Mark H.

Some views are not debateable, they are simply incorrect.  

Some views are not debateable, they are simply incorrect.  

He's responding to a discussion that's based entirely on certain people voicing their incorrect opinions. 

Have you actually read what the two women wrote? Kristina Costabile even said she "love this league and appreciates how much the safety of women in it is taken seriously."
They were both specifically criticizing Pinball Clemons for letting Kelly practice - not so much the league as a whole.  And he is no longer practicing, so it appears the league agrees with their comments.
And no, fining someone for making a comment on which you took affirmative action...would not be equitable
 
 

I don't know if you're stirring the pot or if you really believe that - but the answer is simple
No, people are not entitled to push far fetched beliefs and opinions on others - there are limits to far how far freedom and speech and opinion can be taken - and it would be an absolute disaster if there weren't
If you need an example - Google James Keegstra

Some views are not debateable, they are simply incorrect.  

Some views are not debateable, they are simply incorrect.  

Some views are not debateable, they are simply incorrect.  

It’s how some respond when their absurd drivel is rightly challenged is what is frustrating to me.

He's responding to a discussion that's based entirely on certain people voicing their incorrect opinions. 

Have you actually read what the two women wrote? Kristina Costabile even said she "love this league and appreciates how much the safety of women in it is taken seriously."
They were both specifically criticizing Pinball Clemons for letting Kelly practice - not so much the league as a whole.  And he is no longer practicing, so it appears the league agrees with their comments.
And no, fining someone for making a comment on which you took affirmative action...would not be equitable
 
 

Challenge, yes
Defend, no

He's responding to a discussion that's based entirely on certain people voicing their incorrect opinions. 

Have you actually read what the two women wrote? Kristina Costabile even said she "love this league and appreciates how much the safety of women in it is taken seriously."
They were both specifically criticizing Pinball Clemons for letting Kelly practice - not so much the league as a whole.  And he is no longer practicing, so it appears the league agrees with their comments.
And no, fining someone for making a comment on which you took affirmative action...would not be equitable
 
 

I don't know if you're stirring the pot or if you really believe that - but the answer is simple
No, people are not entitled to push far fetched beliefs and opinions on others - there are limits to far how far freedom and speech and opinion can be taken - and it would be an absolute disaster if there weren't
If you need an example - Google James Keegstra

Have you actually read what the two women wrote? Kristina Costabile even said she "love this league and appreciates how much the safety of women in it is taken seriously."
They were both specifically criticizing Pinball Clemons for letting Kelly practice - not so much the league as a whole.  And he is no longer practicing, so it appears the league agrees with their comments.
And no, fining someone for making a comment on which you took affirmative action...would not be equitable
 
 

Have you actually read what the two women wrote? Kristina Costabile even said she "love this league and appreciates how much the safety of women in it is taken seriously."
They were both specifically criticizing Pinball Clemons for letting Kelly practice - not so much the league as a whole.  And he is no longer practicing, so it appears the league agrees with their comments.
And no, fining someone for making a comment on which you took affirmative action...would not be equitable
 
 

I don't know if you're stirring the pot or if you really believe that - but the answer is simple
No, people are not entitled to push far fetched beliefs and opinions on others - there are limits to far how far freedom and speech and opinion can be taken - and it would be an absolute disaster if there weren't
If you need an example - Google James Keegstra

Barker has double blue blood going through his veins even though he's worked for the Als, Ti cats & Stamps. He's loyal through & through to Toronto to the point that they can do no wrong. hH seems to take offense whenever anyone criticizes the Argos. His emotions gets the better of him & he feels the need to defend the logo.
As an analyst, he has to be neutral. Or at least as neutral as Milt is to the Bombers.

I don't know if you're stirring the pot or if you really believe that - but the answer is simple
No, people are not entitled to push far fetched beliefs and opinions on others - there are limits to far how far freedom and speech and opinion can be taken - and it would be an absolute disaster if there weren't
If you need an example - Google James Keegstra

I don't know if you're stirring the pot or if you really believe that - but the answer is simple
No, people are not entitled to push far fetched beliefs and opinions on others - there are limits to far how far freedom and speech and opinion can be taken - and it would be an absolute disaster if there weren't
If you need an example - Google James Keegstra

In case anyone missed it, Osh was asked about the Argos/Kelly situation yesterday: 

 
WEIGHING IN: O’Shea was asked after practice Wednesday about the nine-game suspension levied against Toronto Argonauts QB Chad Kelly. He said he would not comment on the length of suspension because ‘that’s not in my wheelhouse.’
“But I do feel very strongly that the women that work in our league deserve a safe workplace and deserve to be respected — everybody deserves to be respected and have a safe workplace,” he said. “The women in our league, and there’s a lot of them, really deserve to feel safe coming to work every day. That kind of question should be posed to the women in our organization to see if they do feel safe and respected in this workplace — I believe they do, but far be it for me to answer that. They certainly deserve our support and I know organizationally we make good decisions.”

I see validity in both your points. Thinking back to what it was to be a bomber fan in the past two dark ages this would be crushing. Even with that I and many others defended Harris during his ped positive test not long ago. (His claim was very valid but we never did hear about his independent testing of the allegedly tainted supplement) 
 with that said, the whole victim blaming culture is such a big toxic issue in society right now, the regressive attitudes are much worse on this. Not to mention the victim suffered directly, Harris either way didn’t victimize people. 
 Some of the defences and devils advocate positions has come off really gross with Kelly. Guilt or not, just some real ick factor stuff. 
 
I hope all this in the end helps some of those people to see the importance of protecting alleged victims and treating them appropriately. Some times good people get wrapped up on the wrong side of disputes. It’s certainly happened to me in the past. 
 I still think bluto is good people and a good poster. 

Got curious about the Brady thing...this from the CBA (Section 30.03 viii B):

"In 2023, each Club will include in the Salary Expenditure Cap an additional $60,000 in respect of Non-Football Related Services, such as community appearances, outreach, and promotion. Starting in 2024 and continuing for every year of the collective agreement, each Club will include in the Salary Expenditure Cap an additional $110,000 in respect of those Non-Football Related Services. These special amounts will be the mandatory minimum amount for each Club and will be subject to strict audit rules. The Clubs will have sole discretion on which players shall received these payments and the amounts to each player, but in no case should these amounts be less than $60,000 per Club in 2023 or less than $110,000 per Club, per year thereafter. These amounts will be included in a player’s SPC and noted accordingly."

right.  I knew his name was Morris.  At least now I remember it was Morris.  Still don't know why he hated Lyle Bauer so much, but that rivalry got pretty heated at one point, if memory serves.  I remember Lyle putting out some news release from the Bombers talking about "The Bookworm", which I assumed was Nate?