| |
Main
Date: 28 Nov 2006 07:22:01
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
"flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
by others to try the same?
|
|
| |
Date: 03 Dec 2006 02:53:03
From: Gordo
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Dene wrote:
> Gordo wrote:
>
> > Golf or boating?? I'm playing golf!!
>
> If I whacked the ball as well as you, I'd choose golf too. But.....a
> day or two on the drink with my honey relaxes me like no other
> activity. Golf for me, 9 of 10 outings, is an exercise of futility.
>
> But then comes that special round.........or the great drive on 18.
>
> -Greg
Of course (also), if I had a nice looking 'dingy' like you have, and a
beautiful area of the country to put it in the water, I'd likely split
my time evenly that way. My taste for boating was smashed when I went
out in a rubber raft with my dad, and somehow we sprung a hole in the
bottom and ended up swimming back to shore. What a great, albeit weird
time!
Playing for the first time in 3 weeks today. It'll feel good to get
out.
|
| |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 23:46:33
From: Dene
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Gordo wrote:
> Golf or boating?? I'm playing golf!!
If I whacked the ball as well as you, I'd choose golf too. But.....a
day or two on the drink with my honey relaxes me like no other
activity. Golf for me, 9 of 10 outings, is an exercise of futility.
But then comes that special round.........or the great drive on 18.
-Greg
|
| |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 17:32:42
From: Gordo
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Dene wrote:
> Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> > Dene wrote:
> > > Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> > >
> > > > It was all a giant scam. tin knew he wasn't good enough to play on
> > > > the tour even with two good legs so he exaggerated his handicap to make
> > > > himself famous and made a fortune off that. Media went along with it of
> > > > course, since they made money off the story too. Golf is so corrupt.
> > >
> > > Do some homework, LB. Read Rick Reilly's "Who is your Caddy?" chapter
> > > on Casey tin, then go ahead and post that tin's intentions were a
> > > scam.
> > >
> > > I dare ya.
> >
> > I read that book a year or two ago and big deal. What some hack
> > writes doesn't prove a thing. Tell me - if tin really was so good
> > then why didn't his career pan out when he was given the chance to
> > play?? I'll tell ya why. He never had the ability.
>
> His "inability" came to fruition once he had a even playing field, in
> terms of mobility. All he wanted was a chance and fortunately he got
> it. That's hardly scam material.
>
> -Greg
Isn't it amazing when trolling assholes like Laura find out that the
opposable thumb thing can be used to type?? Trolls are a humorous
bunch.
Golf or boating?? I'm playing golf!!
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 13:03:52
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
George Hibbard wrote:
[snip]
> I don't see how it is even
> within the jurisdiction of a court to interfere in rules in a private
> enterprise entertainment.
[snip]
Commerce Clause.
|
| |
Date: 29 Nov 2006 18:51:41
From: Dene
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> Dene wrote:
> > Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> >
> > > It was all a giant scam. tin knew he wasn't good enough to play on
> > > the tour even with two good legs so he exaggerated his handicap to make
> > > himself famous and made a fortune off that. Media went along with it of
> > > course, since they made money off the story too. Golf is so corrupt.
> >
> > Do some homework, LB. Read Rick Reilly's "Who is your Caddy?" chapter
> > on Casey tin, then go ahead and post that tin's intentions were a
> > scam.
> >
> > I dare ya.
>
> I read that book a year or two ago and big deal. What some hack
> writes doesn't prove a thing. Tell me - if tin really was so good
> then why didn't his career pan out when he was given the chance to
> play?? I'll tell ya why. He never had the ability.
His "inability" came to fruition once he had a even playing field, in
terms of mobility. All he wanted was a chance and fortunately he got
it. That's hardly scam material.
-Greg
|
| |
Date: 29 Nov 2006 16:19:05
From: Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Dene wrote:
> Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
>
> > It was all a giant scam. tin knew he wasn't good enough to play on
> > the tour even with two good legs so he exaggerated his handicap to make
> > himself famous and made a fortune off that. Media went along with it of
> > course, since they made money off the story too. Golf is so corrupt.
