Are The Colts God’s Team?

-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger

If Indianapolis Colts interim head coach Bruce Arians has his way only “high quality” people will be part of the Colts’ organization. What determines a “high quality” person in Arians’ mind? A person who “cares about faith, family and football.” No atheists are welcome.

Arians’ blatant bigotry against the 15% of Americans who reject faith may pay big dividends on the football field. The correlation between great performance on the field and belief in God is evidenced with Tim Tebow. When Tebow wins, millions of believers attribute the win to Tebow’s faith and their belief in God is reinforced.

The former head coach, Jim Caldwell, now quarterbacks coach for the Baltimore Ravens, would quote the Bible’s New Testament in his pregame chats to the team. This kind of demonstration from the head coach excludes those players, if any, who don’t share his Christian faith.

Jacob Tamme, former tight end for the Colts, put it this way:

The Colts are known for having the reputation of a godly Christian example. That is because the coaches here set the Christian example.

The NFL has long been a leader in fighting bigotry and judging players based on their abilities. It is time the NFL stands up against the exclusionary tactics perpetrated by religious bigots. It is a stain on the NFL’s reputation.

H/T: Austin Cline, The Times-Picayune, Mike Florio, Stampede Blue.

99 thoughts on “Are The Colts God’s Team?”

  1. I just calls ’em likes I sees ’em, nicky.

    That you never understood my primary contention about you was that you argue from emotion and freak out whenever someone dares to challenge what you say with logic and evidence to which you respond with nothing but puffery and “ball busting”? Is entirely your failing. Time and again it was illustrated how when someone challenges what you say as gospel that you don’t respond in a logical or evidentiary manner and instead go straight to ad hominem and bluster. Which is exactly at the heart of Mike’s complaint and pretty much everyone you’ve managed to get on their bad side here. No one here cares what you used to do or currently do. It’s irrelevant other than any claims to expert knowledge. What we do care about around here is can you back up your statements with evidence and logic. Something you frequently fail miserably at and rely upon said and noted bluster.

    And for someone who claims to be able to take a ball busting as well as give one, you sure do f&*king whine a lot about being called a douche bag, douche bag. Toughen up, buttercup. If you can’t take having your balls busted harder than you can bust someone else’s? Maybe you should stick to another game. Bron used to act a lot like you do until he finally realized the futility of it. Now he’s a productive if not strangely valued member of the community. His ideas often don’t get traction, but that’s because of the ideas, not him. Even then, he doesn’t respond to challenge of his ideas like a child throwing a fit in Wal-mart.

    However, if more than one person notes that you have argumentation issues? Maybe you should pay attention. You might actually learn something. Like how to better make your case when your statements are challenged.

  2. MikeS, Ok. I’m horribly wrong and you’re absolutely right. That is obviously unbelievably important to you and a few others here. We went toe to toe and you didn’t call me a “douche” idiot” “moron” “putz”, etc. I always like to take a positive away from an encounter. Basta..then some pasta.

    1. Nick, I like the fact that you want to edify whatever positive that you see. That is way better than doing the opposite by a long shoot. A good spirit is in you.
      The truth is all of us die.That is simple. Treat people like pieces of construction material or food will have adverse effects on the soul Jesus came to save. I can’t say Jesus would give his blessing to the legal system. I can’t say Jesus would honer the dead or the people that fought in war. He would .take care of people. To say people in war did a good thing would mean war was eternal. War will not be eternal War will perish when God makes all things new.

