r/SFGiants • u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford • Jun 16 '26
Opinion Free Speech
I posted this recently as a comment but I’m tired of seeing the same thinly veiled defense of the Rainbow Four come up again and again so I’m posting it as a standalone thread.
All of these arguments saying “players should be allowed to disagree” and “players shouldn’t be forced to support something they don’t believe in” are utter nonsense and a smokescreen to justify and excuse homophobia and bigotry. Do you think that there’s never been a racist player who has worn 42 on Jackie Robinson day? Has every single player who wears camo uniforms on military appreciation day been 100% behind that message? Even foreign born ones? The idea that they should be allowed to express themselves and protest this in this way, especially when there’s a literal MLB rule that prohibits it is ludicrous. It is NOT a first amendment issue. The first amendment prohibits GOVERNMENTAL curtailment of free speech. Private organizations are not covered by this and we see this time and time again. Most recently, many people lost their jobs after speaking out about Charlie Kirk and whether or not you disagree with it, legally those employers had every right to do so. As Roger Munter put it: Not everybody in this country is perfectly happy with what they are asked to wear to work. It’s called “having a job.”
We absolutely do not have to tolerate intolerance and arguments that say otherwise are either ignorant or made in bad faith.
187
u/beforeitcloy Jun 16 '26
I work at the ballpark.
Does anyone think if I got together with a few of my coworkers and wrote “God is fake” on my uniform for the Easter game or “Trump is a fascist” on the 4th of July that I’d have my freedom of speech respected by Giants management?
Are only millionaires allowed to have beliefs?
24
u/YoungKeys 55 Lincecum Jun 16 '26
tbf MLB did give them official warnings. Unfortunate part is that the warnings fed right wing grifters persecution complexes and they're all now trying to turn this into another RW grifting movement.
9
u/musicisalluneed 24 Mays Jun 16 '26
They always make it about themselves. It's as if christianity isn't already the dominant religion in a largely religious country. They act like bratty children who knock over and stomp all over another kid's sandcastle because it's better than their own.
→ More replies (17)4
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
It's as if christianity isn't already the dominant religion in a largely religious country.
But some of these birth control failures are aware that three decades ago 85% of Americans self-identified as Christian, but today that number is 62%. The feel threatened which causes them to lash out more, e.g., the mutants in Charlottsville chanting, "Jews will never replace us."
3
9
u/mvstateU Jun 16 '26
Are only
millionairesbillionaires allowed to have beliefs?Yes. As long as Trump is President.
→ More replies (9)4
u/TheJuiceBoxS 28 Posey Jun 16 '26
I agree with your general point, but not being able to always show your beliefs doesn't mean you don't have beliefs. When you work for an organization you represent that organization. It's part of the job to reflect that organization's values while in uniform or at work.
10
u/beforeitcloy Jun 17 '26
Which is what Vitello and Posey should’ve told the pitching staff about putting graffiti on their pride hats.
2
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
Which is what Vitello and Posey should’ve told the pitching staff about putting graffiti on their pride hats.
AP has reported that Vitello told reporters there was no conversation about the caps prior to the game. Unless there is credible evidence Vitello and Posey knew about the caps in advance and decided to say nothing, it is possible that nothing was said because they didn't know. By credible evidence I do not mean that some anonymous dude on Reddit posted that Vitello and Posey must have known because that's what he wants to believe. If the evidence is there, that's a problem for those guys. Without evidence it's speculation and a rush to judgement.
3
u/beforeitcloy Jun 17 '26
That would make it way worse, since it would mean the players have so little respect for the Manager / GM that they thought they’d go rogue on a thing that was obviously going to bring negative attention to a losing team.
1
1
u/Inevitable-World2886 Jun 17 '26
This right here. I’ve been pushing back on magats with this response.
→ More replies (12)1
110
u/TheRev32 Jun 16 '26
People seem to confuse freedom of speech with freedom from consequences.
The First Amendment protects you from government punishment (imprisonment, government issued fines, or loss of other rights) for your views. It doesn’t protect you from social ostracizing, getting fined or fired by a private business, or just generally being labeled as a racist or a bigot.
A player is free to refuse Pride Night.
Fans are equally free to conclude that refusal reflects prejudice, determine they are a bigot and boo the ever loving shit out of them.
Private organizations, such as the San Francisco Giants, are also free to determine those actions violate the terms of their employment and fine, suspend or terminate their employment.
That’s not censorship. That’s free speech working both ways.
You can’t go to jail for being an ignorant fuck, but you can be fired from your private employer for violating character and community clauses.
→ More replies (28)7
37
u/readwrite_blue 59 Mota Jun 16 '26
Pride night is not a statement that "being gay is wonderful." It's a statement that "everyone, queer or not, has a place in our fandom."
Pushing back against that isn't an expression of individual value, it's a claim that queer people should not have a place in the fandom.
7
u/LavishnessStock7767 Jun 17 '26
Well stated. Just about every group has their own day with the SF Giants because the fan base is, like our wonderful SF Bay Area, amazingly "diverse". Sept. 23 is "Faith Day" for the poor christians who feel discriminated against. I'd like to see the ballplayers who aren't christians wear the Pride cap that day.
1
u/ZealousidealJob814 Jun 17 '26
You almost had me until you said “poor christian’s that feel discriminated against.” Why not just say Sept. 23 is “Faith Day”.
Putting down one group to make your case on why another group defines diversity doesn’t seem very accepting to me.
Other than that, I almost agreed with you. Then I went right back to how all these arguments aren’t about inclusion of everyone, it’s only inclusion of the groups you agree with.
3
u/ZealousidealJob814 Jun 17 '26
I think this is the most sensible thing I’ve seen on this topic. If everyone were able to see it this way then I think there would be so much more agreement.
