Why Religion Is More Progressive Than Sports

[cbayer]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/s-brent-plate/why-religion-is-more-progressive-than-sports_b_5266385.html

S. Brent Plate Become a fan
Visiting Associate Professor of Religious Studies, Hamilton College

Posted: 05/05/2014 7:57 pm EDT Updated: 05/06/2014 12:59 pm EDT Print Article

Many commentators have discussed the ways in which sports spectacles look a lot like religious spectacles: Bands of people gather at specified, special spaces, wearing like colors, chanting songs among a throng of like-minded and like-bodied others. They each have their saints (St. Michael and Babe Ruth), their relics (the bones of St. Peter, and Peyton Manning's Broncos jersey), and their holy spaces (Chartres and Wrigley).

If that's not enough, the language of sports liberally borrows from religious language. The Basketball Hall of Fame conducts an "enshrinement ceremony" for new inductees, while the Baseball Hall of Fame has an exhibition called "Sacred Ground." And that primal entity, the fan, is a direct descendent of the religious devotee: The word "fan" is a shortened form of the word referring to the faithfully fervent devotee, "fanatic," which itself derives from the Latin word for temple, "fanum." To be a "fan" is already to be religious, hanging around the temple, or the stadium.

But when it comes to social progressivism, the comparison falls short. Contra Timothy Egan's recent New York Times column, religious institutions continue to offer much more by way of social progressivism than sports. Egan gives some important examples of sports events breaking down race and disability barriers, and it is good to point those out.

Yet if we look at further comparisons over social progressive causes, religious institutions win hands down.

more at link

[intaglio]

1. Could you include the word "Some" in that OP title?

I know it is a quote of a bait and switch Huffpo headline but you could use quotes and brackets
"Why" (some) "Religion Is More Progressive Than Sports"

[cbayer]

4. No, I can't. I never do that.

[Brettongarcia]

2. I've noticed a correlation between conservatism, conservative religion, and love of football

I suggest they are all the result of simplistic thought-patterns. Especially an Old Testament love of simple force to solve problems; rather than intellectual persuasion.

Hello Tim Tebow; Rush Limbaugh's brief career as football commentator; the whole state of Texas; etc.

[Goblinmonger]

3. To think that football is simple

is not to understand the complexities of the game.

[Brettongarcia]

9. It's still complicated relative to being a professor of Philosophy? Or Physics?

[Goblinmonger]

27. I think there are people that understand it at that level.

Not arguing your average fan, but there are players and coaches that have an understanding of the depth of things that none of us could come close to. Manning comes to mind. What he knows about coverage and trends is incredible. Sure there are people that watch it for the hits and raw masculinity of it, but there are many of us that try to get it at the more nuanced level.

[Starboard Tack]

37. "understand the complexities of the game."

Brilliant! Fucking brilliant!

"understand the complexities of the game."

[rug]

49. Don't you realize how many times they had to practice this?

[Starboard Tack]

53. Priceless!

Football (American) is definitely a focus of my personal bigotry. That said, I'm usually polite enough to leave the room when a game is on TV. Always makes Thanksgiving interesting.
Having grown up playing rugby, an actual sport, it really isn't easy to warm to a game that breaks every rule of rugby.
I do like baseball, though. Not quite cricket, but a very civilized game nonetheless.

I hate to be a snob, but at times....

[Goblinmonger]

51. That reads a little elistist, there.

How long do you think it would take you to memorize and understand a pro team playbook? Then, once you know your own plays, how many hours of film watching and study would it take you to know the tendancies of the team you are going to play?

Take the Wonderlic Test and let me know how you compare to Payton Manning.

[Starboard Tack]

55. Oh, it is elitist, my friend. Extremely elitist!

I confess. I don't know how long it would take. Life is too short to contemplate the thought, let alone the actual task.
I am extremely opinionated when it comes to American Football. Sorry, can't help it. In terms of "sports", I consider it an abomination. Additionally, it is extremely slow and boring.
That said, each to his own. I don't want to offend anyone.

[Goblinmonger]

54. And before you respond to my first reply

Here is a sample playbook. Over 200 pages of plays to memorize.

Here are pro players talking about the number of years it takes to really understand a playbook. Dilfer was an average school for QBs on the Wonderlic.