  3. MikeS, We both made our livings searching for the truth. Your search was in helping people find what was truly the problem making them unhappy, dysfunctional, etc. My search was more objective, what happened, when, who, etc.. Anyone who spends their lives searching for truth knows, “The truth is never pure and rarely simple.” In my field the truth was often something that could be proven w/ evidence. With surveillance I would do, one could actually see the truth..quite difficult and satisfying craft. MikeS, you are by definition a partisan. You campaign for Dems. When I said “partisan” it is not perjorative is any sense, I swear to that. I know that word has taken on a negative connotation. When I say “partisan hack” or “blind partisan” then it is a negative. Not when I simply state the appropriate word “partisan” in this context. Again, the limits of this venue providing none of the nonverbal communication tools. We could hash out legislation and posturing by both parties over the century. However, talk w/ vets. I do all the time. They’ll tell you both parties shit on them. And, although you spoke to my alleged abuse of an appropriate word, you didn’t touch on your selective outrage. I sort of understand that, however.

    1. “We both made our livings searching for the truth. Your search was in helping people find what was truly the problem making them unhappy, dysfunctional, etc. My search was more objective, what happened, when, who, etc.”

      Nick,

      Nonsense and poppycock based on little knowledge. When it comes to therapy, Nick, i’m the expert and from the above you know nothing of what I did, or what its purpose was. As far as objectivity goes this is your problem because you are overwhelming egocentric in justifying your pre-judgments. How in hell can you judge my objectivity? Your only basis to do so is in your your assumptions of who I am and perhaps they are based in the fact that I don’t come off as macho as you think manly. You know little of me, or what I’ve faced in my life and career, to be able to make such an assumption but you do.

      Oh, and as far as detecting goes, I’ve mentioned it here before, I was NYC’s Child Welfare in-house expert in the investigation of child abuse and had spent two years on the “line” before that running the Pilot Investigation Unit that took only the most egregious cases in Brooklyn. I an independent study that Unit was the most evidence-based, competent and effective in the City. That was being compared to Units that had a far less difficult caseload. I worked both with the NYPD and the Brooklyn DA’s Sex Crimes Unit. Yeah Nick, just like you I’m able to cite areas of expertise and yet on this blog there is one to whom I even defer on these matters and that person is Otteray Scribe. This is a man of such comprehensive expertise in the field that I’m in awe of him and who you’ve also had difficulty with in matters where he is a national expert.

      “In my field the truth was often something that could be proven w/ evidence. With surveillance I would do, one could actually see the truth.”

      Blowing more smoke out of your ass, because you have tried to defend something that is counter-factual, by then resorting to puffery of your skills. Too many times in the Criminal Investigation field has the “truth” be proven false for you to make such a claim. Many of the most dedicated investigators have gotten the “truth” wrong and many an innocent person has been convicted falsely.

      “MikeS, you are by definition a partisan. You campaign for Dems.”

      So let me get this twisted logic straight. I campaign for Dems and so I’m partisan? You are negating of course all I’ve written that has been critical of both parties and my feeling that there was a military coup after JFK’s assassination and that we live under an oligarchy. I support the Democratic Party at present because objectively they are more for my best interests than the Republicans. That has been my whole argument supporting Obama’s reelection and it has been a consistent one. Both parties stink, but the aroma from the Republican’s is far worse from the objective standpoint of the issues they believe in. Neither party is anywhere near my ideal, but the question comes down to which one will hurt me, the people I love and the American People in general less at this point.

      This is fact, issue by issue. The problem with you and your comments on politics here for the most part is that you don’t deal in facts, you deal in your assumptions of truth. There is the problem and given your bragging about your involvement with criminal justice you really should understand it. A prosecution is a search for “truth” with the knowledge that the “truth” is how a Jury, or a lone Judge sees it. A “fact” is what is used to build the case for deciding what is “true”. Yet a “fact” to the prosecution, may be a “falsity” to the defense.

      Yet out of the courtroom and into the political arena there are no truths, no real absolutes that one can say is good or bad. Only opinions that are often mixed bags. However, there are actual political facts such as statements and votes on a given issue. When it comes to veteran’s benefits the facts are that since WWII, Republicans have been pretty much on the reduction side of the equation as given by their factual voting record and their factual arguments against them. By saying WWII I’m actually being generous because who was the party in power when MacArthur started shooting the “Bonus Marchers” in the 20’s. Out of work, forgotten veterans seeking help from the government they served so well. If you were as honorable and objective as you claim to be, you would admit that and we could move on. I doubt though that you are able to admit being wrong on anything, that just seems to be who you are.