>
> Do some homework, LB. Read Rick Reilly's "Who is your Caddy?" chapter
> on Casey tin, then go ahead and post that tin's intentions were a
> scam.
>
> I dare ya.
I read that book a year or two ago and big deal. What some hack
writes doesn't prove a thing. Tell me - if tin really was so good
then why didn't his career pan out when he was given the chance to
play?? I'll tell ya why. He never had the ability.
|
| |
Date: 29 Nov 2006 14:29:35
From: Dene
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> It was all a giant scam. tin knew he wasn't good enough to play on
> the tour even with two good legs so he exaggerated his handicap to make
> himself famous and made a fortune off that. Media went along with it of
> course, since they made money off the story too. Golf is so corrupt.
Do some homework, LB. Read Rick Reilly's "Who is your Caddy?" chapter
on Casey tin, then go ahead and post that tin's intentions were a
scam.
I dare ya.
-Greg
|
| |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 22:46:31
From: Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com wrote:
> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
> by others to try the same?
It was all a giant scam. tin knew he wasn't good enough to play on
the tour even with two good legs so he exaggerated his handicap to make
himself famous and made a fortune off that. Media went along with it of
course, since they made money off the story too. Golf is so corrupt.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Nov 2006 16:31:50
From: A.T. Barr
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Your such an ASS!
A.T.
--
"Many Knives by Many Makers"
http://www.customknives.com
"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
> It was all a giant scam. tin knew he wasn't good enough to play on
> the tour even with two good legs so he exaggerated his handicap to
> make
> himself famous and made a fortune off that. Media went along with it
> of
> course, since they made money off the story too. Golf is so corrupt.
>
|
| |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 14:05:42
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in high
school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate a
handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps the
ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood gates"
and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps the ADA.
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com > wrote in message
news:1164727321.826096.44820@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
> by others to try the same?
>
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 15:55:03
From: \R&B\
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
"sfb" <sfb@spam.net > wrote ...
> Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in high
> school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
> question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate a
> handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps the
> ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
> gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps the
> ADA.
>
> <oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote ...
>> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
>> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
>> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
>> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
>> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
>> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
>> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
>> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
>> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
>> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
>> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
>> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
>> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
>> by others to try the same?
I don't remember all the things I said at the time, so I'll just say it's
possible I might have been one of those who talked about "flood gates
opening" and such. Certainly I was, and still am, opposed to the Supreme
Court's ruling. But with the benefit of time passing and 20/20 hindsight,
I'd have to say my argument is mostly philosophical.
I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting event,
and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
Of course those who sided with Mr. tin argued that the whatever elements
of "endurance" present in a golf competition are minimal. My rebuttal has
always been that "minimal" is not the same as non-existent, and as long as
ANY amount of endurance is involved, it inappropriate to apply the rules
differently for one player from the others.
It is a sad fact of life, but a fact nonetheless, that Mr. tin and other
persons who are born with a disability are, in many ways, inherantly unable
to participate in certain activities. A person born without eyesight will
never be a pilot (or at least you better hope not if you're riding on the
plane), for example.
I believed then, and I still believe today, that Mr. tin used his
position of privilege (a family of sufficient means to fund the legal
efforts put forth on his behalf) to twist the system to his benefit. While
there's nothing inherantly wrong with that, in and of itself, to forever
leave in his wake a set of rules that an opportunistic individual might come
along later and take advantage of, was, and is, a shame. It certainly
didn't help the game he claims to love.
Personally, while I don't wish harm upon Mr. tin, I'm glad he's gone from
the golf scene. Sadly, he left a precedent behind that could come back and
bite the game again at another time down the road. And for that, he
deserves no accolades, in my view.
Randy
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 09:25:55
From:
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
In article <BtWdnY0VDrCE2PLYnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@giganews.com >,
"\"R&B\"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com > wrote:
> "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote ...
> > Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in high
> > school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
> > question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate a
> > handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps the
> > ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
> > gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps the
> > ADA.
> >
> > <oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote ...
