Now we know why the Patriots keep winning the Super Bowl.

According to Craig James, they’re doing Satan’s work.  Bill Belichick’s got impressive connections, that’s for sure.

Ol’ Craig sounds like he’s a fun guy with some interesting ideas about building camaraderie in the locker room.  I bet Mike Leach wishes he’d have known more about him from the get go.

54 Comments

Filed under The Honorable Craig James

54 responses to “Now we know why the Patriots keep winning the Super Bowl.

  1. Dawgoholic

    Having read the James article, I’m curious as to where the outspoken athletes are as to adultery as it pertains to a pro sports locker room. I’m a Christian but certainly believe that we should love everyone – regardless of your interpretation of the bible on homosexuality.

    Like

  2. Scorpio Jones, III

    Craig James in congress…now there’s a thought to warm the cockles of yo heart…pass the Tagamet, please.

    Like

  3. Billy Mumphrey

    Does Craig follows all of Leviticus or just the part that makes the gay an abomination?

    Like

  4. Russ

    But who’s work was Craig James doing when he was found with the five dead hookers?

    Like

  5. Hogbody Spradlin

    Bill Belichick is like Corch with less personality, but Craig James is enough to make me like him.

    Like

  6. Craig James is certainly an prime example of Res Ipsa Loquitor. Guy needs a 5 to 10 year no publish period.

    Leach’s lawyers could have used this diatribe.

    Like

    • Cojones

      Where can you find this “Res Ipsa” Tequila?

      Like

      • Cazadores Anjeo. But be careful. It can cause amnesia.

        Since you posted your camel jokes I’ve a corny joke of my own to contribute. 😉
        Honey that was wonderful!
        After nearly 48 years of marriage, a couple
        was lying in bed one evening, when the wife felt her husband begin to
        fondle her in ways he hadn’t done in quite some time. It almost tickled as
        his fingers started at her neck, and then began moving down past the
        small of her back.

        He then caressed her shoulders and neck, slowly worked his hand down
        over her breasts, stopping just over her lower stomach. He then
        proceeded to place his hand on her left inner arm, caressed past the side
        of her breast again, working down her side, passed gently over her
        buttock and down her leg to her calf. Then, he proceeded up her inner
        thigh, stopping just at the uppermost portion of her leg.

        He continued in the same manner on her right side, then suddenly
        stopped, rolled over and became silent. As she had become quite
        aroused by this caressing, she asked in a loving voice, “Honey, that was
        wonderful. Why did you stop?”

        I found the remote,he mumbled

        Like

  7. Apparently there is no room in your politically correct world to have a differing opinion about homosexuality, Senator, and others posting here. Your pretty quick to excoriate anyone who fails to toe the line with your thinking; to you, all things are tolerable and if anyone has a different world view, then they are quickly labeled as neanderthals, unsophisticated, narrow minded, etc. Morality is a framework for societal success; cultures adopt a shared set of values, or a moral identity, in order to provide structure, order and security to those living in the culture. Your way of thinking is all bets are off and don’t pass judgment on anyone for having their own pre-determined individual morality. ISIS has a morality which includes beheading 3 year old children. So please don’t criticize them, since they simply have a different world view than you; after all, in accordance with your thinking, don’t we all get to establish our own world views in this post modern world, all of which have their own value and worth, with unlimited personal autonomy? Including homosexual marriage and beheading 3 year old children. So, if you have members in your society who decide that having sex with 4 year old girls or boys, or marrying goats, why draw the line there? The point here is that some like Craig James believe certain behaviors are destructive to societal strength and order and when they express that, you are outraged, cynical and condescending to anyone holding that opinion. Which is the height of intellectual hypocrisy. As long as it is not your ox being gored, you could care less.

    Like

    • Here we go…

      What you care to believe about homosexuality is your business. I don’t condemn you for your personal, private beliefs. In fact, I don’t have any opinion on them at all, because it’s none of my business. So what Craig James says in the privacy of his own home or at church with his friends is fine by me.

