Jeff Kent opens his checkbook and takes a stand against gay marriage

Jeff Kent, who played second base for the Los Angeles Dodgers this season, has stepped into the emotional world of same-sex marriage, giving $15,000 to backers of the California proposition on Tuesday's ballot that would ban it.

In a disclosure filed with the California secretary of state, Kent listed his occupation as professional baseball player for the Dodgers and his address as Austin, Texas. He gave the $15,000 in a transaction dated Monday but which only now is public.

Proposition 8 would ban same-sex marriage by imposing a California constitutional amendment that would define marriage as being between one man and one woman.

With both sides spending upward of $30 million each, the measure has become the most costly ballot measure ever dealing with a social issue, and the spending is by far the most for any proposition anywhere in the country this year.

Kent, a free agent who is considering retiring, is a potential Hall of Famer who is best known for his years with the San Francisco Giants. A Bellflower native, Kent also played baseball at University of California, Berkeley.

A review of campaign records shows no other donations to federal or California state campaigns by Kent.

Frank Schubert, managing the Yes-on-8 campaign, said he was unaware that Kent had weighed in.

"He has had a stellar career and will no doubt one day be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame," Schubert said. "I wish the Giants had kept Kent and traded [Barry] Bonds."

--Dan Morain

Comments

[Maggliana]

Are we all that surprised that a ball player said something dumb? We have a saying in Detroit....Remember the Sheff....

But that's still a shame. Saying something ignorant is one thing, politcally supporting it when millions of children look to you for guidance is another.

Jackass.

[Mike]

Unbelieveable!!! Now I Know Why Everyone Hates Him.
I Actually Cheered For Him This Season Even Though Everyone Said He Is One Of The Most Selfish Baseball Players EVER.
Im Just Hope He Doesnt Play With The Dodgers Next Year or I'll Boooo Him every Time He Comes To The Plate.

[Bob the Roofer]

The problems arise not from some "perverted view of marriage" by das dumkopf Reed Huestis, rather it's from the "official" discrimination levied upon same sex couples by laws regarding end of life/dying loved one/spousal privilege/etc., where the denial of "fundamental rights" comes into play. Anyone same or opposite sex who has taken care of a loved one particularly during a devastating terminal illness deserves the same consideration, that's basic human compassion. Anyone with half a brain, something I seriously question in messer reed's case, can understand that argument in favor of same sex unions. If you want to live in a religious theocracy reed, I'm pretty sure one exists in Iran along with some of the other stone age reasoning you employ, so feel free to immigrate there and good luck with imposing your will and mindset there. One thing I notice about people who think and talk like reed, they're pretty quick to legislate morality when it comes to their beliefs and opinions but even quicker to scream about the growth of big government and that the government shouldn't be legislating morality when it's something they don't agree with. Your sophistic argument is pathetic reed.

[AlfredFromBrooklyn]

Mike, why do you capitalize the first letter of each word in your post? That's all wrong!

I think I understand the argument here... Gays and gay sympathizers can't understand why the morally conservative and religious groups are vigorously opposed to a bill that would promote monogamy among the gay population while treating gays, lesbians, etc. with one more right accorded to the straight population.

The morally conservative and religious groups are disgusted by homosexuals and feel like marriage acknowledges them as equal citizens, while their various religious texts abhor the homosexual lifestyle.

My personal feelings lie in line with the above poster who likened homosexual marriage to interracial marriage, but that's still a very extreme position to take, as the interracial marriage issue extended to human rights being denied to people on the basis of their skin color and this merely prevents people who can exercise all their rights from describing themselves as married. The fact of the matter is, marriage is a legal and religious union, held in extremely high regard by almost every culture on earth, across the board. The rite is different all around the world and the respective cultures usually seem willing to fight and die for their concept of marriage to continue.

In America, for example, we won't allow fathers to marry their daughters, brothers to marry their sisters, or men to marry more than one woman at a time, and up until recently, we haven't allowed men to marry men, or women to marry women. It's just been a fundamental notion of an ancient religious ceremony.