> >> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
> >> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
> >> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
> >> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
> >> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
> >> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
> >> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
> >> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
> >> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
> >> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
> >> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
> >> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
> >> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
> >> by others to try the same?
>
> I don't remember all the things I said at the time, so I'll just say it's
> possible I might have been one of those who talked about "flood gates
> opening" and such. Certainly I was, and still am, opposed to the Supreme
> Court's ruling. But with the benefit of time passing and 20/20 hindsight,
> I'd have to say my argument is mostly philosophical.
>
> I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting event,
> and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
> athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
> chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
>
> Of course those who sided with Mr. tin argued that the whatever elements
> of "endurance" present in a golf competition are minimal. My rebuttal has
> always been that "minimal" is not the same as non-existent, and as long as
> ANY amount of endurance is involved, it inappropriate to apply the rules
> differently for one player from the others.
>
> It is a sad fact of life, but a fact nonetheless, that Mr. tin and other
> persons who are born with a disability are, in many ways, inherantly unable
> to participate in certain activities. A person born without eyesight will
> never be a pilot (or at least you better hope not if you're riding on the
> plane), for example.
>
> I believed then, and I still believe today, that Mr. tin used his
> position of privilege (a family of sufficient means to fund the legal
> efforts put forth on his behalf) to twist the system to his benefit. While
> there's nothing inherantly wrong with that, in and of itself, to forever
> leave in his wake a set of rules that an opportunistic individual might come
> along later and take advantage of, was, and is, a shame. It certainly
> didn't help the game he claims to love.
>
> Personally, while I don't wish harm upon Mr. tin, I'm glad he's gone from
> the golf scene. Sadly, he left a precedent behind that could come back and
> bite the game again at another time down the road. And for that, he
> deserves no accolades, in my view.
I really dislike that this subject has been raised again.
As stated by many, the initiators of the Americans with Disabilities Act
intended that the ADA cover such situations. Do you also oppose the
ADA?
B. tin
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Dec 2006 00:50:01
From: \R&B\
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
<ti285@umn.edu > wrote in message
news:ti285-775895.09255501122006@lenny.tc.umn.edu...
> In article <BtWdnY0VDrCE2PLYnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "\"R&B\"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com> wrote:
>
>> "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote ...
>> > Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in
>> > high
>> > school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
>> > question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate
>> > a
>> > handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps
>> > the
>> > ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
>> > gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps
>> > the
>> > ADA.
>> >
>> > <oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote ...
>> >> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
>> >> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
>> >> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
>> >> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
>> >> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
>> >> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
>> >> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
>> >> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
>> >> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
>> >> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
>> >> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
>> >> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
>> >> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
>> >> by others to try the same?
>>
>> I don't remember all the things I said at the time, so I'll just say it's
>> possible I might have been one of those who talked about "flood gates
>> opening" and such. Certainly I was, and still am, opposed to the Supreme
>> Court's ruling. But with the benefit of time passing and 20/20
>> hindsight,
>> I'd have to say my argument is mostly philosophical.
>>
>> I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting
>> event,
>> and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
>> athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
>> chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
>>
>> Of course those who sided with Mr. tin argued that the whatever
>> elements
>> of "endurance" present in a golf competition are minimal. My rebuttal
>> has
>> always been that "minimal" is not the same as non-existent, and as long
>> as
>> ANY amount of endurance is involved, it inappropriate to apply the rules
>> differently for one player from the others.
>>
>> It is a sad fact of life, but a fact nonetheless, that Mr. tin and
>> other
>> persons who are born with a disability are, in many ways, inherantly
>> unable
>> to participate in certain activities. A person born without eyesight
>> will
>> never be a pilot (or at least you better hope not if you're riding on the
>> plane), for example.
>>
>> I believed then, and I still believe today, that Mr. tin used his
>> position of privilege (a family of sufficient means to fund the legal
>> efforts put forth on his behalf) to twist the system to his benefit.