[Starboard Tack]

60. Yes, I'm familiar with all this. Thanks.

Intellectually, it is fascinating. In practice it is moronic and offensive.
It is based on a fine sport called rugby, which I played for several years. It took this great sport, tore up most of the rules (the ones that actually made it a sport), and turned it into a freak show.
But hey, look at all the crap gear they get to sell. And how they get a 60 minute game to last 3 hours. Boooooring!

[Maedhros]

67. Food for thought: when you refer to something as "moronic and offensive"

then you appear to be implying that those traits also belong to the fans of that thing.

It can be a little off-putting.

[Starboard Tack]

68. Yeah, I know. Shame on me. I am a football bigot.

I'm sure I should be shunned for uttering such blasphemy. But the devil gets into me and I just can't help myself.
I have loved ones whose souls have been co-opted by this evil scourge that has swept America. Yet I still love them unconditionally.
Of course, I could still be converted, I'm prepared to compromise. But you'd have to go back to some basic rules and get rid of the forward pass, stop tackling above the waist and quit wearing all the body armor. Is that too much to ask for.

Note, I'm not insisting that a touch down actually be a touch down. You can keep bouncing it if you don't like getting your hands muddy, but the conversion kick should be taken in a straight line back from where the ball "touched down".

I'm not sure about the fielding of 2 teams per side. What's with that?

[cbayer]

5. I don't think any such correlation exists.

Now NASCAR, yes, but football crosses many lines.

Think the Tillman family, Keith Oberman, the whole state of Massachusetts.

[Inkfreak]

26. Nope. No correlation whatsoever.

Memorizing NFL play books and devising strategies to score (or prevent) is in no way simplistic. Unless you're playing the Jets..

Being physical is only a component of the game. To argue otherwise is dishonest. Love or hate the game.

[Brettongarcia]

41. There's a LOT more memorization - and conceptualization - in Law School; Med School ....

[cbayer]

46. And what, pray tell, do you imagine the party affiliation breakdown to

be among lawyers and doctors?

[AtheistCrusader]

47. "Unless you're playing the Jets"

[rrneck]

6. I wasn't aware that

sports were mandated to pursue progressive values. It is pretty obvious that religion is coming more and more to pursue the entertainment objectives of sports.

[cbayer]

7. They aren't mandated but that is not the point of the article.

What she points out if the rather hypocritical position of criticizing certain things about religion then wholly supporting those same things in sports.

It's really a pretty interesting article, imo.

[rrneck]

14. Sports exist to make money off people's tribal instincts.

It has cheerleaders to make money off sex. It sells beer and bad food to make money off people's desires for alcohol, sugar, salt and fat. It sells garments and trinkets to make money off people's need to identify other members of the tribe. If sports can figure a way to make money off progressivism then it has perceived a market for that idea, or at least a way to deflect criticism from it's failure to treat people right which has market implications as well.

Now how many of the marketing techniques of sport have been adopted by religion? Stadium sized sanctuaries and even the use of sports stadiums for religious services. Advertising that includes attractive women. Media domination with slick production values. Garments and trinkets sold as accessories to faith.

Religion in general and Christianaty in particular have been behind the cultural development curve since the very beginning. From the cooptation of pagan rituals and Roman imperial purple to Christian rock, religion has co opted every non progressive method and motif devised by the avarice of man. Sports doesn't need virtue to thrive, religion can't meaningfully exist without it.

[cbayer]

18. That's a good point about the need for virtue,

and perhaps religion should indeed be held to a higher standard than sports.

But I still support the author's premise that religion does sometimes meet that higher standard, and these are, perhaps, standards that all institutions one supports should be encouraged to reach.

[rrneck]

21. I agree that all public institutions should be held to some standard of virtue.

Most sports are substitutes for combat. You can see it most clearly in the diagrams for offense and defense in football, not to mention the javelin throw in the Olympics. Honor is held as a very high virtue in military culture, and I don't see the concept of honor anywhere in professional sports. Of course I may be biased. I dislike most professional sports about as much as I dislike professional religion.

[cbayer]

24. I think there are standards set in the Olympics.

That is one of the things that make them appealing to me, and also leads to great disappointment when they fail.

But once big bucks get introduced, standards seem to take a precipitous nose dive.

That goes for religion and professional sports, imo. And politics, for that matter.

[Brettongarcia]

73. A valuable point: sports substitute for, replace, actual combat. In that way they are good.

Even better than religion, with its actual wars.

