OT: Broncos a contender?

Submitted by robbyt003 on

Skip Bayless is probably still crying tears of joy after that 80 yard TD pass in overtime vs the Steelers.  Tebow threw 2 td passes and for over 300 yards (80 on one play). Was it the Tim Tebow magic or the Steelers injuries that decided this game?  I can't imagine the Broncos keeping up with the Patriots, but the Patriots defense just may be THAT bad to let it happen.

Doc Brown

January 9th, 2012 at 5:56 AM ^

"I wish people would stop acting so gay in public..."

Not even the same thing, One is a comment on Tebow's behavior and that weak attempt is a comment one's sexual preference, which is not a behavior. I am going to stop right here because I have a feeling we are going to into a innate trait vs. choice argument.

glewe

January 9th, 2012 at 12:10 PM ^

Yes, sexual preference is a behavior. Pretty much anything done by a human being is a behavior. The difference here is that Tebow is obnoxious about his professions. Gay people, as a "people," are not. Certain individuals, perhaps. Not the entire group.

There will always be a level of expression deemed appropriate on a public level.

Discussion closed.

glewe

January 12th, 2012 at 12:09 PM ^

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know what I said would cause you or others to cease thinking.

Mostly the way he uses his position to promote his religion. The especially public promotion of his religion. Nobody is trying to watch Pat Roberts when they turn on the Broncos game. I'm not keen on especially public homosexuality, either. Or especially public heterosexuality. Or especially public sexuality in general, come to think of it.

And it returns to what I was saying before. There will always be a degree of public behavior deemed socially permissible.

Doc Brown

January 10th, 2012 at 12:37 PM ^

How am I a bigot for not buying the fairy tale that one's sexuality can change? I am sure for not having faith and requiring actual physical proof before I believe any line of thinking. I equate the line of thinking that sexuality can change along with the belief the earth is flat and humans did not impact global climate change. I find the statement that sexuality is a choice to be very ignorant. Funny how this line is only pushe by evangelical Christians that want to butt into other people's personal lives. Live and let live, how hard is that. I am amazed someone called 10 year supporter and volunteer for the human rights campaign a bigot. Thanks for taking my posts out of context. Learn some fricken reading comprehension. FYI, non-Chrisitians express bigotry and religious slurs almost on a daily basis from Evangelical Christians. I find it laughable when the majority spiritual belief in America cries of bigotry and intolerance when their figureheads in the press bash those of the GLBT and non-Christian communities on an almost daily basis.

SWFLWolverine

January 11th, 2012 at 10:56 PM ^

Bigot-one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred or intolerance (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)

Bigotry-intolerance towards those who hold different opinions than oneself (google.com)

It is clear by your word choices that you are intolerant of "Evangelical Christians" thereby making you a bigot. You can be amazed that i called you a bigot all you want, I don't know what kind of wonderful activities you have on your resume, nor do I care. You have clearly displayed a dislike for a group of people which screams bigotry. That is all the evidence I need. I didn't even have to take your post out of context to draw that conclusion. 

 

Doc Brown

January 14th, 2012 at 11:01 PM ^

I never said I had anything wrong with evangelicals or Christians (my entire family is a mix of Catholic and episcopalian.

And the same message can spouted off at evangelical christians who preach love and preach and then calling anyone not sharing their beliefs a bigot or anyone in the GLBT community a f*ggot. The reason I hold so little respect for evangelical Chrisitians was when a group of pious individuals called one of my friends (transgender) a f*ckign f*ggot who is going to hell.

JeepinBen

January 9th, 2012 at 8:48 AM ^

I'm going to stop replying because we've been very close to the politics border in this discussion, but c'mon man. There is nothing fine with your statement. What is "Acting gay?" I never said I had a problem with Tebow "being" Christian. I don't want to me Evangelized, or Missionized. That's all.

Doc Brown

January 8th, 2012 at 10:27 PM ^

How is it bigoted? Please tell me? If you know me in person you would know I am perhaps one of the most accepting person when it comes to diversity of religion, gender, race, and sexual preference. But yeah lets throw out a random bigot claim. Wow....just...wow...

