal beliefs because I kept them out of Mozilla all these 15 years we've been going,” Eich told The Guardian. “I don't believe they're relevant.” That wasn't an option. "CEO Brendan Eich should make an unequivocal statement of support for marriage equality," a Credoaction petition signed by almost 75,000 people said, per The Inquirer. "If he cannot, he should resign. And if he will not, the board should fire him immediately." When asked if his beliefs about marriage should constitute a firing offense the way racism or sexism does, Eich argued that these religious beliefs — and beliefs popular as of 2008 — should not be used as a basis for dismissal. "I don't believe that's true, on the basis of what's permissible to support or vote on in 2008," he told CNET. "It's still permissible. Beliefs that are protected, that include political and religious speech, are generally not something that can be held against even a CEO..."

[MTcatfan]

, Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich resigned under pressure after gay rights activists demanded that he step down or recant his support of traditional marriage laws. Eich donated $1,000 to support Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that amended the state's constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. "I don't want to talk about my personal beliefs because I kept them out of Mozilla all these 15 years we've been going,” Eich told The Guardian. “I don't believe they're relevant.” That wasn't an option. "CEO Brendan Eich should make an unequivocal statement of support for marriage equality," a Credoaction petition signed by almost 75,000 people said, per The Inquirer. "If he cannot, he should resign. And if he will not, the board should fire him immediately." When asked if his beliefs about marriage should constitute a firing offense the way racism or sexism does, Eich argued that these religious beliefs — and beliefs popular as of 2008 — should not be used as a basis for dismissal. "I don't believe that's true, on the basis of what's permissible to support or vote on in 2008," he told CNET. "It's still permissible. Beliefs that are protected, that include political and religious speech, are generally not something that can be held against even a CEO..."

That is a different situation, jazy brought up the Magic owner, not Eich. Eich is an appointed head of a for-profit corporation, not the owner of a closely held corporation that is part of an organized sports league, of which the corporation is a voting member. So to me that is a key difference, as I said there is not way there would ever be a 3/4ths majority to kick out an owner for supporting something he is allowed to support, gay marriage is not anything close to racism in terms of historical outrage. Plus to be blunt the owners had no choice on Sterling as what 95% of their players are black and were outraged over Sterling, and heck even if the Magic owner is taped calling gays the "f" word and the "q" word, there are only a handful of gay players so the owners would not be compelled to vote out an anti-gay owner.

While I don't agree Eich should have been targeted by activist groups, even though I agree with gay marriage, that is the peril of being the CEO of a for-profit, if the Board decides that you are going to hurt the bottomline more than help it you are out as the CEO, and while Eich intially had the support of the Board of Mozilla, something tells me there were enough CUSTOMERS(the only ones that mattered to Mozilla) wanting him gone, that when he "resigned" he had lost the Board and would have been fired if he didn't resign. I just don't believe there would ever be enough outrage with the NBA's customers to lead to a team owners ousters over gay marriage, which leads into what I say next.


This is the fallacy of the "slippery slope" argument in regards to Sterling, there is no issue in the country that would unite the players, fans and owners in a way like a racist owner would. So there is no slippery slope, as you would never see the 3 entities that came together in the Sterling case ever come together for any other issue. Heck there are probably tons of anti-gay marriage players(heck Blake Griffin is a young earther for petes sake), there are definitely tons of NBA fans that are anti-gay marriage, and I would bet at least 50% of NBA owners are anti-gay marriage. The right likes to be hysterical when stuff like Sterling or Cliven Bundy happen, but in reality the country is moderate overall and the slippery slope just never really happens.


I mean come on, if the slippery slope actually existed we would not have an NFL team named for 1 of 2 phrases that would make me punch you in the face if you called me it, but you can't even get 10% of the outrage mustered that was mustered in the Sterling case, mustered to eliminate that blatently racist phrase from the team name. Look folks "redskin" is the "n" word for Native Americans, and if you want to be beaten nearly to death or to death, please walk into any type of Indian Reservation establishment and holler "redskin" and see what Natives feel about that name. Despite what some want you to believe "redskin" is, was and always will be a completely 100% racist word, and while I think there are way more important issues for Natives today, it will be a happy day for me when and if that name is removed from the NFL.

btw, the other racist name that will get you punched by me is the phrase "prairie n word"...