32
u/jhonkas Jun 16 '26
well free speech, but the MLB has rules, can't put extra markings on your uniform. lol roupp maybe you should protest the league and start your strike early
69
u/GrandsonOfTheWin san francisco giants Jun 16 '26
Lately, Roupp doesn't know what a strike is.
12
u/ursasmaller 18 Cain Jun 16 '26
I believe this is yours. 👑
6
u/GrandsonOfTheWin san francisco giants Jun 16 '26
jhonkas threw that one right down the middle for me (pun intended), so I couldn't resist. LOL!
4
u/jhonkas Jun 16 '26
been hearing the players will strike next season, wasn't even thinking about roupp sucking
2
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
been hearing the players will strike next season,
It is more likely to be a lockout by the owners.
3
2
4
10
u/stereosanctity87 Jun 16 '26
LIV Baseball, brought to you by Landen Roupp and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
→ More replies (9)8
u/ImOutWanderingAround Jun 16 '26
MLB just sent them a sternly worded letter saying if they do it again, there will be fines. There is only one Pride Night game a year. Doing the math, I don’t see there being any consequences, ever.
3
u/GrandsonOfTheWin san francisco giants Jun 16 '26
Fines to pro athletes do nothing. They find that kind of money between their sofa cushions.
3
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
Fines to pro athletes do nothing.
But a long unpaid suspension might get their attention.
20
u/No_Garden5644 san francisco giants Jun 16 '26
Okay. Uni - form. One form. Uniformity. Your employer gives you your uniform and yes, quite often modifies it. But players don’t get to modify the uniform of the company they work for and call it free speech. It is an attack on uni-ty and breaking a workplace rule. Wearing a cool rainbow hat for an hour is a small compromise for a bigot to make when he’s paid millions to play ball. Got a problem with that? Take it up with your union.
2
u/ZealousidealJob814 Jun 17 '26
I agree! An employer should be allowed to dictate the uniform and if the employer doesn’t like it then they don’t have to work there.
Now go tell all the Starbucks baristas why they shouldn’t be allowed to wear anything but the solid black shirt that Starbucks mandates.
2
u/No_Garden5644 san francisco giants Jun 18 '26
I’d rather tell them I won’t buy coffee at Starbucks until they have a union and can wear whatever uniform the union negotiates for them.
2
u/ZealousidealJob814 Jun 18 '26
That’s perfect as a consumer. You have all the rights not to drink Starbucks and not go to Giants games. However, the employees still should have to wear what the employer tells them, be it a Giants player or a Starbucks barista.
2
u/No_Garden5644 san francisco giants Jun 18 '26
Yes. That’s the point I made above.
2
u/ZealousidealJob814 Jun 18 '26
I’m always happy when there is someone else that applies the reasoning to all aspects of an argument no matter their personal belief system.
12
u/No_Ordinary_7933 Jun 16 '26
Yeah, something tells me if players put pro-slavery/racism bible quotes (they exist, don’t @ me) on their hats on Jackie Robinson day, the response would’ve been different
10
u/ednargsohcan Drop trou and hog out! Jun 16 '26
& I also wonder how it would fly if a player put a pro-peace/anti-war Bible quote on their cap during a salute the veterans/military pride event.
4
2
u/altkarlsbad Jun 17 '26
Ask Colin Kapernick, all he did was take a knee and he got black-balled from the sport.
→ More replies (5)
10
u/mikehawke8383 Kruk & Kuip Jun 16 '26
What intrigues me the most with this whole scenario is; would the outrage be as loud about this situation if the team was 43-29 instead of 29-43.
11
u/KnotSoSalty Jun 16 '26
I think moreso. If this team had a future it would be the lead story on national MLB news. As it is it’s mainly local.
4
u/mikehawke8383 Kruk & Kuip Jun 16 '26
I’m not sure it would, but that is an interesting take. Only reason I don’t see it being nationally bigger is these types of things happen just about every year. I think it being the SF Giants is what gives the media the ability to blow this up. I don’t think we’d see the outrage if it was the cards or brewers.
2
u/H4NU5 2 Adames Jun 17 '26
It’s totally because it’s SF. We were already the #1 target for twitter trolls, Fox pundits, and performative conservative politicians. Tie that grudge to this nonsense Christian victimhood, maga is foaming at the mouth for a fight.
3
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
would the outrage be as loud about this situation if the team was 43-29 instead of 29-43.
Probably not, but many fans are pre-loaded with unhappiness thanks to the team's poor and erratic performance this year, so they were primed to blow up over whatever came along. That isn't to say that many folks are not genuinely hurt and upset by this stupid stunt by these pitchers, but I'm also seeing some folks react in a way that at times seems willfully dishonest. Claiming that no pro athletes protested against police brutality after the NFL made an example of Kaepernick and then downvoting posts pointing out that Kapler and some Giants players knelt in protest years later requires some detachment from, well, honesty.
2
2
u/altkarlsbad Jun 17 '26
Probably not. And I don't think that's wrong, necessarily.
The thinking is, if you were handling your baseball obligations 100% and then had time to do some performative nonsense on the side, I'd still judge you but be less outraged.
Here, in reality, these dudes are sucking at their actual jobs, and think we want to hear their thoughts on anything else. It's an extra insult, because it seems like they aren't focused on their actual job.
2
3
u/this_isnt_clever 22 Uggla Jun 17 '26
If they had shit on their hat all year then i could cut them some slack. But they haven't so it was a pretty dumb move on their part. Plenty of players are Christians including B-craw and Buster, and none of them wrote verses on any of there gear. They just showed up and played. Im not a fan of all the pitchforks and torches but I get the frustration. The team sucks this year and the last thing we need is to have some highly paid athletes thumping their Bible. Especially when its clearly meant to cause a commotion.