I personally believe one's religious beliefs should be private. I don't want to be evangelized when I watch Monday Night Football. If I did then I would watch the 700 Club with Pat Robertson. 

I respect the hell out of the medical work the Tebows has done in Africa and it makes him a great person. 

nyc_wolverines

January 8th, 2012 at 10:44 PM ^

Here's the deal: Everyone should have the right to speak their religion, from Christian, Muslim, Jewish, whatever. The free market of religious expression should not be stopped. We should embrace the expression. Why? Because we are born free men to choose. 
 

I don't fear religious expression by anyone, including some pagan voodoo person. I do fear stopping anyone's ability to profess their faith.

IPFW_Wolverines

January 9th, 2012 at 4:22 AM ^

I wish gays would stop being so in your face about it. 

I wish blacks would stop being so in your face about it. 

I wish muslims would stop being so in your face about it. 

I wish hispanics would stop being so in your face about it.

 

According to you saying these things is perfectly fine as well. It is bigoted whether or not you and your buddies think it is or not. 

JamesBondHerpesMeds

January 9th, 2012 at 4:50 AM ^

All of those attributes (except being a Muslim, although many would ascribe to being from a Muslim family) are not choices, they're attributes. Nobody 'chooses' to stop being gay or black or Hispanic without some form of absolute denial about their hereditary and genetic identity. Nobody is 'born' a Christian.
<br>
<br>A more effective comparison would be 'I wish Republicans/Democrats, Ohio State fans, Beliebers, and Snooki weren't so in my face about it.'
<br>
<br>

Doc Brown

January 9th, 2012 at 5:48 AM ^

You are not that bright are you? 

You just took my original post and turned it around it around into a strawman fallacy. Nice try. I didn't mean any of that and you know it. I am not going to reply to you again because frankly people with attitudes like yours are not worth it. Have a great day and go blue. 

budeye

January 8th, 2012 at 11:21 PM ^

may not have been the right word to use. 

but to dislike someone, and no one can deny that there are people that do not like Tebow because of his openess about his faith is like being a bigot.

that is fine of you personally think a person's religion should be kept private, but it really does not matter what your personal opinion is on how a person should handle their faith. 

bronxblue

January 8th, 2012 at 10:38 PM ^

Honestly, I thought the comment was pretty tame.  And to be fair, it isn't so much Tebow who throws his faith in people's faces (I mean, yeah he does that kneel thing and talks up his faith a bit in interviews, but nothing egregious), but all of the talking heads and hanger-ons who harp about it ad nauseum. 

The brilliance of this country is that both Tebow and the OP are allowed to make comments about religion and its existence/prevalance in various mediums without fear of reprisals or condemnation.

JeepinBen

January 8th, 2012 at 9:50 PM ^

I'm not Christian, and I found this article very interesting: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7369021/fair-game

A snippet:

 

Let us be quite clear — Tim Tebow adheres to a particular form of American Protestantism. He belongs to — and proselytizes for — a splinter of a splinter, no more or less than Mitt Romney once did. This particular splinter has a long record in America of fostering anti-Enlightenment thought, retrograde social policies, and, more discreetly, religious bigotry. To call Tim Tebow a "Christian," and to leave it at that — as though there were one definition of what a "Christian" is — is to say nothing and everything at once. Roman Catholics are Christians. So are Lutherans, Episcopalians, Melkites, Maronites, and members of the Greek and Russian Orthodox faiths. You can see how insidious this is when discussion turns to the missionary work that Tebow's family has done in the Philippines. This is from the Five Priorities of the Bob Tebow ministries, regarding its work overseas:

It is the goal of the Bob Tebow Evangelistic Association to preach the gospel to every person who has never had an opportunity to hear the good news of eternal life in Jesus Christ. Most of the world's population has never once had the opportunity to hear the only true message of forgiveness of sins by faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.