As an atheist, never having spent any time in a church, I don't really care about the religious ramifications of marriage. Frankly, if all those legal rights mentioned in an earlier post are already extended to civil unions, I don't even understand the need to GET married. If not, I can understand the issue a little more clearly. However, all those tax and property laws WERE drafted to help families with children. Eh, even if the proposition fails, the opposition won't change their minds... It'll likely work itself out like the abortion issue... This is going to end sadly however it ends, dividing our country ever further.

[Bryan]

Since I grew up going to Angels games in the OC, I never liked the Dodgers (shoulda stayed in Brooklyn). The last time they had anybody good, I think Davey Lopes, Steve Garvey, and Ron Cey were playing. BTW Kent's a Mormon, so this donation shouldn't come as a shock. Still a man who'd diss Vin Scully and Manny Ramirez...at least Chavez Ravine doesn't have to put up with him anymore. Glad he's moving to TX: they have lotsa boys like him there.

[John]

Some "choose" to be homosexual.

God gave man the freedom of choice.

God strongly was against homosexuality.

Why are we even voting?

Hello?

[anthony garcia]

Mr. Kent,
I just wanted to briefly let you know that everyone has a right to their opinion, including you. Please understand that the fight against Prop 8 is simply about equality and nothing more. You have chosen to use a large sum of money to support something that is driven by opinions and hate. What a shame it is that you couldn't find any other charitable cause for the money that you earned being someone that noone can vote against you on. I have no ill feelings towards you or anyone else that wishes to push Prop. 8 through BUT remember we have the same drive that you have when you're out on the field doing something that you love to do.

[NorCalJoe]

Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. stated

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

Proposition 8 is UNJUST and UNFAIR. STOP DISCRIMINATION COLD, and VOTE *NO* on Proposition 8 on Tuesday 11/4.

Obama'08

[Dylan]

It doesn't bode well for the Prop. 8 crowd that the most misanthropic man in baseball-- his generation's Ty Cobb-- supports their cause.

Proposition 8 is a hateful initiative. Please vote against it. Live your own life and let others love and marry whom they choose. Don't stoop to Jeff Kent's level.

[Michael Underhill]

Dear Bill,

"...It is depending on those who are illiterate and ignorant to propagate their filth." I would ask that you go towards the beginning of this blog and read Carlos' post, and then ask yourself who is "illiterate and ignorant." You should perhaps be in touch with Carlos and let him know that the word is "being" not "been" and "alot" is not a word at all! From many of my GLBT colleagues who are Ph.D.'s I would suggest that you chose you hateful verbiage more carefully.

[Michel Diamant]

Jeff Kent has a problem with 2 guys or 2 gals marrying? Because marriage is for 1 woman and 1 man? Let me guess.... he is married and banging only 1 woman? Very hard to believe! Jeff Kent is a hater.

[Bigot?]

What is a bigot? a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance (Webster's).

So the fact the Jeff Kent has a moral view opposing gay marriage makes him a bigot? How has he treated a group with hatred or intolerance? He showed no disrespect to any group. Tolerance does not mean acceptance of what one considers to be wrong. Tolerance means to still love that person or group even if you disagree with what that person or group is doing. Do I hate homosexuals? No. I try to love all people. Do I agree with or accept homosexual activity? No. Does that make me a bigot? No.

It seems to me that most people commenting here are bigots. They see a person or group (those for prop 8) and they automatically hate them and try to deny them their right to certain morals and opinions. Who is the bigot?

[AET]

Bigot?,

The reality is that for people on either side 8 is potentially a moral issue. Those supporting 8 will argue their morals define marriage in a specific way, those (such as myself) who oppose it are also equally likely to find the freedom to marry a moral issue. I find it immoral and reprehensible to deny a portion of the population the same freedoms we allocate to others. In my book believing some people aren't equal makes you a bad human and a bad Christian (I can't speak to other religions as I don't practice them and don't know their core beliefs) - don't like it? Sorry, that's what my gut and my moral centre is telling me and I'll vote the way that gives my soul peace and I suggest you do the same.