Many historians credit the Greek establishment of the Olympic games as paving the way for peaceful cooperation between conflicting Greek tribes. Albeit belatedly.

On the other hand though? Sometimes the pugnacious quality of sports often bleeds over into Rush Limbaugh rhetoric. And then? Our football players volunteer for actual wars. Like Pat Tillmann. And how many others?

Overall though, rrneck makes an extremely important point: sports does sublimate violence and tribalism to a useful degree.

[trotsky]

8. cbayer, you routinely chastise others for making things into competitions...

where someone "wins" and someone "loses." Why then post an article like this where it specifically declares a "winner" in some ridiculous competition?

[AtheistCrusader]

10. Team Sports is playtime tribalism.

I guess religion is for-serious tribalism then.

[trotsky]

11. Watch for the next articles in this series, including:

Why Religion is More Progressive Than Making Pottery

Why Religion is More Progressive Than Gardening

Why Religion is More Progressive Than Cleaning Toilets

Thank goodness the comments are ripping things to shreds. If I were a believer, I'd be insulted by this article.

[AtheistCrusader]

12. This huffpo article reads like the author has a monthly word count quota.

Quality be damned.

[trotsky]

20. I totally get the sports/religion similarities.

And in fact, if more religious people could view their religion like they view their favorite sports team, I think we'd eliminate a whole hell of a lot of religious conflict.

Unfortunately the author of this piece ignores that lesson and instead appears to have a personal axe to grind against professional sports, so he wraps it up in religious self-righteousness.

Ah HuffPo, at least you're consistent.

[AtheistCrusader]

35. I hate Huffpo.

They've got some BS background scripting shit running on the page for the comment section that horks up my browser every time.

It's a web page. Show me content. It's not fucking hard.

[Brettongarcia]

13. Seems right: "us" vs. "them."

Tribal animal totems: "Bears"; "Lions"; etc..

Explains why religions conflict; conflict with the "Other" is central to their very tribal nature.

Christianity starts with the 12 Tribes from Israel N. Africa, of course.

[cbayer]

16. Conflict with the "other" is central to tribalism in general.

Be it religious or not.

[cbayer]

15. Tribalism is tribalism and can be see pretty much everywhere.

DU is tribal. There are sub-groups within DU that are tribal. There are sub-groups within those who post in religion which are tribal.

I'm not sure where one would draw the lines on "play" vs. "serious". It all comes down to pretty much the same thing.

But one can look at the behavior, objectives and beliefs of tribes and often make some determination as to how liberal or progressive they are.

[AtheistCrusader]

17. Well, sports are, ostensibly, a game.

As opposed to war, which is tribalism on the most serious scale.

Sports are the outlet (even internationally) where we can play tribalism, without killing each other in droves.
There's actually a lot of research behind this, and how it sets us apart as a species.

[cbayer]

19. Is that a reason to hold it to a lower standard when it comes to progressive values?

[AtheistCrusader]

22. I think the article's premise is highly flawed.

I can, for instance, link to multiple instances of professional athletes that are openly gay, and broadly accepted in their sport, by other players. I found one lesbian minister ordained in a southern Baptist church, and that church is viewed as 'renegade' by other churches within that org, so I think it depends on how you frame 'progressive'.


For instance, is it un-progressive to employ a man who used to torture and force dogs to kill each other in a sports org (michael vick), or is it progressive to employ a former felon as part of his re-habilitation post-incarceration?

It's all in how you frame these issues.

[cbayer]

25. The author is clear on that point. There are exceptions, of course.

But I think her historical references about trends are correct.

Professional athletes, with very few exceptions, have only recently started coming out.

They are behind the curve.

[trotsky]

28. The author is male.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/s-brent-plate/

[AtheistCrusader]

29. I think that is massively incorrect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lesbian,_gay,_bisexual,_and_transgender_sportspeople
Filter by sport.

You would have to give cover to MASSIVE religions, like Catholicism by ticking the 'religion is tolerant of this' checkbox by way of smaller, niche religions, to arrive at that comparison trending in favor of 'religion'.

The author also wholly ignored the international aspect of sports where inconvenient.


Worse, religion purports to tell people what is right or wrong, specifically about issues that fall within the sphere of political/civil rights. Sports does not. Sports does not hold that homosexuality is a sin. Bunch of religions do. It's doctrine. There's nothing in the International Football Association Board's rules and laws of the game of Association Football (soccer) that says homosexuality is a sin.

