Profootballfocus’s Mike Florio had this gem of an article today. He’s arguing that, since Bruce Arians (the interim head coach of the Colts) included “faith” in what he looks for in a football player, he’s immediately against atheists.
What? I’m as atheist as the next guy (no, more atheist. Take that, jerk), but when I read the statement he’s quoting, I didn’t even react. (Actually, far stupider is the fact he mentions “football” twice. If you have passion for football, don’t you by definition also care about it? Unless you’re passionately against football, in which case, being a football player is a poor choice of profession.) To use a baseball term, I think all Bruce Arians wants is “make-up”, or players who are less likely to go to prison. Now, I’m not sure faith has anything to do with being a good or bad person, but it’s generally understood that people of faith are “better” people than those without faith. While it’s an unfortunate association, it’s one most Americans would make.
I do understand Florio’s point, kind of, but let’s recap. An interim head coach for a football team, who doesn’t even make hiring decisions, is being criticized for using the word “faith.” Is it a potential legal minefield? In any country but the United States, probably. Of course, nobody would have noticed it if Florio hadn’t pointed it out. And now me, I guess. With my giant blog audience. If we (meaning atheists) don’t want people to think we’re dicks, getting hot and bothered over this isn’t the way to do it, especially since Florio isn’t an atheist either.