As for the bigot issue yes, I'm sorry, you ARE a bigot if you vote yes on 8. You just are and if you don't see how that is then you need to look up the term in a dictionary. The people here disagreeing with Prop 8 aren't trying to 'deny [pro 8ers] their right to certain morals and opinions'. No one is denying you a moral stance or an opinion, we're refusing to AGREE with you through a fair and democratic process. We might be disgusted with your opinions, but we're certainly not trying to prohibit them. You have no right to be agreed with 100% of time.

[Nicole]

Notice that not one of the people who commented on the pro 8 side of the campaign called anyone on the anti-8 campaign names. Having worked on this campaign I have been cussed out, called intolerant and a bigot. All of which is not true. I have family members whom I love of the homosexual orientation. Tolerance is not about uniformity of opinion it's being able to have different opinions and tolerate each others' view point. I firmly believe that marriage between a man and a woman is essential for the raising of children. Studies have shown time and again that a child raised by both a mother and a father grow up to be better adjusted productive adults. The definition of marriage is essential to the future of our country. I applaud the courage that Jeff Kent demonstrated in donating to this campaign.

[Down with Prop 8!]

Your right - everyone is a bigot who wants to define marriage the same way it has been defined since...well, since anyone knows really. I for one have been wanting to marry my Goat, whom I love dearly and have for such a long time, but have not been able to Marry him (yes, I am a man and I love my manly Goat) because of cruel bigots who want to define marriage as only between a man and a women! And then I can get some great tax write-offs as well, being a 'married couple'.....

[Suzanne]

I am whole-heartedly, 100% in support of prop 8. I am not a hateful or discriminatory person at all. Marriage is just a sacred thing to me, and the definition should not be changed for anyone; not homosexuals, not a brother or sister, not anyone. I disagree/agree with several propositions that were or were not passed, but I'm not criticizing or writing hateful blogs and comments to the people with different opinions. This is my biggest problem with the people who are agains prop 8. You say that we are the hateful, biggoted ones, but listen to YOUR WORDS. All I hear is hate. We live in a democracy and the people have spoken. As far as I know, you have the same rights with civil unions as heterosexuals do with marriage, so why do you incist on changing the definition?? If your rights in a civil union are lacking then maybe thats what you need to focus on.

[John]

Why is it if you do not agree with people choosing to be homosexual that you are "Homophobic"?

"genetic predisposition" has never ever been proven, but Homosexual's like to use it as an "excuse" rather than just be honest about their choice.

Truth is the majority does not agree with homosexuality as a lifestyle. It is true the majority is not always right, but they are not always wrong either.

This should never have gone to a vote. The law that needs to be changed is how we can freely designate who benefits from our death, support and benefits, not the definition of marriage.

[anon]

yeah, i don't know why so many people are making jeff kent out to be "hateful" and "homophobic". you have your opinions, he has his.

i know where i stand on the issue of gay marriage in general (not for it) but i have yet to determine where i stand on the issue of gay marriage being legal or not. (separation of church and state?)

regardless, i have respect for someone supporting their beliefs, even when it may be criticized by the public. no wonder he didn't make this super public, everyone jumping all over him.

i wish that political issues didn't have to be emotional issues as well- that we didn't have to get pissed off at someone that had a different opinion than us.

just some thoughts...

[let them turn water into koolaid]

"Tolerance is not about uniformity of opinion it's being able to have different opinions and tolerate each others' view point." while oppressing them. OK, i agree that the yes on 8ers were "tolerant" freedom-haters. :-)
Hitler loved "The Jews", slavery set Southern Negroes free. Koolaid will keep you smart. All bow to rightspeak!

[Joe]

Where in the Bible does it say that "believers" should try to manipulate laws to reflect their beliefs, however basic these beliefs may seem? Last I checked, Jesus led by example, not by legislating his adversaries out of the picture.

[Joe]

anon: "yeah, i don't know why so many people are making jeff kent out to be 'hateful' and 'homophobic'. you have your opinions, he has his."