  4. Mike Spindell “The indisputable facts are that Democrats have always been more supportive of assistance to veterans than have Republicans and this history goes back to the 40′s. This is stating truth, not defending the party”

    It wasn’t until the early 1960’s where the democratic party began to depart from its core beliefs and start clinging to left-wing wacko ideologies that defines the party today. In other words, pre-1960, the democratic party wasn’t really a bad thing. It’s only within the recent decades the party has fallen off of the deep end and panders to left-wing social groups and class warfare. Republicans now are the ones that honor the vets while democrats, by a defining point of their party, are discriminatory to veterans and disagree with them. One significant indicator of such is that the military votes predominately Republican. I’m waiting to see if there is any backlash because the military was denied voting in this election. With all of the military votes conveniently not getting to them in time to vote, and the mysterious plane crash that destroyed thousands of military ballots. Couple this with the rampant voter fraud that was evident as soon as early voting began. One has to wonder if Mr. Obama would have even won if all this was factored in. Basically half of the US did not vote for Obama and his first four years in office were absolutely horrible and one has to really wonder why in the hell anyone would vote for him again, knowing he did such a horrible job the first four years.

  5. Aside from someone being “discriminated” what are positive attributes of atheism? An atheist is typically the most hateful, bigoted, mean spirited, argumentative, resentful, dogmatic, religious person you can attempt to talk to. Ask any random person about atheism and the characterization is always some crotchety mean spirited individual that’s arguing about the existence of God, of which they supposedly don’t believe in. Perhaps there aren’t many atheists that are confident in their belief that God doesn’t exist. They must seek out and argue with people of faith and seek out areas where faith is displayed openly (which is SUPPOSED to be protected free speech). Atheist “organizations” whose sole purpose is to deny people of faith what they are supposed to be guaranteed as a right. So there really aren’t any positive attributes of atheism. Atheism hasn’t dried a shed tear, created any artistic masterpieces, or never once given answers to any tough questions about or existence. Maybe it is only the caustic, bigoted, dogmatic, religious wacko atheists that are the ones who “own the microphone” so to speak. If there are other atheists that are not hell bent (pardon the pun) of denying other peoples rights or arguing just for the sake of arguing. If that is the case, then atheists need to revamp their belief system and kick those the curb who insist on making other people miserable. The atheists I have the displeasure of meeting are predominately online and they all cling to the belief in evolutionism with a death grip and simply will not listen to problems with the theory or alternatives, and will not have an open mind to other beliefs. It’s easier to converse with an agnostic, since he/she doesn’t know if God exists or not, therefore leaves room for some sort of a debate. Atheism, on the other hand, is a head-in-sand belief system that refuses to debate evidence contrary to its belief system. So atheists need to realize why they generally are not well liked. This is a problem their organization (if there is one) needs to deal with.

    1. “An atheist is typically the most hateful, bigoted, mean spirited, argumentative, resentful, dogmatic, religious person you can attempt to talk to.”

      Barney,

      You suffer from the psychological defense mechanism known as “projection”. This means you see in other character faults that exist in you but are too painful to acknowledge.

      “In other words, pre-1960, the democratic party wasn’t really a bad thing. It’s only within the recent decades the party has fallen off of the deep end and panders to left-wing social groups and class warfare. Republicans now are the ones that honor the vets while democrats, by a defining point of their party, are discriminatory to veterans and disagree with them.”

      Yet another example of your “projection” and thus inability to see reality.

  6. Frank, Thanks, again. I see you’re a criminal attorney. There are many posts here that would be perfect for your expertise.