>> While
>> there's nothing inherantly wrong with that, in and of itself, to forever
>> leave in his wake a set of rules that an opportunistic individual might
>> come
>> along later and take advantage of, was, and is, a shame. It certainly
>> didn't help the game he claims to love.
>>
>> Personally, while I don't wish harm upon Mr. tin, I'm glad he's gone
>> from
>> the golf scene. Sadly, he left a precedent behind that could come back
>> and
>> bite the game again at another time down the road. And for that, he
>> deserves no accolades, in my view.
>
> I really dislike that this subject has been raised again.
>
> As stated by many, the initiators of the Americans with Disabilities Act
> intended that the ADA cover such situations. Do you also oppose the
> ADA?
>
> B. tin
I am not opposed to the ADA. Where you and I disagree is in your assertion
that the initiators of the Americans with Disabilities Act intended that the
ADA cover this specific situation. Obviously, the courts agreed with you on
this, but I simply cannot fathom that the writers of the law could have ever
conceived of the notion that a disabled person would ever be granted an
accommodation to play in a professional sport. It is just unfathomable.
Randy
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Dec 2006 08:05:58
From: George Hibbard
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
> R&B
> I am not opposed to the ADA. Where you and I disagree is in your
> assertion that the initiators of the Americans with Disabilities Act
> intended that the ADA cover this specific situation. Obviously, the
> courts agreed with you on this, but I simply cannot fathom that the
> writers of the law could have ever conceived of the notion that a disabled
> person would ever be granted an accommodation to play in a professional
> sport. It is just unfathomable.
>
> Randy
Government regulation of government sponsored things makes sense. Goverment
regulation of private enterprise is intrusive. Govt has no right to tell my
church who may have access to privileges therein, or the BSA or Augusta
National to accept members they don't want, or the PGA to change rules
because THEY want someone in. If the govt. is the sponsor, fine: that is
taxpayer funded.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Dec 2006 07:15:32
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
"\"R&B\"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com > wrote:
: <ti285@umn.edu > wrote in message
: news:ti285-775895.09255501122006@lenny.tc.umn.edu...
: > In article <BtWdnY0VDrCE2PLYnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
: > "\"R&B\"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com> wrote:
: >
: >> "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote ...
: >> > Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in
: >> > high
: >> > school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
: >> > question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate
: >> > a
: >> > handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps
: >> > the
: >> > ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
: >> > gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps
: >> > the
: >> > ADA.
: >> >
: >> > <oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote ...
: >> >> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
: >> >> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
: >> >> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
: >> >> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
: >> >> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
: >> >> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
: >> >> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
: >> >> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
: >> >> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
: >> >> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
: >> >> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
: >> >> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
: >> >> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
: >> >> by others to try the same?
: >>
: >> I don't remember all the things I said at the time, so I'll just say it's
: >> possible I might have been one of those who talked about "flood gates
: >> opening" and such. Certainly I was, and still am, opposed to the Supreme
: >> Court's ruling. But with the benefit of time passing and 20/20
: >> hindsight,
: >> I'd have to say my argument is mostly philosophical.
: >>
: >> I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting
: >> event,
: >> and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
: >> athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
: >> chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
: >>
: >> Of course those who sided with Mr. tin argued that the whatever
: >> elements
: >> of "endurance" present in a golf competition are minimal. My rebuttal
: >> has
: >> always been that "minimal" is not the same as non-existent, and as long
: >> as
: >> ANY amount of endurance is involved, it inappropriate to apply the rules
: >> differently for one player from the others.
: >>
: >> It is a sad fact of life, but a fact nonetheless, that Mr. tin and
: >> other
: >> persons who are born with a disability are, in many ways, inherantly
: >> unable
: >> to participate in certain activities. A person born without eyesight
: >> will
: >> never be a pilot (or at least you better hope not if you're riding on the
: >> plane), for example.
: >>
: >> I believed then, and I still believe today, that Mr. tin used his
: >> position of privilege (a family of sufficient means to fund the legal
: >> efforts put forth on his behalf) to twist the system to his benefit.