Sports do figure large (switching gears to a different social issue) in racism. But again, good luck quantifying/comparing internationally. Sticking with soccer, the sport figures large in the social movements of anti-apartheid south Africa. The history of the same game in the US is actually blissfully free of references to racism, whereas in the same sport in the UK the list of incidents goes on and on and on.

The author's piece is too general to be useful in any capacity.

[cbayer]

30. Massively? Ok, you win. Sports are more progressive than religion.

[AtheistCrusader]

31. That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying the comparison is invalid. It doesn't work. You would have to break it down by nation, and social issue to even hope of building a useful comparison.

Here.
http://www.rantsports.com/soccer/2013/12/08/nelson-mandela-apartheid-and-the-role-of-sport/
There's also a great piece over at Foreignpolicy.Com titled 'how soccer defeated apartheid' if you're willing to register.


It's a thing. And a big damn deal. There are great examples. There are also terrible ones. I would not pretend to be capable of crafting a truly fair comparison between the subjects of sport and religion, on all political issues within the sphere of 'progressivism'. Not with an eye to measuring one as 'more' or 'less' progressive than the other.

First world cup held in Africa, 2010:

Sport reaches many people in the same way religion does. Quantifying how/why seems like a foolish endeavor.

[cbayer]

32. It's a simple little piece.

The author makes the point that there are some areas in which religious groups have been more progressive than some sports.

She doesn't state it definitively, but uses it to make the point that one some people bash about religion they seem to openly accept when it comes to sports, and how that is hypocritical.

It's a valid point, imo, but not one worth making into a "sport" where someone wins and loses.

But that's tribalism at work, isn't it?

[AtheistCrusader]

34. But it isn't something you can actually prove, because good luck quantifying it.

In my lifespan, I can think of NO religious event that sparked the instant sea change conversations that arose internationally, in and out of soccer, as when Brandi Chastain took her shirt off in celebration after we won the women's world cup in '99. And then suddenly bam, women in sports took front stage. Everyone noticed Mia Hamm, a female equivalent, on-par to Pele himself. Then suddenly it's all about the WNBA, etc.

Do you remember the fallout? It echoes to this day, hell, long distance runners are wrangling over it right now, arguing back and forth over women running in sports bras, versus men with no shirts, and modesty, and gender equality in sport... And I would argue, progressives are winning on every front. EVERY front.

I just don't know how that author can possibly hope to draw a meaningful conclusion across so many sports in so many nations against so many religions in so many nations, across a host of political ideas, and measure one against the other.

He certainly hasn't 'shown his work' to prove it.

[cbayer]

38. Exactly. You can't prove it and I don't think the author attempts to.

You seem to be trying to disprove it, though.

I think there are lots of examples that can support both sides and it probably all comes out as a wash.

Progressives are not winning on EVERY front when it comes to sports, as can recently be seen in the Clippers event.

Conservatives are not winning on every front when it comes to religion.

This is an opinion piece, not a scientifically based article hoping to prove anything.

To take it to that realm is to miss just the subtle point and the opportunity to discuss where we (progressives) win and lose.

[AtheistCrusader]

39. Did you even read the title of your own linked article?

"Why religion is more progressive than sports"

That's a fucking bullshit, unprovable claim. Why does it always come down to this? You equivocating and handwaving away and trying to backpedal for some stupid fucking claim by some stupid fucking author, and wasting my goddamn time?

What is your deal? You're going to sit there now and tell me it doesn't claim what it plainly claims in black and white?

QUIT WASTING MY TIME WITH THIS SHIT.

[cbayer]

43. No, of course I didn't read it. That's just how lame I am.

Again, it's an opinion piece not a piece of scientific literature.

You disagree with it and proffer some anecdotal information and your own opinion, just like the author.

I don't really think it merits all caps, personal attacks and really foul language, unless there is something really threatening about it to you, which I can't see.

As to WASTING YOUR TIME WITH THIS BULLSHIT, it's entirely up to you whether to read it, comment it or engage in a discussion of it. I have absolutely no control over your time, nor would I want to have any control over it.

When you start making personal attacks, the discussion is obviously over.

[AtheistCrusader]

44. What personal attack? Send it to a jury or withdraw that accusation.

I tried to engage with you for an HOUR honestly, with serious material and all I get in response is you pretending the article doesn't say what it says.