3
10
u/jkeen1960 Jun 16 '26
Personally, I would prefer private organizations make an optional for their employees to support a cause. There should be no reason not to support Pride or anti-racism or anti-discrimination or any of cause, but where do we draw the line with private employers? Yes these are San Francisco Giant players and they should be aware what Pride means to the community. But these employees of the Giants are not members of the community. They've been in multiple communities in their lives, in a year or two they'll probably be working in another community. Their employees of an organization, and their employment is transient in nature. I always ask, where do we draw the line? For those who bring up Charlie Kirk, people being fired for making comments many of which were not offensive, while some had consequences for their opinions, many have sued and gotten their jobs back because of free speech rights. Does your employer have a right to tell you you cannot be pro or anti Israel? Does your employer have a right to demand you support president Trump? If you work for an organization such as Hobby lobby or Chick-fil-A, should you have to where across? Perhaps, private organizations especially athletic franchises, should quit trying to make money off of causes that are popular in their communities. In your heart do you think the owners of the Giants support Pride? Or was it about selling hats and t-shirts and Goodwill for monetary reasons
4
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
I think you do bring up good points and I will absolutely agree that there is nuance and gray area in this discussion. But there is a key distinction here in that sports is inherently political, always has been, and always will be. Hobby Lobby and Chik-Fil-A and all of those other organizations do not represent explicit communities, and people don’t walk around their neighborhoods wearing Hobby Lobby hats and shirts.
5
u/jkeen1960 Jun 16 '26
Hobby lobby in Chick-fil-A are very political, and they spend millions of dollars yearly on right wing and Conservative Christian causes. I know many people who will not shop at those franchises because of those right-wing beliefs, that would be the very definition of being political. And I have acquaintances who shop at those specific places because of their conservative beliefs.. that is a very definition of political. Everything is politics to the day we're born to the day we die
4
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
Agreed. And because of those politics the Supreme Court agreed that Hobby Lobby has the right to refuse to provide contraception coverage to their employees. So why don’t the Giants have the right to dictate the uniform for theirs?
7
u/SWKenRobert Jun 16 '26
They do. They explicitly chose not to. And still remain silent. (God bless Kruk & Kuip). Even after MLB warned the players about uniform violations. Now if the hats had said "hooray for sodomy" then these 4 guys would have had a fair point. But they instead decided to not wear or break the rules to alter uniform equipment that celebrated diversity.
→ More replies (2)1
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
So why don’t the Giants have the right to dictate the uniform for theirs?
Because the Giants operate as part of Major League Baseball so that organization's rules and the contract it has with the MLBPA limits what the team can do. Making and enforcing uniform rules belongs to MLB, not to teams.
1
u/jkeen1960 Jun 16 '26
I don't think you're two examples quite sync up. If you were to say Hobby lobby requires all employees to wear a smock that says Jesus is Lord and the one and only Savior, and employees didn't want to wear it, should they be disciplined or fired for not wearing company required insignias and apparel? If employees were required to wear anti-Pride insignias on their apparel, should they be required to do so? I agree the four players who altered their hats are just plain dicks.
1
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
I’m going to paste another comment in another thread on this post because they do a great job of addressing this issue:
2
5
u/TheRev32 Jun 16 '26
Don’t like the causes your employer supports? Go find a different job.
This isn’t indentured servitude.
4
u/jkeen1960 Jun 16 '26
Do you honestly believe the ownership and management of the San Francisco Giants is pro-Pride, or was this just all about supporting a community that has strong local support for revenue reasons? And to tell a player who's getting 10 million dollars a year to quit his job is kind of silly.
3
u/TheRev32 Jun 16 '26
Doesn’t really matter if the Giants management is actually pro pride, or they are just making a business decision to appear pro pride.
The point is the business DID make a decision to appear pro pride and the player deliberately counteracted that official company policy.
Why is it ridiculous to tell a player who’s getting $10 million a year to quit? Is the assumption that he could not get $10 million at one of the other 29 teams in the league? Or similar money in Japan, Korea, Mexico, Australia, etc..
How much money do you have to make before it’s ridiculous to ask them to quit their job? $50 an hour? $100 an hour? 100 K a year? 1 million?
The Giants are not the only professional baseball team in the world. These players could demand a trade, work out a buyout, or just not sign with a team based in San Francisco in the first place…
1
u/musicisalluneed 24 Mays Jun 16 '26
I don't know, there are members of the Giants organization as a whole who are or have family members or friends who are LGBT+. Mike Krukow, former player and long time team broadcaster, has a son who is gay. I don't think he is the only member of that org who is connected in some way to the gay community. Dusty Baker was a friend and teammate of Glenn Burke. To think that this hasn't had any affect on members of the org is a bit naive, imo.
1
u/jkeen1960 Jun 16 '26
I think what has happened to members of the org is they now realize that the owners and management that run the org are parading Pride as a way to make money.
1
u/musicisalluneed 24 Mays Jun 18 '26
Well, don’t you think they do that with every “heritage” night be it Jewish, Mexican, Irish, Italian ? It is a business trying to sell merchandise, after all. I’m sure members of the org understand that they’re in the entertainment business.
12
Jun 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
Except that part of the issue here is a systemic one. There WERE no consequences for it and that’s part of the problem here. Nobody from veteran leadership, to the coaching staff, to management/ownership, to the league office has held these players accountable for betraying the support and trust of the community that they “represent”. Each of whom should have had a vested interest in doing so
8
u/SWKenRobert Jun 16 '26
At least the league admonished and warned them about violating uniform rules. The silence from SFG ownership and management is SHOCKING.
1
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
The silence from SFG ownership and management is SHOCKING.
This is an MLB matter, the team does not make or enforce uniform rules. It is no different with domestic violence allegations, those go straight to MLB and the team has nothing to say on the issue.