: >> While
: >> there's nothing inherantly wrong with that, in and of itself, to forever
: >> leave in his wake a set of rules that an opportunistic individual might
: >> come
: >> along later and take advantage of, was, and is, a shame. It certainly
: >> didn't help the game he claims to love.
: >>
: >> Personally, while I don't wish harm upon Mr. tin, I'm glad he's gone
: >> from
: >> the golf scene. Sadly, he left a precedent behind that could come back
: >> and
: >> bite the game again at another time down the road. And for that, he
: >> deserves no accolades, in my view.
: >
: > I really dislike that this subject has been raised again.
: >
: > As stated by many, the initiators of the Americans with Disabilities Act
: > intended that the ADA cover such situations. Do you also oppose the
: > ADA?
:
: I am not opposed to the ADA. Where you and I disagree is in your assertion
: that the initiators of the Americans with Disabilities Act intended that the
: ADA cover this specific situation. Obviously, the courts agreed with you on
: this, but I simply cannot fathom that the writers of the law could have ever
: conceived of the notion that a disabled person would ever be granted an
: accommodation to play in a professional sport. It is just unfathomable.
Agreed here. I do not believe that the intent of the Congress
in passing the ADA was ever considered in this case.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 22:28:34
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:55:03 -0500, "\"R&B\""
<noneofyourbusiness@all.com > wrote:
>I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting event,
>and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
>athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
>chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
However, the Champions tour allows carts. Is it not professional
golf?
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 02:29:27
From: \R&B\
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
"Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net > wrote ...
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:55:03 -0500, "\"R&B\""
> <noneofyourbusiness@all.com> wrote:
>
>>I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting event,
>>and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
>>athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
>>chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
>
> However, the Champions tour allows carts. Is it not professional
> golf?
It's not golf at the highest level.
IMHO, there *should* be a "highest level" of sport, and the governing body
of that sport should be free to set the rules and conditions of competition
as they see fit in order to make the test as stern as it should be for
competition at the highest level.
However, to hear those who supported Mr. tin argue their side, you'd
think they believe that people born with just one good eye should be able to
putt to a larger cup that's easier to see, since that would make it a "level
playing field."
This just in: Sport at the highest level is NOT a level playing field.
Those with special gifts have an advantage. And that's as it should be.
I don't wish to re-argue the case. It's decided, and the court's decision
boggles the mind. Judge Scalia, who I rarely agree with, wrote the dissent,
and his words were the only sensible ones I saw come out of the court on
this case. For the Supreme Court to step in and essentially rule on what
"the essence of golf at the highest level" is (ruling, in so many words,
that the essence of professional golf is merely the actual striking of the
ball, and that all other endeavors that occur in between the actual making
of the shots are irrelevant to the competition) is simply
mind-boggling...and wrong.
Your tax dollars at work.
Randy
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 15:58:57
From: George Hibbard
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
""R&B"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com > wrote in message
news:BtWdnY0VDrCE2PLYnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote ...
>> Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in high
>> school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
>> question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate a
>> handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps the
>> ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
>> gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps the
>> ADA.
>>
>> <oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote ...
>>> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
>>> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
>>> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
>>> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
>>> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
>>> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
>>> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
>>> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
>>> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
>>> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
>>> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
>>> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
>>> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
>>> by others to try the same?
>
> I don't remember all the things I said at the time, so I'll just say it's
> possible I might have been one of those who talked about "flood gates
> opening" and such. Certainly I was, and still am, opposed to the Supreme
> Court's ruling. But with the benefit of time passing and 20/20 hindsight,
> I'd have to say my argument is mostly philosophical.
>
> I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting event,
> and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
> athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
> chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
>
> Of course those who sided with Mr. tin argued that the whatever
> elements of "endurance" present in a golf competition are minimal. My
> rebuttal has always been that "minimal" is not the same as non-existent,
> and as long as ANY amount of endurance is involved, it inappropriate to
> apply the rules differently for one player from the others.