That's a waste of my time. Call it a personal attack if you want, but I doubt you'll find much sympathy anywhere.

[cbayer]

48. This is a personal attack.

You equivocating and handwaving away and trying to backpedal for some stupid fucking claim by some stupid fucking author, and wasting my goddamn time?

It is about me and not about the topic or my opinion of it. That is the definition of an ad hom.

I'm not looking for sympathy nor do I have any interest in sending this to a jury.

But you most likely will find some. In fact, I feel sure that you will if you seek it.

[AtheistCrusader]

50. Equivocating and handwaving is a personal attack?

When you are ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN DOING IT IN PLAIN TEXT?

I don't fucking think so. Send it to a jury.

[AtheistCrusader]

64. Right as usual.

Or not, given the post was not hidden.

[Warren Stupidity]

56. When some posters are caught in their own bullshit they play the victim card.

[trotsky]

58. Bingo. n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

36. A thought. For comparison.

Brandi Chastain kicks the winning goal in the '99 FIFA women's world cup, takes off her shirt in celebration like any man does all the damn time. She ends up on the cover of Time.
The Pope washes the feet of some poor people, also ends up on the cover of time.


Religion and sport reach people on social issues in profound ways, sometimes utterly by surprise.
I don't think one can compare them. Not head to head in a fair fashion. One could cherry pick anything from either side to spin the comparison. It's just not useful to attempt it. Too many human factors.

[trotsky]

23. It's a completely stupid comparison, cbayer.

For the people in pro sports who opposed integration or homosexual players, how many of them do you suppose did it for religious reasons?

[okasha]

69. War, and sports at college and pro level,

are for-profit corporate ventures and therefore inherently regressive.

[AtheistCrusader]

70. Hmm.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/08/wealth-of-roman-catholic-church-impossible-to-calculate/

[Goblinmonger]

33. This is a horrible ethnocentric piece not to mention riddles with fallacies.

Take a look at major world-wide sports organizations and compare that to the RCC and you'll see a different picture.

And trotsky's point of the people in US professional sports that are bigoted likely get those views from their religion (e.g. gays are bad) needs to be fully understood.

[Warren Stupidity]

40. Yeah like when the NFL backed Prop-hate.

Oh wait....

[AtheistCrusader]

42. I'm sure that won't count for some special pleading reason or another.

[trotsky]

52. HEY! Remember - it's NOT about winning and losing!

Even though the author declares that religion WINS!

Fucking A.

[Brettongarcia]

45. I had some interface with Tim - "Linsanity" - Dalrymple. He's got a PhD in theology & does sports

He might be interesting to read. Though I don't remember any brilliant thesis coming out of him.

http://www.researchonreligion.org/christianity/timothy-dalrymple-on-religion-sports-and-jeremy-lin

[hrmjustin]

57. I never thought of sports as political in anyway.

I am a baseball, hockey, curling, and football fan.

[cbayer]

59. I hear you and maybe "progressive" wasn't a good choice of words.

There is certainly sexism and racism throughout many of the major sports, as well as issues regarding pedophilia.

That is where the author is making some comparison, I think.

I'm pretty much just a baseball fan, and the Red Sox are and always will be my team.

[hrmjustin]

61. I follow the NY Mets, NY Giants and Jets, and the NY Rangers.

Yeah sports have major issues.

I have to say I have always seen Nascar as republican but I don't think it is a sport.

[cbayer]

62. Nascar does seem to have a world of it's own and it is clearly associated

with a rather specific political demographic.

I don't know what that is, but it has never interested me in the least.

Welcome back to the religion group, justin!

[hrmjustin]

65. Thanks. I needed the brake and I am ready to rejoin the group.

I will pick my battles but I won't have as many issues as I did before because I can't see a few and I realized no matter what I said to a handful of people it was not heard.

I wish them well but for the time being it is better this way.

[trotsky]

66. Do sports have major issues because of sports?

Or is it because at least some of the athletes, managers, owners, etc. have religious beliefs that cause issues?

[AtheistCrusader]

63. See, that's handwaving.

You're dismissing the CRUX OF THE AUTHOR'S POINT as 'not a good choice of words'.

What words then, would you put in the author's mouth?

[okasha]

71. I thought I was the only person

in the US who liked curling.

Now I know there are at least two of us.

[hrmjustin]

72. I don't get to see it much but when I do I love it.