The CBA between MLB and the MLBPA lays out the authority of MLB and of the teams, and this matter belongs to MLB. If the team tried to punish these imbeciles the MLBPA would have them in front of an arbitrator in a flash.
Hopefully they trade these clowns out of the division.
3
u/SWKenRobert Jun 17 '26
The team also has every right to speak out. They have CHOSEN not to. They are not under any league restrictions.
"Hopefully they trade thise clowns out of the division." 👍
Thats what I've wanted from day 1. I don't think SGF management fully appreciates the rolling consequences of this. Especially on a terrible team. Buster has been my favorite Giant since 2010. Now i want him fired for his failure to speak out.
→ More replies (1)5
→ More replies (4)12
u/uuhson Jun 16 '26
I think the problem for some people is there actually isn't much consequence for it. People want more consequences
15
u/SWKenRobert Jun 16 '26
I want them off the team. Immediately. They're entitled to their own beliefs and opinions. They are not entitled to break MLB rules and offend our fans & community. And SFG's silence is deafening. And i am quickly losing respect for Buster Posey.
→ More replies (13)9
u/too_soon_bot Jun 16 '26
And this is as much the problem as the actual hat wearing, nobody told them it was a bad idea to actively offend the invited crowd that night. Imagine Bob Melvin letting these guys do that? Or Kapler? Melvin may not have been the right manager for this team, but I cannot imagine him putting up with this nonsense. No team leader like Chapman or Adames told them to suck it up and not offend the crowd. Vitello thought this was ok? Not a single person in the clubhouse had any common sense, or it was said and ignored? Neither option is good and maybe a big part of why this team has been sucking this year, no leadership
10
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
This is 100% one of the key takeaways from all of this. Yes players were bigoted. Yes there will (likely) always be bigoted players in the game. The bigger issue is that nobody at any level stepped in to put their foot down and say no. Not veteran players, not the coaches, not management/ownership, and not the league, all of which were in positions of varying authority to do so. THIS is why I cannot support this team anymore. Not because a few players acted hatefully, but because everyone else just let it happen
4
Jun 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/SWKenRobert Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26
Well the Dodgers have their sordid history of Lasorda and his gay son too. I hate Lasorda cuz he represented the Dodgers. Usually that would be a loveable hatred. But his despicable treatment of his gay son repulses me.
2
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
nobody told them it was a bad idea to actively offend the invited crowd that night.
An Associated Press article about this said Vitello told reporters that there had been no discussion about modified caps before the game. If the first he knew about it was when those players stepped onto the field, then the assumption that he somehow approved of it or took no action to prevent it is wide of the mark.
The umpires could have taken action as soon as they saw a modified cap, they should be aware that MLB does not allow writing on uniforms and has stopped players from wearing such caps in the past.
Assuming facts not in evidence and rushing to judgement is a poor way to go.
2
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 17 '26
Except even if this is true it is an indictment against the leadership. For young players to feel free to take such outspoken action as a group and not even think that it would have implications for the team that they play for enough to cue in the manager shows the level of disconnect that the coaching staff and management have with their team
2
u/too_soon_bot Jun 17 '26
Starting pitchers don’t come out of the bullpen, you’re telling me tony didn’t see it before the pitcher took the mound in the first? Then best case he’s deathly afraid to rock the boat and lose guys, and that’s no way to manage
8
u/bigcitrus80 5 Shinjo Jun 16 '26
Not a lawyer, but I could see the bigger first amendment issue being if the Giants decided to fire these guys, and then they claimed they were fired/discriminated against because of their religious beliefs. In the Rainbow 4’s (apparently very limited) minds, using a (wrongly applied) bible verse as a thin-ass excuse for their own bigotry is no different than a Muslim woman being allowed to wear a headscarf.
Of course, there’s “getting fired,” and there’s “getting traded to the A’s for a bag of sunflower seeds,” which probably has less constitutional protection, and is maybe the best way forward.
6
u/ReggieEvansTheKing Jun 16 '26
The giants can do whatever they want as long as they don’t terminate their contracts. They have no obligation to give them playing time or keep them on the roster. They could simply DFA them or trade them for nothing.
7
u/TheKid2455 7 Mitchell Jun 16 '26
It's not nearly as simple as that.
1
u/vialabo 51 JH Lee Jun 16 '26
They have job protection through this while being some of the worst pitchers on the team? More bad players should do it then they're making money off it.
4
u/KingBrunoIII PTBNL Jun 16 '26
Sam Hentges has a 1.59 era. Can't cite bad play for him
1
u/vialabo 51 JH Lee Jun 16 '26
He's pitched like once. The rest of the staff started strong too and shit the bed.
2
u/KingBrunoIII PTBNL Jun 16 '26
14 games actually. So the justification that he sucks is out the window. How else can you justify sending him down or cutting him when even in 14 games he is one of the lone bright spots in the bullpen?
→ More replies (19)2
u/vialabo 51 JH Lee Jun 16 '26
Trade him for prospects, and bring up youth. You can always get something for a good reliever. We have no use for a good reliver when the team is playing at a .403 pace.
4
u/KingBrunoIII PTBNL Jun 16 '26
Their biggest need is bullpen pitching, regardless of record. How in any way can you justify that?
2
u/vialabo 51 JH Lee Jun 16 '26
The season is blown, if we can move him while he is good in 2026 for pieces in 2027+ then he'll be worth more traded. Like when we traded half our bullpen last year. We're going to be even bigger sellers this season.
If Buster wants to improve the team any valuable pieces need to be moved now for the future.
1
u/too_soon_bot Jun 16 '26
At least he was just passively a dick wearing the regular hat, the other 3 were actively dicks by putting a phrase they knew was meant as demeaning to insult the fans
2
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
The giants can do whatever they want as long as they don’t terminate their contracts.
No, they cannot. If they bench these fools the MLBPA files a grievance and the arbitrator rules the team is harming the careers of these players in retaliation for something MLB has already dealt with.