>
> It is a sad fact of life, but a fact nonetheless, that Mr. tin and
> other persons who are born with a disability are, in many ways, inherantly
> unable to participate in certain activities. A person born without
> eyesight will never be a pilot (or at least you better hope not if you're
> riding on the plane), for example.
>
> I believed then, and I still believe today, that Mr. tin used his
> position of privilege (a family of sufficient means to fund the legal
> efforts put forth on his behalf) to twist the system to his benefit.
> While there's nothing inherantly wrong with that, in and of itself, to
> forever leave in his wake a set of rules that an opportunistic individual
> might come along later and take advantage of, was, and is, a shame. It
> certainly didn't help the game he claims to love.
>
> Personally, while I don't wish harm upon Mr. tin, I'm glad he's gone
> from the golf scene. Sadly, he left a precedent behind that could come
> back and bite the game again at another time down the road. And for that,
> he deserves no accolades, in my view.
>
> Randy
>
IOW life ain't fair; and that doesn't justify changing rules for "special
exceptions" that stretch the core parameters. I don't see how it is even
within the jurisdiction of a court to interfere in rules in a private
enterprise entertainment. STRETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCH.
J'agree, Mr. Brown.
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 11:32:32
From: John van der Pflum
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:58:57 -0500, "George Hibbard"
<gh@perfectimpact.com > wrote:
>
>J'agree, Mr. Brown.
>
Breaking news -- hell just froze over (Or the Cubs won the World
Series). Randy Brown and George Hibbard agreeing on something. ;-)
--
jvdp
http://www.rsgcincinnati.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 09:29:01
From:
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
In article <8CHbh.8147$f8.4570@bignews7.bellsouth.net >,
"George Hibbard" <gh@perfectimpact.com > wrote:
> ""R&B"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com> wrote in message
> news:BtWdnY0VDrCE2PLYnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> > "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote ...
> >> Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in high
> >> school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
> >> question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate a
> >> handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps the
> >> ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
> >> gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps the
> >> ADA.
> >>
> >> <oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote ...
> >>> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
> >>> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
> >>> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
> >>> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
> >>> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
> >>> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a particular
> >>> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
> >>> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
> >>> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
> >>> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
> >>> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
> >>> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
> >>> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
> >>> by others to try the same?
> >
> > I don't remember all the things I said at the time, so I'll just say it's
> > possible I might have been one of those who talked about "flood gates
> > opening" and such. Certainly I was, and still am, opposed to the Supreme
> > Court's ruling. But with the benefit of time passing and 20/20 hindsight,
> > I'd have to say my argument is mostly philosophical.
> >
> > I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting event,
> > and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
> > athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
> > chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
> >
> > Of course those who sided with Mr. tin argued that the whatever
> > elements of "endurance" present in a golf competition are minimal. My
> > rebuttal has always been that "minimal" is not the same as non-existent,
> > and as long as ANY amount of endurance is involved, it inappropriate to
> > apply the rules differently for one player from the others.
> >
> > It is a sad fact of life, but a fact nonetheless, that Mr. tin and
> > other persons who are born with a disability are, in many ways, inherantly
> > unable to participate in certain activities. A person born without
> > eyesight will never be a pilot (or at least you better hope not if you're
> > riding on the plane), for example.
> >
> > I believed then, and I still believe today, that Mr. tin used his
> > position of privilege (a family of sufficient means to fund the legal
> > efforts put forth on his behalf) to twist the system to his benefit.
> > While there's nothing inherantly wrong with that, in and of itself, to
> > forever leave in his wake a set of rules that an opportunistic individual
> > might come along later and take advantage of, was, and is, a shame. It
> > certainly didn't help the game he claims to love.
> >
> > Personally, while I don't wish harm upon Mr. tin, I'm glad he's gone
> > from the golf scene. Sadly, he left a precedent behind that could come
> > back and bite the game again at another time down the road. And for that,
> > he deserves no accolades, in my view.
> >
> > Randy
> >
>
> IOW life ain't fair; and that doesn't justify changing rules for "special
> exceptions" that stretch the core parameters. I don't see how it is even
> within the jurisdiction of a court to interfere in rules in a private
> enterprise entertainment. STRETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCH.
