I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. I'm really glad he started off in the first amendment direction. This is a point that even the opponents of gay marriage cannot argue against. What Burns did is inexcusable, he attempted to use his influence to muzzle someone. That's just plain wrong. This letter starts off very professional and then, while continuing to make valid points, it starts to meander in to personal attacks. "you may want to hire an intern to help you with the longer words", is a small indication of the insults to come. He spares Burns nothing and is pretty harsh with his words. I laughed out loud a couple of times and like I said, I really enjoyed reading this but I wonder if it would carry more weight if it weren't so "vitriolic" itself. Should he have taken the high road or do you think the impassioned insults will carry the message further?
Typically, I think the 'high road' would be more effective. It's definitely the better one to take, IMHO. However, I think that Kluwe is writing with a particular audience in mind: NFL fans. The letter is very aggressive, and it even goes so far as to question Burns' heterosexuality. Kluwe presents equality for gays as a matter of patriotism, without require his audience to really empathize with them. He's almost equating homosexuality with 'cocklust'. I thought the letter was interesting because it is both enjoyable to read, and not quite right. Still, it probably was more effective than a more balanced criticism would have been, considering the audience it was written for. As an aside, I think Kluwe must know that the NFL can actually inhibit his expression while they employ him.Should he have taken the high road or do you think the impassioned insults will carry the message further?
The politician backtracked his comments. Seems the heat from the press and other NFL players forced his cocklusting hand.