Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 50 of 50

Thread: Is CA Law AB 1887 Already Affecting Cal Sports?

  1. #46
    Real Bear BeachedBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Havering at Manny's
    Posts
    2,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Rijman View Post
    I get that this topic is upsetting to some people, now we're attacking someone who is asking questions and accusing them of having a personal agenda or being a troll? There are no overwhelming responses that do not fit my agenda, please support this claim. My son already attends Cal and does not play sports for Cal. My personal agenda is to find out what's Cal's stance is on AB 1887 and how that will affect the athletes and sports us fans enjoy watching. Some are content to just wait and see. I am interested in this topic and decided to seek out answers, which I'm doing here in this forum and through the Cal administration, which has bounced me to a 3rd person and no one can yet come up with an official statement from Cal. As alumni and fans don't we have the right to know how this law will affect the athletes and teams we support?
    I don't think I called you a troll (although I may have implied it by echoing the posts of others, reflecting the behavior of your responses). I'm just having fun - and sorry if you felt it was at your expense. I'm not going to justify the claim you ask, primarily because I'm being lazy at the beach. Finally, to your point in bold - see OTB's more eloquent response. I would suggest you definitely have an interest, but not sure about a legal right. In either case, you will need to give it time to sort out. Such is the way of these things.

    Peace, and....


  2. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by BeachedBear View Post
    I don't think I called you a troll (although I may have implied it by echoing the posts of others, reflecting the behavior of your responses). I'm just having fun - and sorry if you felt it was at your expense. I'm not going to justify the claim you ask, primarily because I'm being lazy at the beach. Finally, to your point in bold - see OTB's more eloquent response. I would suggest you definitely have an interest, but not sure about a legal right. In either case, you will need to give it time to sort out. Such is the way of these things.

    Peace, and....

    I'm glad he cares enough to ask the questions. They are good questions. The problem is, we had this discussion. Those good questions were addressed. So, fine, he wasn't here for that. I think people have patiently answered the questions for him. At some point when someone asks questions and doesn't listen to the answers at all, it becomes clear that they aren't really here to ask questions. They are here to hit the panic button and when people don't panic, rather than consider their responses they are frustrated that people aren't listening to them that the world as we know it will end and just keep repeating the same thing. I'm obviously not going to convince him at this point that Cal sports isn't in mortal peril.

    As for a right to know, Cal doesn't have an obligation to hold a press conference every time someone imagines a danger to Cal sports. Personally, don't waste my time with that. If they are going to hold a press conference, I'd much rather here some concrete steps they are going to take to solidify the departments finances.

  3. #48
    I don't disagree with anything you write. My point about the "broad" boycott is that it was supported by a large number of companies and countries in the West (with the sad, notable exception of Israel). When a boycott has that kind of support, it is more likely to be effective. And, yes, the crimes committed by the government of South Africa dwarf what is going on in NC.

    The California boycott is, imo, a "feel good" that does little or nothing to address the issues. Obviously, if every other state in the union prohibited their universities from participating in football in Texas or basketball in Kansas or NC, it would be a big deal. Whether or not it would be an appropriate big deal is another question.

  4. #49
    Doesn't matter what one guy says his group thinks. And FYI, the state government cannot ban the use of private funds for travel to other states and can't ban students of public universities from traveling to other states.. And I'm beginning to wonder what your real agenda is here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rijman View Post
    "But we also think schools should be modifying their activities in order to comply with the spirit of the law, and we understand they've been doing that from the discussions we've had"
    -Rick Zbur, Equality California Executive Director
    (The largest LGBT civil rights group in CA who sponsored AB 1887)

    San Diego Union Tribune article regarding AB 1887 and the impact on CA public schools;
    http://enewspaper.sandiegouniontribu...375d8b&pnum=61

  5. #50
    My problem is that you keep citing that quote, which is legally utterly irrelevant to anything, as if it has legal meaning. The repetition is annoying because what one guy who isn't even in the legislative body that passed the law thinks about its meaning doesn't mean any more than me standing up and saying the spirit of the law is that people comply with the letter of the law. If you're worrying about the PR impact an LGBT group might have, that's another issue altogether. But I don't think it's much of an issue for Cal sports, honestly. They are complying with the law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rijman View Post
    Do you honestly think the Cal admin shares your same opinion of LGBT civil rights groups? If you don't want to have a civil conversation on this topic why not move on?



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •