You’re useful to the left so long as they can exploit you.
New York Mets second baseman Daniel Murphy will join senior Obama administration officials at a working fathers event on Monday, part of a broader White House effort to push for family-friendly policies at companies across the U.S.
Some fans and sports commentators bashed Mr. Murphy when he missed the first two games of the season for the birth of his first child. Major League Baseball, the Mets and a host of media outlets came to his defense, and the episode ultimately highlighted a key issue for working dads and turned the ballplayer into an unofficial spokesman for fathers.
Indeed, the role of caregivers has changed markedly in the past two decades. Therewere about 2 million stay-at-home dads in the U.S. in 2012, nearly double the 1.1 million in 1989.
“The workplace is changing for dads too in terms of how dads participate now in changing diapers, child care, coaching teams,” a senior administration official said last week.
White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, Chief Economist Jason Furman, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx and others also will relay their experiences, the official said.
We suspect Murphy won’t be invited back any time soon and he should expect life to become miserable.
“I disagree with his lifestyle,” Murphy said. “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual. That doesn’t mean I can’t still invest in him and get to know him. I don’t think the fact that someone is a homosexual should completely shut the door on investing in them in a relational aspect. Getting to know him. That, I would say, you can still accept them but I do disagree with the lifestyle, 100 percent.”
Such an opinion won’t go over well with the leftists stormtroopers.
“We love the people. We disagree the lifestyle. That’s the way I would describe it for me. It’s the same way that there are aspects of my life that I’m trying to surrender to Christ in my own life. There’s a great deal of many things, like my pride. I just think that as a believer trying to articulate it in a way that says just because I disagree with the lifestyle doesn’t mean I’m just never going to speak to Billy Bean every time he walks through the door. That’s not love. That’s not love at all.”
And cue the outrage:
There are certainly notes in Murphy’s comments which suggest compassion and which clearly reveal that his feelings are not that of a stereotypical homophobe. Murphy is certainly not going to bash Bean or hurl any epithets at the guy. But there is no escaping the fact that that the terms in which he couches his feelings about all of this are representative of the sort of mindset, whether it’s based in his own Christianity or, coming from another person might be based in something else, which has led to the discrimination, hate and marginalization of homosexuals throughout history.
“Disagreeing” with Bean or anyone else’s homosexuality is nonsensical. It’s not an opinion. It’s not a philosophy, political position, choice or a world view. It’s a fact. It’s part of who Bean is as a person. To say one “disagrees” with Bean’s homosexuality is no more coherent than saying one “disagrees” with Murphy’s left-handedness. Or with Murphy’s heterosexuality for that matter. Who would ever say they “disagreed” with Murphy’s heterosexuality? What would we think of a person who said that?
Only certain opinions are approved of these days. Questioning the gay lifestyle sure isn’t one of them. In fact, we surmise his opinions will gain more attention than ISIS hurling gay men off buildings.
Good luck, Mr. Murphy.