>
So you would have accepted that restaurant owners could deny minorities
the chacne to eat in their restaurants? That it was okay to deny
muslims accerss into businesses when the Gulf War was underway?
The constitution provides that the government, including the courts,
regulate commerce. There is most certainly jurisdiction.
B. tin
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Dec 2006 07:34:02
From: S McFarlane
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
<ti285@umn.edu > wrote in message
news:ti285-94C961.09290101122006@lenny.tc.umn.edu...
>> IOW life ain't fair; and that doesn't justify changing rules for "special
>> exceptions" that stretch the core parameters. I don't see how it is even
>> within the jurisdiction of a court to interfere in rules in a private
>> enterprise entertainment. STRETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCH.
>>
>
> So you would have accepted that restaurant owners could deny minorities
> the chacne to eat in their restaurants? That it was okay to deny
> muslims accerss into businesses when the Gulf War was underway?
>
> The constitution provides that the government, including the courts,
> regulate commerce. There is most certainly jurisdiction.
Wrong. The Constitution provides that Congress shall regulate Commerce with
foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
It does not provide that the courts shall do so. The courts have used a
ridiculous and convoluted bit of pseudo-logic in 'interpreting' the above
language to usher in a new era of extra-constitutional government.
So, before you lean too heavily on that, understand that Congress also has
the right to regulate your growing of vegetables in your garden for your own
consumption, presumably because in so doing you are influencing the
interstate commerce of carrots in your own small way. Long Live the SC!
Scott
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 14:08:30
From: George Hibbard
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
<ti285@umn.edu > wrote in message
news:ti285-94C961.09290101122006@lenny.tc.umn.edu...
> In article <8CHbh.8147$f8.4570@bignews7.bellsouth.net>,
> "George Hibbard" <gh@perfectimpact.com> wrote:
>
>> ""R&B"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com> wrote in message
>> news:BtWdnY0VDrCE2PLYnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> > "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote ...
>> >> Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in
>> >> high
>> >> school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
>> >> question has always been how far a tour might have to go to
>> >> accommodate a
>> >> handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps
>> >> the
>> >> ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
>> >> gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps
>> >> the
>> >> ADA.
>> >>
>> >> <oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote ...
>> >>> I seem to remember back when the Supreme Court handed down
>> >>> its decision on the tin case, we had several regulars express
>> >>> the opinion that this would result in some rather dire consequences
>> >>> for competitive golf, and sports in general. Expressions like
>> >>> "flood gates" and "tip of the ice berg" were used to predict
>> >>> relatively "massive" affects of the decision. I'm not in a
>> >>> particular
>> >>> position to see these things building, but it has been about 6
>> >>> years or so and I'm not aware of the TOUR or other similar
>> >>> organizations having to deal with large quantities of ginally
>> >>> handicapp folks petitioning for special accomodations. Anyone
>> >>> running amateur or pro events out there that has had to deal with
>> >>> alot of these issues in competitions? Has the fact that tin
>> >>> wasn't successful even with accomodation put a damper on attempts
>> >>> by others to try the same?
>> >
>> > I don't remember all the things I said at the time, so I'll just say
>> > it's
>> > possible I might have been one of those who talked about "flood gates
>> > opening" and such. Certainly I was, and still am, opposed to the
>> > Supreme
>> > Court's ruling. But with the benefit of time passing and 20/20
>> > hindsight,
>> > I'd have to say my argument is mostly philosophical.
>> >
>> > I boiled down to this: Professional golf is, after all, a sporting
>> > event,
>> > and sporting events, by their very nature, measure some element of
>> > athleticism and skill. It's not merely a game, like playing Bridge or
>> > chess. It requires some amount of physical prowess and endurance.
>> >
>> > Of course those who sided with Mr. tin argued that the whatever
>> > elements of "endurance" present in a golf competition are minimal. My
>> > rebuttal has always been that "minimal" is not the same as
>> > non-existent,
>> > and as long as ANY amount of endurance is involved, it inappropriate to
>> > apply the rules differently for one player from the others.