  7. MikeS, What epithet did I use? Is “partisan” an epithet? I don’t use “douche, “putz”, “idiot” “STFU”, “moron”, “stupid” like some here do. I don’t brag about having a “sharp stick”. Your outrage is quite selective..partisan as it were. And, MikeS, I like your persona and I believe you know that. We see the world a bit different. As I’ve said here several times, life would be way too boring for me to engage solely w/ people I agree. Being somewhat of an iconoclast, that’s usually not a problem.

  8. Mike, Firstly, I am a libertarian which makes me quite liberal on cultural issues and fiscally conservative. You spoke about haveing a conservative friend. Well Mike I have many liberal and conservative friends. I disagree w/ both of them fairly equally. So, can we put this “conservative” horseshit to rest?

    Regarding the issue @ hand. The vote you cite was a cynical political one and any objective observor recognizes that. It was Dems making an election posture. But, for the sake of argument’ lets say it wasn’t. If you live your life in election cycles, then one can get a VERY distorted view of reality. I don’t. If you want to understand history one must look @ the panorama, not just a snapshot. And, MikeS, when you look @ the history over the past century, both parties have shit on veterans, and both parties have used cynical votes like the one you cite to manipulate people. Consider yourself manipulated.

    1. Nick,

      I wanted to see if you were honorable and discovered that you either are not, or that you are so taken with yourself that you lack the self awareness to ever see yourself as wrong. And you’re a Libertarian? Why how could I have not realised that when your writings reek of it? Any word used in context can be an epithet and your use of partisan was. This is so because your connotation was that I’m so taken with my political views that I am blind to their faults.

      As for the links I presented you dismissed them rather, than refute them by caling them cynical. The truth is you’ve got no refutation to the facts so you obfuscate. The indisputable facts are that Democrats have always been more supportive of assistance to veterans than have Republicans and this history goes back to the 40’s. This is stating truth, not defending the party. As far as understanding what has been going on in this country has been the fault of both parties I’ve left a written history here, just put my name in the search function top right. As far as you being an iconoclast your words belie that and remember Nick I read all comments made here. You are a partisan, even disdaining both parties and your world view is sadly clouded by your pre-judgments.

  9. “A SOLDIER DIED TODAY”

    JUST A COMMON SOLDIER [IN HONOR OF ALL VETERANS]:

    (A Soldier Died Today)

    by A. Lawrence Vaincourt

    He was getting old and paunchy and his hair was falling fast
    And he sat around the Legion, telling stories of the past,
    Of a war that he had fought in and the deeds that he had done,
    In his exploits with his buddies; they were heroes, every one.
    And tho’ sometimes, to his neighbors, his tales became a joke,
    All his Legion buddies listened, for they knew whereof he spoke.
    But we’ll hear his tales no longer for old Bill has passed away,
    And the world’s a little poorer, for a soldier died today.

    He will not be mourned by many, just his children and his wife,
    For he lived an ordinary and quite uneventful life.
    Held a job and raised a family, quietly going his own way
    And the world won’t note his passing, though a soldier died today

    When politicians leave this earth, their bodies lie in state,
    While thousands note their passing and proclaim that they were great.
    Papers tell their whole life stories, from the time that they were young,
    But the passing of a soldier goes unnoticed and unsung

    Is the greatest contribution to the welfare of our land
    A guy who breaks his promises and cons his fellow man?
    Or the ordinary fellow who, in times of war and strife,
    Goes off to serve his Country and offers up his life?
    A politician’s stipend and the style in which he lives
    Are sometimes disproportionate to the service that he gives.
    While the ordinary soldier, who offered up his all,
    Is paid off with a medal and perhaps, a pension small.

    It’s so easy to forget them for it was so long ago,
    That the old Bills of our Country went to battle, but we know
    It was not the politicians, with their compromise and ploys,
    Who won for us the freedom that our Country now enjoys
    Should you find yourself in danger, with your enemies at hand,
    Would you want a politician with his ever-shifting stand?
    Or would you prefer a soldier, who has sworn to defend
    His home, his kin and Country and would fight until the end?