      What is fair game, though, is what I addressed in my post. James wants to moralize in public and proselytize. That’s not a one way street, rd. You don’t get to accuse a sports organization of consorting with the Devil on the one hand and then ask to be absolved of criticism for expressing an opinion on the other.

      And what James says about locker room morale seems pretty topical for a football blog that’s commented on what happened at Texas Tech.

      Needless to say, I disagree with your comment about intellectual hypocrisy.

      Like

      • I understand the difference, totally. The point is when you refuse to apply broad standards to behavior, shared standards, then you can pretty much choose any standard you want. Which is what you just did. I don’t support homosexual sex between consenting adults for the same reasons I don’t support adultery. Or the plague of fatherless families when women are abandoned by irresponsible men who impregnate them and walk away. I don’t see any of these behaviors as benefiting society long term. You are simply picking and choosing what standard of morality you want to enforce and then criticizing others who have a different view than you. Which is the point, the uncomfortable point, I made. Tell me where you draw the line. And if you draw the line, then why is your line valid and not mine?

        Like

        • The point is when you refuse to apply broad standards to behavior, shared standards, then you can pretty much choose any standard you want. Which is what you just did.

          No. As I just explained, my response was targeted to James’ comments in the linked article for the reasons I just laid out. Period.

          You obviously think that I’m trying to make a larger point about society in general with this post. I’m not.

          As for where I draw the line, I’m not sure my personal beliefs are any more your business than yours are mine, but I will say it’s hard to argue with the words of Hillel the Elder: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.”

          Like

    • Dawgfan Will

      If you can’t see the difference between sex between two consenting adults and sex between an adult and a child, I’m not sure I have any argument to make that you would understand.

      Like

      • DawgFaithful

        And if youre comparing same sex marriage and ISIS beheading 3 people then at the very least you are a complete dumbass. I’m a Christian. I don’t agree with homosexuality but if that’s how you want to live your life then that’s your God given right. That’s between you and God. As the Senator said, it’s none of my business. As long as you’re not hurting other people, which ISIS clearly does, then I don’t care what you do with your personal life. The Satan statement is bullshit. Would you expect anything less than bullshit to come from the mouth of a giant turd like Craig James?

        Like

        • Interesting. Most Christians I know don’t call other people dumbass and turd. And thanks for making my point for me so eloquently.

          Like

          • DawgFaithful

            My believing Christ lived and died for my sins makes me a Christian. You comparing a murdering group of radicals to homosexuality makes you a dumbass. I just call it like I see it. I never said I was perfect.

            Like

            • At least you and I agree on one thing. Only one way to eternal life.
              And I did not compare them. I simply pointed out that post modern thinking permits people to choose any type of morality they want. And post modern thinkers are quick to point that freedom out but also quick to criticize others who hold a different view when they espouse that view publicly and it doesn’t fit their model. I think if you go beyond the extreme tone of my example (i.e. where do you draw the line), you can see that logic. And I used the extreme example to point out the absurdity of abandoning absolute standards of behavior. And if you think God doesn’t hold to absolute standards, then……well, I guess the Cross doesn’t matter.

              Like

              • DawgFaithful

                “Your way of thinking is all bets are off and don’t pass judgment on anyone for having their own pre-determined individual morality. ISIS has a morality which includes beheading 3 year old children.”

                This is comparing them. And it’s a clown comparison bro.

                Like

                • Again, you refuse to see the point. Choosing a morality based on one owns’ worldview rather than a shared world view leads to the absurd conclusion that you would have to allow someone to make heinous choices such as ISIS and not be able to criticize it. Because, after all, we should not be allowed to criticize other choices. An extreme example, as previously acknowledged, but one nonetheless that points out the fallacy of post modern thinking.

                  Like

                  • ColoradoDawg

                    RoswellDawg, I’m not sure who’s choosing a morality on their own worldview here. According to most of the polling I’ve seen a majority of Americans are in favor of gay marriage being legal, and the numbers for gay relations between consenting adults being legal is even higher (granted you can pick and choose your polls, but even if you choose the more Conservative polls you’re going to find it close. Here’s a link to Gallup’s work: http://www.gallup.com/poll/1651/Gay-Lesbian-Rights.aspx).

