Last week, New York Rangers agitator and occasional forward Sean Avery (above) appeared in a video for the New York Human Rights Campaign, endorsing same-sex marriage. It’s 2011, and an athlete is supporting same-sex marriage. Good on Avery and no harm done, right?
Well, no.
In a bizarre move, Todd Reynolds, vice president of the Onatrio-based player agency Uptown Sports Management, came out against Avery’s appearance in the video. He posted his reaction on the agency’s official Twitter feed:
Very sad to read Sean Avery’s misguided support of same-gender “marriage”. Legal or not, it will always be wrong.
He continued:
To clarify. This is not hatred or bigotry towards gays. It is not intolerance in any way shape or form. I believe we are all equal…
And to conclude:
But I believe in the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman. This is my personal viewpoint. I Do not hate anyone.
Thanks for the clarification, Todd. But this is the definition of intolerance. It is intolerance in every shape and every form. Calling a player’s support for same-sex marriage “sad” and saying that “it will always be wrong” is arrogant, hard-headed, intolerant bullshit.
But he didn’t stop there. A few hours after the tweet, he appeared on TSN Radio in Toronto, where he said (via PuckDaddy):
There’s certainly a voice for the other side on this particular issue. I was merely responding to be the other voice. I believe in standing up for what you believe in. I’m passionate about what I believe in. And I believe in morality and I believe in right and wrong. I know many people with different view points for what is right and wrong.
But I’m a little disappointed in some of the response. If you oppose a viewpoint, you’re immediately targeted by some people as a hater, a bigot, intolerant, homophobic and many other terms. That’s obviously not the case for people who know me. … I don’t hate anyone. And I’m certainly not a bigot. But I believe in marriage between one man and one woman. It’s a social debate that’s raged on for quite some time. In Canada and the U.S. it’s a hot-button topic right now. I guess maybe it was how I was raised. I believe in voicing your opinion and not being part of the silent majority.
Last night, Sean Fitz-Gerald of The National Post caught up with Don Reynolds, Todd’s father and Uptown Hockey’s president. Somehow, Don managed to outdo his son:
It’s sad. I mean, my personal position is that I do not support gay marriage, and I think it’s wrong, as well. It’s not politically correct to, I guess, give your opinion about a thing like that. It’s politically correct on the other side, for people to say, “Sure, I support gay marriage.” But the majority, I think, of Canadians would say that they don’t agree with gay marriage—that man and woman were created to be married, not man and man or man and horse, you know?
A horse. Really.
Sigh. We’re not turning this into a gay-marriage debate. There really isn’t even a debate at this point, as far as we’re concerned, and it’s not like the Reynoldses have contributed anything of merit to it. This whole thing is just so strange, and I have no idea how Todd Reynolds thought it was a good idea to grandstand on the company’s Twitter feed. I doubt they’ll be having any more clients with the Toronto Maple Leafs any time soon.
—Photo AP
REALLY hilarious! I’m not going to debate same-sex marriage or not… I just laughed at the man and horse part! Bwahahahahahaha!
There are just so many holes in the argument that marriage is all about one hetero man and one hetero woman making babies after a religious ceremony. There is currently no requirement that two people be fertile when they get married, and I doubt a hetero couple who get married in their 80’s (perfectly legal!) are going to produce children. It is also perfectly legal for a gay man to marry a lesbian, which I hardly see as a bulwark against homosexuality. A thousand years ago, the Catholic Church performed some types of same-sex unions with the same level of… Read more »
Please refer to my reply above. As to your “historical” claims, I’d really challenge you to cite sources for any of that. Most of those arguments were fabricated as propaganda against “organized religion” and repeated and accepted as fact. I doubt either of us are interested in going back to source documents, but I’m willing if you are. ; ) I’ll tell you this from a Catholic point of view – there are certain things that are customs, and certain things that are understood to be truth. Not to get off topic, but as an example – the pope COULD,… Read more »
Morons. Absolute morons.
And to clarify, they’re not morons simply because they’re against gay marriage. They’re morons because they think they can talk out of both sides of their ignorant mouths by saying “Gay marriage is morally wrong, but I’m not a hater.” Well, if you actively work to ensure a certain segment of the population cannot enjoy the same liberties as the majority, that is being a hater. And a bigot.
But the most amazing part of this is that Sean Avery comes out looking like the good guy!
Just because something is morally wrong doesn’t mean you hate those who support it. Marriage isn’t a liberty like freedom of speech. It’s a recognition by the state of what is, in its purest form, a religious sacrament. It’s not in the government’s authority to redefine what marriage is. They can legally recognize a “union”, but that doesn’t change what marriage has always been. I never hear gay “marriage” supporters explain why the government began recognizing marriages in the first place, which was family stability and procreation. Gays are denied marriage because anyone hates them, but rather because is not,… Read more »
Guess what Eric? Marriage is not solely about procreation. I defy you to tell childless heterosexual couples they should be denied the right to be married simply because they made a choice NOT to procreate. And I disagree when you say “marriage isn’t a libery like freedom of speech.” I believe it is. Pursuit of happiness, and we’re all entitled to that. In Massachusetts, everyone is allowed to be married. So yes, we have redefined what marriage is. And it’s now the law of the land, not to mention simple common sense. I have never heard those against gay marriage… Read more »
Thankfully what happens in Massachusetts is not the law of the land. In every state where it’s been put to a public vote, it’s been defeated. It hasn’t been redefined, but rather hijacked. Maybe it doesn’t affect me. Maybe two straight people getting married doesn’t affect me either. Maybe the better question is why the government recognized marriage in the first place? It speaks volumes that, in general, as a group, gays reject everything that “conservative” Americans believe about family life, yet for some reason seem intent on having what they have on marriage. It seems like a disingenuous political… Read more »
On what planet to gays reject everything that “conservatives” believe about family life? There are PLENTY of committed couples who have children and live conventional lives. If by conservative beliefs you mean they don’t have sex with opposite sex partners, then guilty as charged, but by definition, that’s the difference. As for the nature of marriage.. historically it is so different than what even the conservative mainstream considers it to be today that they are essentially different entities. Marriage has grown and changed over history, and allowing same sex couples to marry is just another change.. unless you’d like the… Read more »
Why don’t you start by attacking atheist marriage instead? What about marriage within non-Christian religions?