| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ILUVBIGTEN
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 1106
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Back to top |
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16359
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/07/07 1:12 pm ::: Re: KMR and her contract extension |
Reply  |
|
| Actually, she could probably have her pick of several major openings, yet she chooses to stay at a place as bigoted and homophobic as Baylor. Says quite a bit about her, IMO.
|
|
ILUVBIGTEN
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 1106
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/07 1:18 pm ::: Re: KMR and her contract extension |
Reply |
|
| PUmatty wrote: |
| Actually, she could probably have her pick of several major openings, yet she chooses to stay at a place as bigoted and homophobic as Baylor. Says quite a bit about her, IMO. |
I'm sure she'd love Liberty.
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4636
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/07 3:00 pm ::: Re: KMR and her contract extension |
Reply |
|
| ILUVBIGTEN wrote: |
| PUmatty wrote: |
| Actually, she could probably have her pick of several major openings, yet she chooses to stay at a place as bigoted and homophobic as Baylor. Says quite a bit about her, IMO. |
I'm sure she'd love Liberty. |
Do you have any evidence to support that?
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
fancy_daniel
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 4489
Location: Los Angeles
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/07 3:06 pm ::: Re: KMR and her contract extension |
Reply |
|
| ILUVBIGTEN wrote: |
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/news/story?id=2828348
| Quote: |
| "I'm going to be at Baylor for as long as they'll have me," Mulkey said. |
That's nice, Kim, because nobody else wants you anyway. |
DAAAAMMMMNNN!!! Tell it like it is BigTen.
Although I think they would take her in the South where her values would be 'valued.' Probably LSU or Florida.
|
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
|
RedEqualsLuck
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 4781
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/07 3:17 pm ::: Re: KMR and her contract extension |
Reply |
|
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
| ILUVBIGTEN wrote: |
| PUmatty wrote: |
| Actually, she could probably have her pick of several major openings, yet she chooses to stay at a place as bigoted and homophobic as Baylor. Says quite a bit about her, IMO. |
I'm sure she'd love Liberty. |
Do you have any evidence to support that? |
are you looking for evidence that Baylor is a homophobic institution?
if so, you might want to check their by-laws.
google the universtiy
check the archives of their fanboard's response to (then) Emily's departure...
_________________
When Jefferson wrote: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal," he didn't include the word "except."
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4636
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 1:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
So are you assuming that everyone who goes there and/or works there is homophobic?
Somehow, I doubt it.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
PurdueBBall3
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 597
Location: Where WCBB male head coaches aren't.
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 2:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
So are you assuming that everyone who goes there and/or works there is homophobic?
Somehow, I doubt it. |
I wouldn't say that; however, when one works at an institution as someone who is as high profile as a head coach, I think it's fair to assume that their "brand of oatmeal" aligns with that institution.
_________________
"Boo-hoo. Oh, boo-hoo. Waaaah, waaaah, waaaaah." Notably Dumb's Muffie (Bitch) Yuckgraw
|
|
umbeta1455
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 1897
Location: Maine
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 2:51 pm ::: Re: KMR and her contract extension |
Reply |
|
| RedEqualsLuck wrote: |
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
| ILUVBIGTEN wrote: |
| PUmatty wrote: |
| Actually, she could probably have her pick of several major openings, yet she chooses to stay at a place as bigoted and homophobic as Baylor. Says quite a bit about her, IMO. |
I'm sure she'd love Liberty. |
Do you have any evidence to support that? |
are you looking for evidence that Baylor is a homophobic institution?
if so, you might want to check their by-laws.
google the universtiy
check the archives of their fanboard's response to (then) Emily's departure... |
by-laws are just words that make the university look better. Just because by-laws say something means nothing about how a person/coach feels aout certain values. I am sure Portland is pissed because that would have probably been the first place she would have wanted to go as a coach.
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4636
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 3:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PurdueBBall3 wrote: |
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
So are you assuming that everyone who goes there and/or works there is homophobic?
