Mariners suspend Steve Clevenger without pay for remainder of the season


The Seattle Mariners suspended Steve Clevenger without pay for the remainder of the season, moving swiftly Friday to discipline their backup catcher after his set of tweets imploring that protestors in Charlotte should be “locked behind bars like animals.”

                                             Unbelievable ! I'll bet this wouldn't have happened if he said something in support of those same rioters.


As soon as you put an adjective in front of the noun “people”, you are going to be subject to someone calling you out. Especially when those adjectives are words that are a result of birth. These would include color, ethnicity, gender. Religious, while not necessarily an accident of birth is so fraught with emotional overtones, it also should be used with care.

Note, one can leave off the noun and convert the adjective to a noun. Same problem will and should exist.


Steve went to my high school. Good kid. With all the tweets and comments from athletes and celebrities that generate controversy, it seems a bit like cherry picking to suspend one guy without pay (note he has been injured since June anyway, so this conveniently gets them off the hook for now in paying the salary to an injured player) while ignoring all the other things that get said and posted.

I doubt the player’s union will allow this anyway, and the Mariners will likely back down once the dust settles. They have the far and away best union in pro sports. They have the highest salaries, and all are fully guaranteed from the day the ink hits the paper. If a player signs a ten year deal, and gets paralyzed on Day one, the team has to pay him for the entire ten years.


While I find his remarks distasteful, I have great concern about the role “thought police” are playing in our country. I could easily see similar or worse comments made by someone from a different demographic group having nothing said if they voiced their opinion in a similar manner.


My take on this is the same as when Curt Schilling was fired from ESPN. These are private organizations and they can take action against their employees/members any way they like. I think it idiotic that they suspended him. I think it would have been better for the Mariners to make a principled stand saying something to the effect of “The remarks by Steve Clevenger do not reflect the position of the Seattle Mariner’s club. We strongly disagree with his statement. While we do not agree, we recognize Steve’s right to express his opinion.”


The 49ers did that wit Kapernick, after many found his actions offensive and disrespectful. Of course, Kapernick was protesting for minorities, so he gets a pass. Granted, different team and whatnot, but I have no doubt if Kap played for the Mariners, he wouldn’t be suspended without pay.


The irony is that if he would have posted a tweet supporting the looting and burning and violence in Charlotte, they wouldn’t have taken any action.

There’s no way this suspension is upheld if he appeals. The union will fight it tooth and nail, and an arbitrator would most likely decide in his favor.


Actually probably the opposite is true.

The COB provides:

“Players may be disciplined for just cause for conduct that is materially detrimental or materially prejudicial to the best interest of baseball.”

"As an employee under contract, the Mariners are within their rights as an employer to suspend Clevenger without pay for conduct detrimental to the organization. As for his future with the organization, he’s under club control, but the team could choose to non-tender him a contract in the offseason if it wants to move on. Clevenger is on the 60-day disabled list and wasn’t expected to return this season.

Clevenger’s salary is $516,500 this season. With the suspension, he’ll lose just over $30,000 this season."


Well, people in the US were praising the rioters in Kiev in 2014.

Well, he was likely suspended for this remark.

Everyone should be locked behind bars like animals!”

emphasis mine. If he didn’t say he would not likely have been suspended.


The situations are in no way analogous. Kaeperneck exercised his freedom of speech to protest the shooting of innocent black citizens by police. Clevenger advocated for the arrest for everyone in the Black Lives Matter movement (something that’s clearly unconstitutional) and likened protestors to animals, which is racist and offensive.


Since when is arresting people for destruction of private property and assault unconstitutional? :mad:

If anything, what he said was offensive to animals.


The rioters in Charlotte assaulted white people, injured police, threw rocks at motorists and looted stores. Clevenger’s comments were pretty accurate.


Note that Clevenger didn’t refer to just the rioters. He said the protesters. All of them, apparently.


Please. Has nobody taken a course in rhetoric or language in the past decade? This kind of pedantry is annoying.


Words/language and rhetoric matter so it was good to point out the distinction even if some don’t understand the difference and find it annoying.


The media has been pretty much referring to everyone involved as simply, protesters.


I think the media has been careful not to say the protesters are rioting and looting. When they refer to the protesters as a group, they refer to their acts of protest. Those that riot are a small subset of the protesters, and their actions are not condoned by them. It is only sloppy commentary that puts them all in one “basket of deplorables”, to borrow a recent terminology.


Sure language matters. But do you really think he thinks they are literally animals? Do you really think he literally meant ALL the protesters, including the peaceful ones? It may be strong wording, but please, don’t be so pedantic.


Nonsense. Clevenger advocated for the arrest of everyone involved in the same way I literally wished for eternal damnation for my buddy the time I quipped “go to hell, Fred.” Poor taste for sure, but only angsty contrarians pretend it was an actual literal wish.

And as far as saying something is racist and offensive, that is your opinion. Many are of the opinion that Kapernick’s actions, juxtaposed with his racist socks, are more offensive. That’s where free speech comes into play, and why we don’t get to silence either person, which you seem to support when you find something offensive.

Granted, we are talking about private organizations, not bound by the first amendment, but you talk as if their speech or actions are in anyway different. They are not, you just happen to agree with one of them.

closed #20

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit