(carefully affixing fake white beard from the Xmas Store)…ok, we’re all set! From Phil’s February 15, 2014 New York Post column :
Several readers have asked a good question: Why do the media demand we be sensitive to and tolerant of Michael Sam’s sexuality, yet so many mocked Tim Tebow’s religiosity?
Thank you, dear anonymous, hopefully not entirely imaginary readers of The New York Post for your
loaded stupid thoughtful question. I could not be happier to spell it for you fucking troglodytes lovely people.
Though I’ve yet to actually see any “demand” that young Mr. Sam be treated in a sensitive fashion, most civilized persons would not argue that his consenting-adult relationships be subject to the same protections and rights as those of failed talk radio hosts who’ve had more marriages than I’ve owned automobiles.
More to the point, Michael Sam didn’t choose to be homosexual any more than Shawn Bradley chose to be very tall. Conversely, while Tim Tebow’s “religiosity” is also subject to protections that go back to this country’s formation, his spirituality is the very definition of learned behavior.
Were Michael Sam — or any other homosexual athlete — actively engaged in the dubious process of recruiting, media mockery might be the least of his worries. On the other hand, Tebow has used his sports notoriety as a vehicle with which to champion his religious beliefs. It’s hardly illegal, but some have suggested the saintly aura is convenient cover for you know, the fact he totally sucks as a professional football player. Perhaps Tebow’s faith isn’t being mocked nearly as much as Tebow himself.
Even if Phil Mushnick is suggesting the worship of Tim Tebow is legit thing that’s roundly ridiculed by others, the analogy is mega-flawed. Merely because Michael Sam was born gay does not mean that Skip Bayless was born with his lips superglued to Tebow’s hind quarters.