It so happens that 95 percent of the population of the Philippines is Roman Catholic. Catholic doctrine just happens to be in conflict with what Bob Tebow and his son preach in regard to personal salvation.

bacon1431

January 8th, 2012 at 10:46 PM ^

I'm a Christian and I completely agree with the article (If I read it again, I'm sure I could nitpick something), but the general idea is correct. Props to Tebow for being confidenct about his faith, but I personally am not the same "type of Christian." Tebow and his family and very comfortable being public with their faith and probably have no problem talking to a stranger on the street about God. That is not my style. I don't evangelize until I get to know somebody because, well, I feel it's more likely to have an impact on them and we would gain a better understanding of each other. I'm not one for judging (ya know, don't judge lest you be judged and all), but I'm also a man and total depravity of mankind means I'm a POS and can't do anything about it, so I'll go ahead and say this. I think Tebow is doing more harm than good for Christianity. When "Tebowing" became a thing, he should have stopped doing it. His praying suddenly became more about him rather than about God. Not his fault, but that's how it goes. Contrary to some beliefs, you can talk to God without bowing your head and closing your eyes. He is all-powerful, so I think he can still hear you. I don't have a problem with people criticizing him and his faith because people criticize everything about everybody. The Bible says that Christians will be persecuted. And if this is the hardest persecution he ever faces, he doesn't really have any problems.

I will make a statement about the Phil. being 95% Chrisitian. I was in Guatemala this past January, and it is a predominantly Catholic country (like all of Latin America) but many I talked to there were non-practicing religious individuals. If you asked them if they were Christian, they'd say yes, but they didn't ascribe to many of the beliefs of their professed faith and didn't practice. I've never been to the Phillippines, so I can't say what it's like, but just like the article pointed out, there are many types of Christians. Some practicing, some not. So evangelism can still be done in that country, and in a big way I'm sure. Just like every country. But I will also say that my biggest pet-peeve about the church body is that there are too many groups. For example, people seem to be more about being Baptist than they are about being a Christian - holding onto their denomination over everything. There are a few fundamental beliefs that are hard to debate, the rest is just conjecture for the most part.

Everything above is JMO, and I'm sure some Christians and non-Christians will disagree with me. But I was just giving my perspective. Mods, understand if this will be deleted, as lengthy discussions about religion probably aren't preferred board topics.

IPFW_Wolverines

January 9th, 2012 at 4:31 AM ^

If he doesn't live out his faith he'll be criticized for hypocrisy. If he does you bash him for being die hard about it. He could not win with you merely because he is a Christian. 

nuclearblue

January 9th, 2012 at 11:37 AM ^


No.  If he wants to "spread the faith" while on a mission trip or something like that, he has every right to because he's there to talk religion.  If he's on National TV, he needs to keep it to himself.  He's not there because of what he does/does not believe, he's there to play and talk football.

 

Religion is like a penis.  It's fine to have one.  It's fine to be proud of it.  But don't whip it out in public and try to shove it down my throat.

bo_lives

January 9th, 2012 at 10:27 AM ^

The media is in your face about it. Hard to believe so many people on this board are against Tebowing when in reality Tebow copied it from Denard (okay, maybe not but you get the point; both of them publically display their faith with on-field gestures).

As for the Broncos contending - if Tebow beats Tom Brady I will be distraught. That just cannot happen. Our boy Brady, one of the greatest QB's in NFL history, cannot lose to a shotputter, even a shotputter guided by destiny.

Cope

January 8th, 2012 at 9:06 PM ^

to pull the trigger. Tebow pulled it. Tonight he was that good. And man, Champ Bailey and that defense were stout tonight.

BlueintheLou

January 8th, 2012 at 9:08 PM ^

I feel like Denver pulled out all the stops on this one and it will be difficult to replicate. However, I have been wrong many, many times before.

The dude wins games. Can't count him out if Jesus is on his side. It's like Angels in the Outfield.

LSAClassOf2000

January 8th, 2012 at 9:15 PM ^

....but you apparently cannot deny the man's psychological impact on the team, ability and statistics notwithstanding for a moment. 

The Broncos D is not bad, but the Patriots D is better than theirs. 

robbyt003

January 8th, 2012 at 10:40 PM ^

why did New England allow 850 more yards than Denver?  EIGHT HUNDRED and FIFTY YARDS.  

As far as points, that stat actually does kind of surprise me.  But I guess when Denver played GB,DET, and NE they all went crazy on them.  NE didn't really play a great offense like GB, DET, or NO

Do you really belive NE has a better D than Denver?