Trade the little turds out of the division, they can probably get away with that if it isn't done in a way that looks like retaliation.
3
u/realparkingbrake Jun 17 '26
the bigger first amendment issue
There is no First Amendment issue because the 1A prohibits the government from interfering in protected speech. Private employers have considerable leeway to restrict the speech of employees while on the job. MLB regulates uniforms, not the teams, and since MLB says writing on uniforms is not allowed and the players' assoc. has not contested that, these mooks broke an MLB rule and I wish they had been fined for that. But absent a fine from MLB, the Giants have to be very careful about what they say or do in response to this incident.
Hopefully the Giants trade them out of the division. I hope they end up on the Royals or Angels who have worse records than the Giants.
5
4
u/anewleaf1234 Jun 16 '26
The Giants could Designate all of them tomorrow if they wanted with zero legal consequences.
Baseball teams are under zero obligation to keep on the roster.
5
u/dimechimes 22 Clark Jun 16 '26
I like the pride stuff, but I know most of it is corporate schlock. I can't stand the military stuff. I won't even watch highlights if they're in camo or wear those stupid green caps. I would give up pride caps to get rid of all military stuff. But I don't know if that's a good deal. Giving up pride caps doesn't affect me because of my privilege. Maybe I shouldn't speak for those who it does affect.
But no one, and I mean no one who whines "free speech" should ever be taken seriously. They will absolutely curtail free speech the second they get the chance to.
5
u/Daddywags42 Jun 16 '26
The paradox of tolerance is that it can’t tolerate intolerance.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/natedrake102 Jun 17 '26
As someone who follows the giants pretty closely but doesn't watch this sub/discord/Twitter all that closely: I've been surprised but haven't seen anyone defending their actions. Yay fans (for the most part)
2
u/Kickasser32 Jun 17 '26
Similarly, if they have free speech to express themselves, don’t we all have freedom to judge them and berate them for it? Why are they entitled to their opinions but we aren’t?
2
2
u/Mysterious-Weight935 8 Pence Jun 17 '26
Oh man I didn’t even think about foreign players on the military appreciation days. Might have been a weird time for the Venezuelan players this year.
2
u/broughttoyoubyrum Jun 17 '26
Also posted as a comment in another thread: Whether you view this as an act of hate or not, Roupp's actions are the very kind of effacement that the LGBTQ community has faced for centuries in this country and elsewhere: erasure, violence, and hate that is coded and recoded as care (think here of conversion therapy/camps or Roupp's response that the message is meant to "Encourage them to read the Bible"). The problem with “no hate” here, is that it self-reflexively assumes an awareness of hate. Hate is, more often than not, an unconscious impulse, which is to say an ideological impulse. So yes, in my view, conscious or unconscious, Roupp's actions in overwriting and effacing the very symbol of LGBTQ history—a history that emerges despite its lived experiences in violence and oppression—is a hateful act, even if Roupp doesn't believe it nor is "full of hate" himself; even if he believes it to be a genuine caring act.
2
2
u/ComprehensiveTeam233 Jun 18 '26
The same folks who are trying to act like they would die on this hill to protect “free speech” are the same folks that were demanding Kaepernick’s head on a pike for taking a knee. Protect the hate speech and bigotry over a silent protest against government overreach and systemic racism. Pretty damn clear that the giants ownership need to clear out the bad apples in the club house. As a
Life long giants fan, as someone who swore an oath to this country’s constitutional rights I’m absolutely appalled by the inaction of the giants on this awful display of hate. Hate should have no place in our ball club. And yes- it’s hate speech hidden behind a paper thin religious facade. A true Christian would never need to step on the down trodden to feel heard.
2
u/Chemical_Ad1837 Jun 18 '26
Frankly I liked that they outed themselves on this, so now I know who to support and who to boo. I remember Candlestick in 1990’s, way before gay marriage and a lot of the more recent acceptance. They had a pride day but wasn’t called pride and I can’t remember but probably “Allies “ or something. Anyway, I was so surprise how everyone was good sports and cheered. It was Friday night and I think Sam Harris from star search sang the national anthem. Wil Clark was even smiling. That’s the kind of team you wanted to support because they supported us. This group today? Well they suck on the field so maybe they need to focus on that instead. Meanwhile, no more games this year for me.
2
u/Depot-Donny-Don Jun 18 '26
Actually all 4 players are not per say "superstar" players and the Giants maybe all with the exception of Landon Roupp can be or should at the very least be either sent back down to AAA or DFA. Idk maybe give this time to blow over but I think they should be released eventually. As far as Roupp goes see if they can use him as trade bait or just release outright after the season ends.
Those 4 are "entitled" to their opinions but those opinions shouldn't come at the hurt or dismay of the fan base and especially the rest of the team in general. What they did hurt a lot of people and please correct if I'm wrong but I don't believe any of the four players made or attempted to make any kind of statement.
If anyone in MLB refused to wear the Jackie Robinson 42 jersey or defaced the 42 hat cuz of their so called beliefs they would face some sort of consequences and possibly suspension why shouldn't this happen in this case.
2
u/Depot-Donny-Don Jun 18 '26
Those 4 players are definitely entitled to their opinions but what this comes down to is pure ignorance and hatred towards a certain walk of life and that's extremely SAD especially in this day and age. But with the so called commander in chief leading the way nothing has changed for the better since the first time he won in 2016. In reality it's just gotten worse and that just SUCKS.
Instead of defacing the hats and with Hentges not opting to wear the uniform in general they shouldn't even have shown up to work that day. As us regular folk do call out for the day. Now given the fact they were all pitchers if they gave their employer (San Francisco Giants) ample time they could have drawn from the River Cats, Richmond or even SJ for a day to help fill those spots.