It's for the same reason Strom Thurmond is remembered as the senator who in 1957 conducted the longest one-man filibuster ever.... against the Civil Rights Act. Sure, he and his constituents were entitled their opinions, but today we realize that they were just bigots. As a people, we have belittled their deeply held, sacred opinion and accepted the opposite as truth. In 50 years, the same will be true of homosexual unions, and all those who oppose it today and tomorrow will be regarded as bigots. (As a sidenote, on the evolutionary scale, a bigot is somewhere between maggot and roach. That especially applies to the unique "stupid bigot" breed, the ones who deny evolution.)

[Truth for Peace]

Mormons, the Mormon Church and other hateful NON-RED-LETTER Christians, now in this day and age, like to choose gays and lesbians to hate and scapegoat; ...and they seem to feel this evil, hurtful, hateful, non-loving expression of theirs’ are somehow moral.

These confused, evil, ill-moral, hating Mormons and other Christians forgot and abandoned the most sacred and blessed teachings of the Bible, while believing and expressing and acting for such evil hate!

The Bible dose speak against a man lying with a man the same as a woman (an impossible thing physically-sexually, anyway), but dose not speak against or ask for a ban on same-sex marriage, ...it only speaks for marriage. Same-sex marriage has been a part of life on this planet since time was first recorded; if your church dose not want to sanction it for itself, fine; but, it is a lie (false witness) to claim same-sex marriages are something new that redefines marriage; and, it is a lie to claim that banning loving, committed same-sex persons from marrying, will somehow ‘redefine’ and ‘save marriage’, ...when only a ban would redefine it and only LOVE can SAVE marriages, and us all!

The Bible dose also speak against other things, and these should always be considered by a TRUE Christian, when considering their hate and witnessing against gays and lesbians; here are two: First, a wife must do as her husband says or orders; so, being gay or lesbian is then considered a sin or bad, like it would be bad for a wife to report or act against her husband raping their preschool children after the husband ordered his wife not to. Second, shell fish must not be eaten, and the flesh of a dead pig must not be touched; so being gay or lesbian is then considered a sin or bad, like it would be bad for a dad to throw a football (pigskin) with his son; or, like a Christian church serving a homeless person a bowl of clam chowder soup; or, like a grandmother serving her grandchildren beacon and eggs for breakfast, or a ham sandwich or and American hot dog! Being gay or lesbian then, would be considered bad like reporting and stopping child abuse, like feeding the hungry or like a dad spending quality time with his child, ...sounds likes its not really bad at all!

The Bible speaks of: ‘those of other flocks’, ‘turning the other cheek’ and ‘love’, if this is not what you and your children are learning from your church or religion, then your simply listening to the wrong and evil side! I pray for your guidance and wish you love!

The haters like to say that they don’t want the government or judges changing the definition of marriage; but, then they spend thousands and thousands of dollars to do just that! The law suit and actions against the Mormons and others are right and just; if they want to speak freely with their actions and money, they must accept that others may do the same.

Marriage is about bringing loving, committed couples together, it is not about discriminating against couples simply because one is or is not a man or a woman.

‘Same-sex marriage discrimination’ is ‘sex discrimination’; if all that is needed is for one of the persons to be another sex, that’s ‘sex discrimination’, children! Although, I’ll guess that calling it ‘gay or lesbian or homosexual’, gives ugly, evil, NON-RED-LETTER Christians a warm and cozy, false feeling or morality inside, doesn’t it, ...kind of like a witch burning or a stoning or lynching, eigh!

[Sam]

Hooray for Jeff Kent! Personally, I don't care one or the other what the homosexuals folks do with each other! But, they need to keep it to themselves. What I do care about, is the way that some of the homosexual community try so hard to force their behavior on other folks. They also try to make others feel that their is something "wrong" with them if they aren't homosexual.

[KentFan12]

GO JEFF KENT!!! Not only are you one of my hero's as a baseball player, but have always been one of my hero's as a person, but this just made me that much more of a fan of yours Jeff Kent!!! GO JEFF KENT!!! Whatever you do, whether it be retire or continue playing, i pray the best for you. God Bless!

[commenter]

Jeff Kent belives on what he believes in.
Why do No on 8 supporters have to be so mean.
The California Penal Codes states that domestic parters have all the rights. The Yes on 8 vodters arent haters they are just speaking on what they believe in.