Somehow, I doubt it. |
I wouldn't say that; however, when one works at an institution as someone who is as high profile as a head coach, I think it's fair to assume that their "brand of oatmeal" aligns with that institution. |
Well, she recruited, and allowed Emily Neimann to play a large role with her team on the way to a championship.
I know Neimann then left, but I am not aware of it being because of KMR's view of lesbians.
I am not trying to defend or support KMR, I don't find her demeanor particularly appealing, but I don't know that it's fair to associate her with every aspect of Baylor's "belief system."
I went to a Catholic high school where I would bet over half of the people associated with the school were not opposed to homosexuality.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
Carol Anne
Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 1739
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 5:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
1) There is no "R" in Kim Mulkey's name anymore. She and Randy Robertson were divorced last year.
2) I have a good (and gay) source in Cental Texas who assures me that there have been lesbian players--and not just Emily Niemann--on Kim's teams at Baylor. Those women were not out to all of Baylor, but their sexuality was known to the coaching staff.
3) Baylor University is by no means the only school that offiicially condemns homosexual acts and disallows gay rights groups. Take a look at Notre Dame! Also, many historically black colleges and universities have policies like BU's. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18011607.
|
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 5:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Carol Anne wrote: |
1) There is no "R" in Kim Mulkey's name anymore. She and Randy Robertson were divorced last year.
2) I have a good (and gay) source in Cental Texas who assures me that there have been lesbian players--and not just Emily Niemann--on Kim's teams at Baylor. Those women were not out to all of Baylor, but their sexuality was known to the coaching staff.
3) Baylor University is by no means the only school that offiicially condemns homosexual acts and disallows gay rights groups. Take a look at Notre Dame! Also, many historically black colleges and universities have policies like BU's. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18011607. |
4) Baylor is a private religious institution.
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16359
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 6:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| Carol Anne wrote: |
1) There is no "R" in Kim Mulkey's name anymore. She and Randy Robertson were divorced last year.
2) I have a good (and gay) source in Cental Texas who assures me that there have been lesbian players--and not just Emily Niemann--on Kim's teams at Baylor. Those women were not out to all of Baylor, but their sexuality was known to the coaching staff.
3) Baylor University is by no means the only school that offiicially condemns homosexual acts and disallows gay rights groups. Take a look at Notre Dame! Also, many historically black colleges and universities have policies like BU's. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18011607. |
4) Baylor is a private religious institution. |
And as a private, religious institution can legally do anything else they please. However, it is also perfectly valid for people to take what they do into account when formulating their opinions of them.
I do not think that everyone who works at Baylor is a homophobic bigot, but not everyone working for Baylor is in the position Mulkey is. She may very well not fall into the category, however, she is choosing to not only stay at the institution but also to work in an area that brings much positive exposure and support to the university. Athletics exist to promote a university, and the run the national championship gave a Baylor a tremendous amount of free press and good will. Mulkey has chosen to continue to do that work for the institution when she had many, many other options and I hold her accountable for that decision.
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4636
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 7:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Okay, I am not trying to push it, merely try to get a better understanding.
So I am lead to this question:
Isn't it better to have a tolerant coach who is known to go against the University's "policy" regarding homosexuality than to have a coach who will not condone homosexuality?
Perhaps KM is doing what she can to improve the open-mindedness of the university.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
LadyDevilFan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 405
Back to top |
|
RedEqualsLuck
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 4781
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 9:14 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
a couple of outside observations...
I wasn't suggesting anything about KM...
I don't assume that everyone knows and/or believes or follows the Baylor regs. Of COURSE there are gays at Baylor -- just like there are gays in the NBA.
Considering where Emily ended up, did KM ever make a statement in support of her?
_________________
When Jefferson wrote: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal," he didn't include the word "except."
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16359
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
|
womens_hoops
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 2831
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/07 9:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PUmatty wrote: |
| Sexual orientation and gender identity protection is not federally mandated for federal funding. |
And religious schools are substantially exempted from Title IX anyway. "Under the Title IX regulation, an institution that is controlled by a religious organization is exempt from those sections of the regulation that are inconsistent with the religious tenets of the organization."