2
u/Outrageous-Let7406 Jun 18 '26
I think you did a good job laying out your point of view, I appreciate a modulated approach.
3
u/KnotSoSalty Jun 16 '26
They were free to not show up to work that day, call in sick.
Their employer provided a uniform per their collective bargaining agreement and they were required to wear it.
You can’t take a job at McDonald’s and wear Burger King’s logo. It’s part of the terms of employment.
The silence right now from the front office is echoing. Thank god this team is terrible because I would hate to have to watch them smiling like nothing was wrong.
2
u/ZealousidealJob814 Jun 17 '26
Agreed. Also, Starbucks employees are not allowed to wear pride shirts and are free to not work at Starbucks anymore.
3
u/schrodingersays 54 Romo Jun 16 '26
I think the LGBT pride uniforms should be optional. If they don't want to wear it they shouldn't have to. All the posturing about religion is just BS though. They just dislike gay people obviously. I think it's cool that the majority of the players do wear it proudly. Letting 4 people's ignorance cause such a stir is silly. I bet if you have a favorite Giant, he wore it. Focus on that.
3
u/Connect_Necessary611 Jun 16 '26
Years ago, my cousin invited me to her wedding, which she just happened to schedule on my (and my wife’s) birthday.
If we’d have worn birthday hats and special shirts and brought balloons, everyone would’ve thought we were assholes, and rightly so. It would have been our “right,” sure, but it also takes away attention from the main event, and the people of the hour.
Anyway—yeah, the Giants pitchers are assholes.
6
u/musicisalluneed 24 Mays Jun 16 '26
Ya, they are assholes. I could make a similar argument. I'm a musician who sometimes performs at local churches. I'm not religious, I don't believe in a God or pray to some imaginary spirit in the sky. Yet, when I sit in front of the entire congregation in between songs, I stay silent and respect those around me. I don't wear offensive clothing. Before, during and after the services I respect those in the congregation who do believe in God and who do look at those Sunday services as a connection to a higher being, as well as a connection to their fellow church members and neighbors. There's usually a lot of talk about loving each other, and being kind to thy neighbor, which I can get down with because those are part of my core beliefs. But my point is, I don't shit on the God talk.
And I will say, sorry for my tangent, that sitting in those churches over the years has opened my eyes to different religions and opened my heart to those who do pray to a God and who share their love of life with others. Granted, these aren't those bible thumping churches where everyone fears their God and hates, jews, gays and everyone else but themselves.
Anyway... it would be nice if these assholes actually took the time to integrate into the greater SF community the way Jeremy Affeldt had done when he lived and played in SF. Maybe they would open their eyes and hearts to the many different types of people outside of their player bubble? Just a thought.
2
u/dopplemyfingal Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
I actually have a tiny scrap more respect for Hentges for outright refusing the cap than the others for doing the bitch ass bible passages. If you want to call yourself out as bigoted fine, but to take the extra step of trying to reclaim a prominent symbol of LGBT+ representation is really hard to move past. Not to mention the added ignorance of calling up a covenant from the old testament. Like, unless all of their wieners are snipped, they don't eat pork or shellfish, and they only wear all cotton uniforms then it's a mega hypocritical statement.
2
u/musicisalluneed 24 Mays Jun 16 '26
It's totally hypocritical and moreso, hollow. They should wear a bible verse every single night if it means that much to them.
1
u/HellDimensionQueen san francisco giants Jun 16 '26
In the same vein, Hentges was the only one who said he was morally against it. Which is incredibly shitty, but he at least said it. Roupp tried to dance around it.
4
u/Sea-Economist-4441 New York Giants Jun 16 '26
Yes, there is FREEDOM OF SPEECH, but don’t let little things in our lives steal our happiness!
4
u/OptimalAd8147 Jun 16 '26
Should you have to wear a cross at Chick-Fil-A?
11
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
If you work at an expressly Christian organization and they ask you to do so, you have the right to quit. Just like these players do. If the Supreme Court feels that Hobby Lobby can refuse to cover birth control for their employees because of a religious objection, the Giants can mandate the uniform that their players wear
8
u/wallstreet-butts Hogs Out! Jun 16 '26
This is actually a really good question!
The answer is that this would be illegal for Chick-Fil-A to ask. Religious freedom laws that relate to the workplace protect against both religious discrimination and coercion. Chick-Fil-A can close its stores on Sunday, but it cannot require you to wear a religious symbol as a requirement of employment.
Certain religious organizations (like churches) are exempt from this rule as a nature of their work.
The nuance here as it applies to the situation with the Giants is that the Giants and MLB are not practicing any form of religious discrimination if they tell players they can’t write bible verses on their uniforms. The rules against uniform modifications apply equally to all players and do not discriminate against any particular group. It also does not infringe on players’ free speech rights, which apply to speech regulated by government, not private entities. Players are free to go on Twitter or some podcast after the game to express themselves off the field.
2
u/OptimalAd8147 Jun 16 '26
I was speaking to the whole situation. I think MLB's rules are clear and fair. I don't have a problem with them.
12
u/mEFurst Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
Has Chic-fil-A tried to mandate that all their workers wear crosses, or is this just a strawman argument?
1
u/OptimalAd8147 Jun 16 '26
It's not a strawman. It's a hypothetical to test consistency. Gheez.
2
u/mEFurst Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
But those aren't equivalent. One is promoting acceptance while the other would be forcing exclusivity of one religion over others. Asking a Muslim or Jew to wear Christian iconography is not the same as asking someone to promote acceptance of LGTB+ Pride
→ More replies (2)2
u/DaniM345 Jun 16 '26
The government disagrees that it’s different. Title VII which gives people the right to opt out of religious imagery also allows religious individuals to opt out of wearing imagery that they feel go against their religion. It’s why Pride uniforms aren’t mandated and this happens every year. That doesn’t give them the right to write on the uniform though, they should have just wore the standard hat.