[jazyd]

MT, I thought you wre a strong Catholic as in the past we have had several discussions about the faith and I also thought, wrongly I guess, you were a firm believer in the Bible and teaches of the faith. Guessed wrong since you are a believer in gay marriage. Guess you only think the part you want to believe is relevant and everything else in that little book and the teachings of the Catholic faith is very flawed in your opinion.

[MTcatfan]

MT, I thought you wre a strong Catholic as in the past we have had several discussions about the faith and I also thought, wrongly I guess, you were a firm believer in the Bible and teaches of the faith. Guessed wrong since you are a believer in gay marriage. Guess you only think the part you want to believe is relevant and everything else in that little book and the teachings of the Catholic faith is very flawed in your opinion.


I am Catholic and I follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, and I am also a Catholic raised person who went to Catholic school 10 out of 12 years of school. That makes me a huge defender of the Catholic Church when I feel that it is being wronged, that does not make me a person who believes in everything that the Catholic Church believes in. While I believe in the Bible I put the Gospels in the top position since it is Christ that makes us CHRISTians, and Jesus never said anything about gay marriage, and I am of the belief a lot of what he said would at least tell the faithful it is not their place to judge.

I also think that gay marriage is a non-religious issue, as it is ONLY religion that needs to define marriage between a man and woman, and almost all defenses of not allowing it are religious. I have many reasons as to why I support gay marriage none of which I need to justify with you, and one of them is I am a believer in the separation of church and state, and since there is really no non-religious reason to not allow it, I support gay marriage. There is no need to not allow a portion of our country that has a right to exist, to not be able to file taxes together, inherit property from each other without penalty, make monetary and health decisions for their partner, and adopt children together. Do church's need to support it, nope, do they need to perform gay marriage services, nope, but the GOVERNMENT should allow it to happen in a civil manner.




Lastly, how DARE you question my faith, that is not your place, that is God's place, and I am comfortable with my faith and my belief. Also this is probably not the place to debate gay marriage, I was just addressing Tony's "slippery slope" analogy more than I was desiring to debate gay marriage as an issue. This was just meant to be a discussion of whether or not an owner would get a team taken away by opposing gay marriage. Also I ask again who is wanting the team to be removed from the Magic owner? My search of gay marriage Magic owner on Google was just basically "slippery slope" discussions or wondering if this could happen.

[TonyRay]

One, the mozilla CEO was targeted for giving a gift of $1000 to support the proposition at the same time Obama was against gay marriage. I don't like the fact that groups can put pressure on ones that someone targets that by all accounts had not discriminated against anyone in his business practices. They just went down a list of donors and then made him a target.
Second, I don't like how Sterlings personal conversation at his home was leaked out or the manner in which this woman trapped him into saying more and more. The guy has terrible views but at the same time he was wronged. The NBA made this decision and if I view his past business practices it is hard for me to feel sorry for him.
Third, as for my belief as a Catholic it is hard for me not to use my faith definition of marriage when the gay marriage subject comes up. I view my marriage as a holy ceremony that God gave us as the uniting of a man and a woman and that's why I married in the church and not in the courthouse. It's hard for me to separate that definition what some want to redefine it as. I am not judging gays and don't deny that there should be legal rights to them but I just don't see it as a marriage but rather a civil union.

[ukpumacat]

MT, I thought you wre a strong Catholic as in the past we have had several discussions about the faith and I also thought, wrongly I guess, you were a firm believer in the Bible and teaches of the faith. Guessed wrong since you are a believer in gay marriage. Guess you only think the part you want to believe is relevant and everything else in that little book and the teachings of the Catholic faith is very flawed in your opinion.

Oh. My. Word.

[MTcatfan]

Oh. My. Word.

Yeah...