                    And here’s a listing of countries where gay marriage is currently legal or will be soon (http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/19/gay-marriage-around-the-world-2013/). Seems like the majority of the Western world to me.

                    So, at what point are you choosing a morality based on your own view rather than a shared world view? Looks like the world is leaving your views behind.

                    Like

                    • I thought we were discussing another issue. I was not discussing whose worldview is in focus here, yours or mine. What I was discussing was the predilection to cut off people who disagree with you as being out of touch, uneducated and hate mongering. And if we all have the right to an opinion about our worldview. And the hypocrisy of people who say they are all about tolerance and inclusion when it comes to homosexuals but try to shut down people who believe that homosexual behavior has consequences for individuals and society – as if those people had no right to the opinion. Your response is clearly aimed at another point. A point I am not making at all. So, thanks for proving my point – you think my opinion doesn’t matter because I am part of an unwashed, uneducated, unsophisticated minority.

                      Like

                    • Gravidy

                      I don’t want to live in a world where the government decides whether two people can marry or not, but Roswell is absolutely correct in his point about the politically correct crowd being 100% tolerant of people who agree with them and not at all tolerant of those who don’t. While I think I agree with you on this issue in principle, I have to say you didn’t address Roswell’s point.

                      And in the abstract, if we’ve reached the point where we form our personal morality on the results of polling, the world is farther down the toilet than I thought.

                      Like

                    • Cojones

                      ros, don’t come on here pushing your agenda by trying to say others are stopping you from doing anything. By the way, did you see the CNN program Sun nite ,”Finding Jesus”? The tenants of my belief permits me to try to love everyone, homosexual or not. If you need a boost in that direction, I’d like to send you a special brownie.

                      If not, smoke’em if you got’em.

                      Like

                    • ColoradoDawg

                      Isn’t the point of an argument or discussion to either come to a consensus (not likely on this subject) or to attempt to prove the other side is incorrect? I think you miss the point of any discussion or argument. Yes, I’m arguing against you, but the fact that I’m doing so says I acknowledge the validity of your opinion. You’re clearly not uneducated or unsophisticated. You can’t argue with the uneducated or unsophisticated (what argument can be made against someone who simply says “I hate faggots.”). You have a reasoned and personal belief that I am arguing against.

                      To the contrary, RoswellDawg, I think your opinion on this subject matters very much because if it were to remain the law of the land then tax paying, law abiding citizens will be denied the same rights to marriage and to openly love whoever they choose as you and I do. Of course you have a right to an opinion. This is America. We’re big about rights in this country … such as say Freedom of Religion and a right to marry who we want to.

                      Like

                  • G. Marmalarde

                    In a free society people have the right to do what they want if it doesn’t hurt anyone else or infringe upon their liberty or well being. Beheading someone ? Not allowed. Pedophilia? Not allowed. Consensual sex between two adult citizens? That is their right as Americans if they so choose. Do you see the not -so -subtle difference here? Your right to worship as you please and speak out against homosexuality? Also allowed. It’s really not that complicated.

                    Like

                    • G. Marmalade, I am not arguing about whose system of beliefs is the shared set of values that govern our society or any other. Whether we as a culture believe that pedophilia is wrong, beheading others is wrong, consensual sex between consenting adults is wrong (all your examples above). You jumped right to the values argument. And that my belief about homosexual behavior is what I am discussing. You are right – it is not really that complicated, but I will restate it again: Post modern thinking has shaped a culture that promotes total self autonomy and the idea that all ways of believing are valid, if you are actually faithful to the premise. This leads to the following observation: Someone believes that homosexual behavior and marriage, as an example, is an acceptable facet of culture, because they believe everyone has the right to determine their own sexuality and how they live it out. Then someone else steps us and says they don’t believe that is the best thing for society. In reaction, the first person then criticizes the second because he is narrow-minded, unloving or (fill in the blank with a descriptive). Which is prima facie evidence that he doesn’t truly believe that everyone has the right to think what they want and believe, because he disagrees with the premise the second person is making. Which is a gross inconsistency and in fact, totally discordant with the very thing he professes to believe. So many on this post have jumped right to the point I am making – they are writing me off and proving the very point I am making. They cannot see the subtle difference either. Something tells me you are not one of those however.