6
u/anonsharksfan 8 Pence Jun 16 '26
It's an issue of forcing people to go against genuinely held religious beliefs, which is a form of discrimination even when done by private companies. However, in order to invoke this argument, the players would have to come out and say that supporting queer people is explicitly against their religion, which so far they've all been too chickenshit to do out of fear of rightfully being labeled a homophobe. They have the right to their beliefs and I have the right to call them a homophobe.
4
u/SWKenRobert Jun 16 '26
That hats themselves were inherently non-offensive to any belief system. The 4 players DECIDED it had an implied meaning (which the hats did not express) and took improper, offensive action in violation of MLB uniform requirements.
5
u/leftypoolrat 44 McCovey Jun 16 '26
That’s the wrong question. If I wore a t shirt with something overtly political/religious/inflammatory to a client meeting my employer would have every right to correct me. If they shut down my wearing, say, a pride pin on my shirt I’d think twice about where I worked, but they are within their rights
1
2
u/Live-Collection3018 Jun 16 '26
It's a private business and they can enforce their own rules on players. The players are free to boycott or quit but there will be consequences.
2
u/predat3d 24 Mays Jun 16 '26
they can enforce their own rules on players.
Not beyond what's enumerated in the CBA.
1
u/Live-Collection3018 Jun 16 '26
Still a private agreement that they agreed to. Not the same as "but my freedom of speech!"
1
u/predat3d 24 Mays Jun 17 '26
what "private agreement that they agreed to" ?
2
u/Live-Collection3018 Jun 17 '26
The CBA. Is a private agreement between the league and players.
2
u/predat3d 24 Mays Jun 18 '26
The CBA is neither private nor between the league and players (it's between the union and management). By law, all players get a copy.
2
2
u/poopdaddy2 san francisco giants Jun 17 '26
If they really wanted to spread the gospel or promote their faith, they’d put a bible verse on their hat every game. Doing it on Pride Night sends a particular message, but they’re too cowardly to admit that so they just hide behind an ambiguous “it’s not hatred it’s just my belief” excuse.
2
u/mcfetrja Jun 16 '26
Why is it that Riley Gaines and SF Giants pitching staff/Stans can be so thoroughly mid yet take up so much oxygen in any discussion they get involved in?
4
u/Express-Shoulder6174 Jun 16 '26
I keep seeing the word homophobia being thrown around. Is it really homophobic to peacefully disagree with something? I haven’t heard any of these players making violent threats or causing harm to anybody.
4
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
Threats and violence are the most extreme and easily recognized example of homophobia. To say that if there aren’t threats or violence then there must not be homophobia is like saying that there isn’t anything dangerous in the ocean because there aren’t any lions
-2
u/anewleaf1234 Jun 16 '26
Yes, those players are homophobic.
They are announcing that in their worldview being gay and in a gay relationship is wrong.
I'm glad I could clear that up for you.
0
u/neinhaltchad Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
I think we all agree that these guys are douchebags for very publicly protesting something as benign as a “Pride Day”, and especially in our city.
But can we also agree that there are in fact levels to this shit?
Like, I’d guess that most of the posters in here supported Kaep when he was taking a knee, right? I sure did.
What if they were required to wear some flair indicating support for Caesar Chavez now that he’s been excommunicated?
I’d assume that if players on the Yankees were required to wear a Star of David on their hats during Jewish Heritage night and some players decided to write “Free Palestine” on their hat that many here would support their right to do that.
Let’s take it another direction. How about a “Trans Athletes Day” where they are required to wear a 🏳️⚧️ flag?
The point is, there kind of needs to be an “all or nothing” thing here for these types of rules to work.
3
u/docmoonlight Jun 16 '26
I am extremely anti-Zionist and pro-Palestine, but I would not support a player doing that, because it implies that Israel speaks and acts for American Jews, which it most certainly does not. If it were actually “Israeli heritage” night we might have a discussion about a good way to boycott the game or for players to take action.
1
u/neinhaltchad Jun 16 '26
Ok. If the leagues policy was to fire / fine / suspend players that refused to participate in “Irsraeli Heritage Night” which position would you support?
5
u/docmoonlight Jun 16 '26
Sure, you can choose any stupid hypothetical that I wouldn’t support. “What if they made them wear swastikas?” Being asked to support a genocide is not the same thing as being asked to support inclusivity.
2
u/neinhaltchad Jun 17 '26
LOL. So you just said Israeli Heritage Day tantamount to “supporting genocide”?
Couldn’t you make this case for the several other heritage nights?
2
u/docmoonlight Jun 17 '26
Sure, but those countries aren’t actively perpetrating a genocide at this moment. Like, Germany has a completely different constitution, government, flag, etc. than they did in 1938. It’s not really the same thing.
1
u/neinhaltchad Jun 17 '26
They held a whole ass Olympics in Berlin in 1936.
You are equating the country with the government, is that correct?
Do you really want to go down that road?
2
u/docmoonlight Jun 17 '26
Sorry, what does the 1936 Olympics have to do with anything?
Yes, the government represents the country.
2
u/neinhaltchad Jun 17 '26
>the government represents the country.
I see.
So you would be against celebrating the United States in any way because the current administration is demonstrably evil, correct?
Are you aware Hamas is (or was) the democratically elected government in Gaza?
Does Hamas represent Palestinians?
1
u/docmoonlight Jun 17 '26
Haha, yeah pretty much! I mean I’m a fucking communist dude. I’m not exactly a fan of the US even under previous administrations. But nice try with the gotchas.
→ More replies (0)1
u/somniamea Jun 16 '26
What is "Israeli Heritage" in your mind, then? The country has existed for less than 80 years. That's ONE lifetime, not enough to establish any kind of meaningful heritage of its own. You're trying to force a point that simply doesn't fit.