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/hq53e8.html
(They are also partly exempt from Title VII, the employment discrimination law.)
That leaves (I think) only Title VI, which is the general antidiscrimination law for federally funded programs. But it covers only racial discrimination (not sex discrimination, or religious discrimination, much less orientation discrimination).
|
|
bballjunkee212
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 1906
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/07 9:01 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| womens_hoops wrote: |
| PUmatty wrote: |
| Sexual orientation and gender identity protection is not federally mandated for federal funding. |
And religious schools are substantially exempted from Title IX anyway. "Under the Title IX regulation, an institution that is controlled by a religious organization is exempt from those sections of the regulation that are inconsistent with the religious tenets of the organization."
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/hq53e8.html
(They are also partly exempt from Title VII, the employment discrimination law.)
That leaves (I think) only Title VI, which is the general antidiscrimination law for federally funded programs. But it covers only racial discrimination (not sex discrimination, or religious discrimination, much less orientation discrimination). |
If an institution accepts federal funding, it must meet federal guidelines. That's how the most openly bigoted and homophobic institution of them all, the United States military, gets access to campus to recruit. We don't care how open and affirming you are, the Government says, if you want our money, you will give Don't Ask-Don't Tell the same access as any other campus recruiter.
But back to Baylor and KM: I don't have any personal knowledge about any of this, but given Emily Niemann's ultimate departure from basketball altogether, I suspect her departure from Baylor was more a part of trying to find herself than it was a reaction to any anti-gay attitude she was experiencing.
As for Baylor, it's a fundamentalist-leaning Christian school in Texas, right? If someone says that there's a homophobic environment on campus, and that it is, at least tacitly, institutionalized, you'll pardon me if I don't fall off my chair.
As for Kim Mulkey, say what you want about her, but one thing is certain: She is driven to win and she knows how to do it, as both player and coach. And so I highly doubt that when it comes to players and recruits, she takes much else into consideration other than their ability to play and contribute to program success.
_________________
~Bill
|
|
womens_hoops
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 2831
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/07 11:00 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| bballjunkee212 wrote: |
| If an institution accepts federal funding, it must meet federal guidelines. |
Well, that is sort of true, sort of not true. It would be more true to say "If an institution accepts federal funding, it must meet federal guidelines, unless Congress has explicitly stated that it doesn't have to meet federal guidelines."
Religious institutions enjoy an exemption from Title IX. So even if a religious institution accepts federal funding, it doesn't have to comply with Title IX. You can read the statute and see for yourself.
Oh hell, I'll just get it for you. I'd hate for you to waste your time with boring legal research.
Here is Title IX, 20 U.S.C. 1681(a): "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance . . . ."
But here is 20 U.S.C. 1681(a)(3): "this section shall not apply to an educational institution which is controlled by a religious organization if the application of this subsection would not be consistent with the religious tenets of such organization."
| bballjunkee212 wrote: |
| That's how the most openly bigoted and homophobic institution of them all, the United States military, gets access to campus to recruit. |
That's because there was a specific statute passed (the Solomon Amendment) requiring all institutions receiving federal funding to accept military recruiters. In the case of anti-discrimination laws, there are specific statutory provisions exempting religious institutions from the requirements (even if they accept funding).
Congress can (within some limits) require institutions receiving funding to meet certain guidelines. But it doesn't have to. In the case of Title IX, it decided not to require religious institutions to meet those guidelines.
|
|
4ever_bball_fan
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 6125
Location: Houston
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/07 11:29 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Could it be that most religiously affiliated post-secondary schools do not even field athletic teams of either gender? I say most, and have no idea how many colleges/universities/seminaries that refers to, but I would think more than 50% do not participate in athletic endeavors.
Which makes it even more commendable for the schools that choose to enter the fray, and also achieve nationally recognized success. At least to me.
_________________
The competitor with the will to win also has the will to work. John Wooden.
|
|
|
|
That was great!