                      Like

                    • Which is prima facie evidence that he doesn’t truly believe that everyone has the right to think what they want and believe, because he disagrees with the premise the second person is making.

                      With all due respect, rd, I think this is where your premise falls short.

                      There is a big, big difference between me disagreeing with your position on gay marriage and me not believing you have the right to take that position. Again, taking your premise to its logical conclusion, it seems you want it both ways – the right to oppose gay marriage without criticism.

                      Like

          • DawgFaithful

            Do you or do you not believe that ISIS beheading innocent people is comparable in any way to living a homosexual lifestyle other than that you consider both to be sins under your belief system?

            Like

            • Personally, I think ISIS is an unspeakable evil and everything they stand for disgusts me. I have numerous homosexual friends and in my church experience, I don’t know a single person who is not welcoming to homosexuals and tries to relate to those individuals as human beings. Does that answer your question?

              Like

              • Cojones

                I support gay marriage principally because laws in this country discriminates against them when it comes to paying taxes. If the IRS said that it recognizes common-law marriage when making out your taxes, then many wouldn’t feel it’s necessary to get married. Then they could just keep porking for fun.

                Like

    • Billy Mumphrey

      I’m merely looking for consistency. I mean, if the dude is eating animal fat instead of using it as an offering to god he is totally going to hell. Don’t even get me started on tattoos.

      Like

      • simpl_matter

        Tattoo’s in hell?!?

        <img src=”http://befret.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/fantasy-island-tattoo-kxikgtdc.jpg” />

        Like

    • simpl_matter

      The irony in your statement is that the beliefs James espouse are rooted in a Bible that prescribes death and torture as punishments for a myriad of behaviors (and countless sentences WERE carried out). Go back a few generations and tell me James isn’t citing scripture and calling for the death of any unrepentant homosexuals.

      Like

      • The New Testament, or New Covenant, changed forever our relationship to God. The Mosaic Law and the provisions for punishment in the Old Testament were replaced in the New Testament, by a new way of life in relating to God and others. Hence, you don’t see people who believe in the Gospel or Good News, adhering to Old Testament Law provisions for punishment; and you don’t see Christ followers beheading people. The history of the church in this country, certainly, for hundreds of years, has not been one of prescribing death for homosexuals. Anyone who sees that as a solution is misrepresenting the gospel. And anyone who paints Christians as advocating that as a solution is wrong.

        Like

  8. Dawgoholic

    Roswell, you seem to miss the distinction between consensual actions between adults and harm to others. While the morality of homosexuality is debated, the fact that it is consensual behavior is not. On the other hand, beheadings are very different. Now if you want to say someone that supports gay marriage and opposes legalization of marijuana is hypocritical, go for it.

    Like

    • And the scapegoat got released into the wild with poor chances for survival, while on the other hand, the other goat – chosen for its acceptableness, became the sacrificial goat and had no chance for survival.

      Like

      • Cojones

        The folks down in Fl passed a constitutional amendment that you can’t do it with goats or you will be prosecuted. They are considering reaching further and not permitting homosexuals from doing it. They have already tried scapegoat (as in the gay community is what has deteriorated the state), but don’t give’em any ideas about that sacrificial thingy. Besides, the gov has said you can’t mention ecology and clean water and global warming in state communications.

        It’s his water and Atlanta can’t have it.

        Like

  9. grouchy

    I was surprised to see this item. I didn’t know anyone noticed Craig James anymore.

    Like

  10. Rugbydawg79

    very interesting–one of the reasons I follow this blog, you just don’t get thought provoking commentary like this anywhere else. Man are we ready for Spring Football !

    Like

  11. W Cobb Dawg

    So whatever happened to Leach’s law suit? Doesn’t seem to have shut James up at all, even though one can argue it cost him his post-player career.

    Like

  12. AusDawg85

    Racism. Politics. Religion. Methinks the Senator is working up to a Sunday TV morning show on….wait for it…

    .FOXNEWS!!!!

    Like