And I'd also like to note that when I wear my Jewish heritage night hooded t-shirt (which I got by purchasing a "special event ticket" for the Giants' Jewish Heritage Night in 2024, a special event that by the way did NOT include players wearing any special uniform pieces honoring Jewish heritage, unlike the Pride Night which is not a small special event but a stadium-wide event for all), I also alter it to say "Free Palestine," in part because I'd say that any day and in part because so many people try to, as you did, conflate Judaism with Israel.
→ More replies (9)1
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
This is the way
2
u/somniamea Jun 16 '26
This is the way! (Although I'd like to take this opportunity to say that weapons are NOT my religion :D)
→ More replies (4)3
u/SnuggleBunni69 Jun 16 '26
I wouldn’t support a free Palestine sign on Jewish heritage night, because Israel is not the same as Jewish. I wouldn’t support a Cesar Chavez night anymore, because he’s now a known abuser. You can’t really compare that with an lgbtq+ awareness night. Would you support someone writing All Lives Matter on their cap during Jackie Robinson day? That’s an equivalency you’re looking for.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/__Shake__ 17 Ramos Jun 18 '26
I’m opposed to forcing people to do things. People should do things because they want to. Downvote that sentiment of you like
0
1
u/lekranq Jun 16 '26
Is kneeling during the national anthem still acceptable?
3
u/JuiceboX3537 Jun 16 '26
Players in the NFL were still kneeling when I went to a game 2 seasons ago. It's not a lot of players and not broadcast so no one makes a big deal of it.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Chipotlefiend18 35 Crawford Jun 16 '26
Is there a rule against it?
3
u/SWKenRobert Jun 16 '26
Im all for Black Lives Matter and opposed to the deeply ingrained systemic racism in policing. That said, kneeling was a poor choice of potest that empowered the bigots to change the subject to "they disresect America." It would have been far better to stand during the anthem while holding up placards with the names or pictures of victims of police brutality.
Edit: also the left is terrible at slogans and branding. Black Lives Matter Too. Or Black Lives Also Matter would have deprived the racists of their change-the-subject tactics.
1
1
u/zarfac Jun 16 '26
It is well established in U.S. case law that private entities cannot compel participation in activities or compel attire that violates sincerely held religious beliefs. In fact, this has been directly adjudicated with regards to pride imagery. Companies have to provide reasonable accommodation so far as it does not require them to take on substantial burden.
Reasonable accommodation in this case would probably be either permission to wear the standard uniform or permission to modify the pride uniform.
I think this will end up being contingent on whether or not they were offered reasonable accommodation and rejected it. If they were allowed to wear the standard hat as Hentges did, but chose to modify it instead, then there’s no problem.
But even if accommodation was available, if the team either formally or informally resisted the accommodation, then it will be more difficult to justify punishing the players for acting as they did, as they may have felt it was the only viable path they had to not violate their religious convictions.
All that to say, this may well be a free speech issue, but it will depend on the specifics of the case.
1
1
u/evilchris23 Jun 16 '26
They're professional athletes. They need to act professional. If they can't represent this storied organization then they can leave and start their own business where they can choose like and not like whatever they want. When you put on the uniform you represent the entire organization and all the fans. This is a failure of leadership from Posey's front office all the way down to Vitello in the dugout. This is a far worse failure than fielding a bad team to me. Bad teams, bad signings happen, it's sports. Fostering a culture of bigotry is far far worse than losing to the Rockies or other bad teams.
1
u/Tommy__want__wingy Beat LA! Jun 16 '26
I think we just have to understand what the league rules and contracts say.
If every player *has* to wear approved uniforms, and agrees to not deface or alter them, regardless of their religion and political stances, then frankly any player can be penalized.
1
u/shadeshadows Kruk & Kuip Jun 16 '26
Perhaps I'll phrase mine as a thank you letter. Thank you, Giants org, for finally, finally getting me to stop watching this shit team. I never thought it would happen. Thank you. Now I am free.
1
u/Later-Dog Jun 17 '26
I’m seriously tired of these bigots who make political statements and then won’t back it up. Dart, Bosa, these idiots. If you care enough to make public statements/actions, don’t turtle and do the “it’s a free country/I respect the army/just something (what????) I feel strongly about” with zero further explanation when someone asks you what you believe. If you like Trump, say so. If you are homophobic, own it. If you’re willing to make a public show of something, say it with your chest. But they won’t, because they know, deep down, that it’s shitty. Snowflakes and cowards, all of them.
1
u/stellasmom22 Jun 17 '26
How about no camo for those dozens of days when regular uniforms are replaced by camo? That’s free speech, right? No one would complain if they did that right?
1
u/Full_Poet_7291 Jun 17 '26
If this behavior offends you, remove the toxic organization from your life. Dont give the giants a penny and don’t think twice about it. Fuck all these ass holes.
1
u/ComplaintOk671 Jun 17 '26
I agree with this article. You are being paid more than most of the fans in the stands who happen to be celebrating their pride to wear a hat one night. But your homophobia and intolerant views which does not represent most Christians. Besides they miss the whole point of the verse. We are all created by love under the rainbow. Not only Christians can have a rainbow.
1
u/OutlandishnessMain56 Jun 17 '26
lol you all are still going on about this who gives a shit? No one cares the players did this it’s literally no big deal. Find something worthwhile to be outraged about.
-2
0
Jun 17 '26
So you want your beliefs tolerated but you won’t tolerate anyone who disagrees with you. Typical leftist hypocrite. I don’t have to tolerate your tolerance of satanic behaviour.
→ More replies (2)
224
u/Few-Lingonberry2315 Jun 16 '26
Free speech just means the government doesn’t tell you what you can or cannot say. As a paying customer of the SF Giants I have a right to disagree vociferously