>> >
>> > It is a sad fact of life, but a fact nonetheless, that Mr. tin and
>> > other persons who are born with a disability are, in many ways,
>> > inherantly
>> > unable to participate in certain activities. A person born without
>> > eyesight will never be a pilot (or at least you better hope not if
>> > you're
>> > riding on the plane), for example.
>> >
>> > I believed then, and I still believe today, that Mr. tin used his
>> > position of privilege (a family of sufficient means to fund the legal
>> > efforts put forth on his behalf) to twist the system to his benefit.
>> > While there's nothing inherantly wrong with that, in and of itself, to
>> > forever leave in his wake a set of rules that an opportunistic
>> > individual
>> > might come along later and take advantage of, was, and is, a shame. It
>> > certainly didn't help the game he claims to love.
>> >
>> > Personally, while I don't wish harm upon Mr. tin, I'm glad he's gone
>> > from the golf scene. Sadly, he left a precedent behind that could come
>> > back and bite the game again at another time down the road. And for
>> > that,
>> > he deserves no accolades, in my view.
>> >
>> > Randy
>> >
>>
>> IOW life ain't fair; and that doesn't justify changing rules for "special
>> exceptions" that stretch the core parameters. I don't see how it is even
>> within the jurisdiction of a court to interfere in rules in a private
>> enterprise entertainment. STRETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCH.
>>
>
> So you would have accepted that restaurant owners could deny minorities
> the chacne to eat in their restaurants? That it was okay to deny
> muslims accerss into businesses when the Gulf War was underway?
>
> The constitution provides that the government, including the courts,
> regulate commerce. There is most certainly jurisdiction.
>
> B. tin
You got it right. Private enterprise is just that. I totally believe that
private clubs, private enterprises, the right to choose who you want to work
for you, the right of private things is NOT the business of government.
Such a policy is intrustive: it steals from man, it is an obversion of the
natural law of life.
Damn right. You do not have the right to the privileges in my church, nor I
in yours. I cannot inveigle myself into your board of directors, your
household, or your bedroom. The opposite is called communism.
"Powers/rights not expressly granted to the ....." you know the drill. Or
do you? Its premise is the exact same thing.
Regulating commerce? Has nothing to do with the bottom line issue here.
One of the most seductive elements of our society is that once someone gets
elected to an office, HE TAKES IT UPON HIMSELF TO BE A DO GOODER and do "for
his constitutents" things that they simply do not want. My own city -- just
a few years new, is a case study in just that. The tension is between those
electeds and we who gave them office such that, like virtually any place in
the US, the tail wags the dog. In this city it is those people spending our
money and putting us in debt for things and in prioritizing that is directly
the opposite of the will of the majority.
It is worst of course in the fed. govt., but it is all over.
|
| | |
Date: 28 Nov 2006 22:27:35
From: Steve
Subject: Re: Casey Martin and the Flood gates
|
"sfb" <sfb@spam.net > wrote in message
news:tcWdncyTFcwbFfHYnZ2dnUVZ_ridnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Casey tin was a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in high
> school. tin only challenged the Conditions of the Competition. The
> question has always been how far a tour might have to go to accommodate a
> handicap once the precedent was established that the ADA also trumps the
> ROG. Since the Supremes placed no time limit on their ruling, "flood
> gates" and "tip of the iceberg" are forever unless the Congress dumps the
> ADA.
"a very good junior golfer who became handicapped in high school"???
He was born with the bad leg and I would say he was better than a very good
junior golfer. He grew up playing at my father in laws C.C.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casey_tin
Casey tin (born June 2, 1972 in Eugene, Oregon) is an American
professional golfer. He still resides in Eugene. He was educated at Stanford
University, and was briefly a teammate of Tiger Woods. He was three times
all Pac-10 and was a member of the University's NCAA-champion 1994 team. He
turned pro in 1995.
tin suffers from a birth defect in his right leg known as Klippel
Trenaunay Weber syndrome.
|
|