    He was just a common soldier and his ranks are growing thin,
    But his presence should remind us we may need his like again.
    For when countries are in conflict, then we find the soldier’s part
    Is to clean up all the troubles that the politicians start.
    If we cannot do him honor while he’s here to hear the praise,
    Then at least let’s give him homage at the ending of his days.

    Perhaps just a simple headline in a paper that would say,
    Our Country is in mourning, for a soldier died today.

    © 1987 A. Lawrence Vaincourt

  10. Nick,

    Now here are two more citations:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/19/veterans-bill-vote-demcrats-republicans

    http://www.politicususa.com/meet-40-senate-republicans-betrayed-veterans-killing-1-billion-jobs.html

    Now Nick, faced with facts let’s see if you have the honesty you always proclaim for yourself and can, when faced with the truth, admit you were wrong. My guess is though that you’ll come back with some conservative put up job to the effect that Obama wanted to cut veteran’s benefits so that they would choose Obamacare as a less costly option for them and the government. The truth is that like my opinions, or not, I’ve established a reputation in life as someone with a open mind. You have boasted of your ability to also be open-minded, while I basically like your persona here, I’m not sure that it is either as fair, or as hoest as you pretend.

    1. Nick,

      You are also a partisan of sorts and that shows in the way you bandy about epithets towards others. However, I freely admit that I am a partisan towards my own opinions, but will always re-examine my premises and acknowledge my errors. You not so much. What I stated wasn’t a partisan opinion, it was fact.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-pressler/larry-pressler-obama_b_1948415.html

      http://www.disabledveterans.org/2011/04/16/republicans-seek-to-cut-1-3-million-veterans/

  11. MikeS, You do realize the neglect of veterans is one of the few bipartisan “efforts”, don’t you?

    1. Nick,

      Most of the proposed cuts to veteran’s benefits in the last decade have come from Republicans not Democrats. The Republicans are for increases in military spending for items that benefit their benefactors, not those truly in harms way.

  12. Frank,

    Thank you…. Lets we not forget the original fighting force of the America’s….. The Marine Corp….. And there birthday is celebrated on November 10….. Established…. 1775…..

  13. What Mike said about aftercare. The average person has no idea what troops in harm’s way experience. War is not a video game. Ask newly elected Rep. Tammy Duckworth, who left both her legs in the sandpile. Her opponent picked at her during a debate about the time she had spent picking out a dress to wear when she spoke at the Democratic National Convention. She retorted that she was entitled to pick out a dress because she had spent most of her adult life wearing camouflage.

    This video was made by an Army nurse as a class project for his Master’s Degree in Nursing. The tune is an old Irish song written sometime in the late 1700s. It was piped at the memorial service for my ggg-grandfather at the National Cemetery, because it was a tune he would have known and possibly sung or played on his fife as they marched.

  14. We must remember and celebrate the risks and sacrifices that all of our troops and veterans made for this country. We must also ensure that they receive the best of care both in and out of the armed forces. We must also ensure that their lives. limbs and brains are not sacrificed in vain, greed or vanity. We must always be suspicious about those who purport to “honor the troops” and yet care for them not one whit when their service is done.

  15. nick spinelli: I’m a faithful reader every day. I enjoy all the regular bloggers and jump in sometimes. Thanks for allowing me to join in. I’m sorry to jump in on this unrelated article with Veterans Day thoughts, but I was afraid that one would not be composed on the subject matter.

    I hope Nal doesn’t mind. I’ll end with this inspiring clip I found on You Tube featuring the Cactus Cuties years ago. Sit back and let the voices of children flow over you and this Veterans Day 11-11-2012:

    http://youtu.be/OHgTDb_QH98

Comments are closed.