Posted on 04/30/2014 12:30:12 PM PDT by AZLiberty
From a blogging friend of mine:
END OF SINCERITY? IS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE NBA TO TRUMP THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES?
James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D. © April 30, 2014
When I was an undergraduate student at the University of Iowa, after a physics lecture, Rex Jamison invited me to have coffee with him.
Rex was valedictorian of his high school class at Story City, Iowa. He was also number one in my class at Iowa as well. He would go on to become a Rhodes Scholar at Cambridge in Great Britain, and subsequently to graduate from Harvard University from the School of Medicine at the top of his class.
Rex and I were acquaintances taking many of the same courses, living in Hillcrest Dormitory, and often involved in bull sessions on various topics.
Deeply religious at the time, a devout Irish Roman Catholic, attending mass and communion several times a week, I suppose I wore my religion on my sleeve. Rex was not religious.
One night the bull session turned to religion and Rex had the floor. He challenged me among all our friends to justify the tenets of Catholicism, the relevance of Papal Encyclicals, the basis of Papal Infallible Authority and the church's dogmatic teachings. I was no match for him.
Rex had been a debater in high school, and he fairly reduced me to incredulity. He never let up even when my responses were reduced to stutters. I felt naked with all my clothes on.
Therefore, I was surprised when he invited me for coffee after our class in physics. I couldn’t imagine what he wanted of me as my only contact with him was when he had an audience, when he could hold court with his peers and demonstrate his intellectual superiority by punishing one of us with it.
He was not a good listener, and always seemed to have to be “on.” My wonder was how he could feel “on” with only me as his audience.
After our second cup of coffee, he looked into my eyes deeply, and said to me, “Jim, teach me how to be sincere.”
I thought he was kidding, so I laughed and said, “Right!”
“I’m serious. I watch, hell, I study you. Did you know that?”
“Noooo," I said. That felt weird. He studied “me,” me of all people, a person he had destroyed before our peers.
“Yeah, I do. You listen to others. You listen to me. I tried to make you mad the other night when we were discussing religion, and I could see pain in your eyes, sincere pain, not phony pain, not contrived pain. I got to you, but I couldn’t stop. I also saw anger, and thought he’s going to hit me, and you started to stutter, yeah, stutter! That was the damnedest thing. You’re a mountain compared to me and could crush me like a bean, and what do you do? You stutter!
“Now, that’s sincerity, and I want to learn it, teach me, be my rabbi.”
“Rex, sincerity can’t be taught. Sincerity can only be felt. It doesn’t come out of the head. It comes out of the heart.”
“Really?”
“Yes, really!”
He gathered up his books, turned and left, looked back and said, “I’ll owe you for the coffee, okay?”
THE END OF SINCERITY? IS THE NBA CONSTITUTION TO TRUMP THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?
I thought of this conversation when Adam Silver, the Commissioner of the NBA, told a press conference that Donald Sterling, the owner of the L A Clippers NBA Basketball Team, would be banned for life from the NBA, exacted a $2.5 million fine, and could never again step into an NBA arena.
Donald Sterling’s crime was having said some outrageous and despicable things about African Americans in general and NBA players and former players, such as Magic Johnson, in particular in disparaging language to his former mistress.
He made these remarks in the privacy of his own home, not knowing that he was being recorded. But the remarks were of such a heinous nature that the NBA Players Association, of which more than 80 percent are African American, as well as NBA fans throughout the league, demanded the commissioner come down hard on the LA Clippers owner, and they were not disappointed.
If fact, I don’t imagine most NBA players or fans expected the commissioner to be so draconian, or his wrath to be so personal against the Clippers’ owner. The commissioner made it emphatic that his ultimate objective was to strip Donald Sterling of ownership of the LA Clippers with an early sale of the franchise.
To accomplish this, the commissioner needs three-quarters of the 30 NBA franchise owners to vote for such an action. He claimed it was within the NBA constitution to exercise such an action.
FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH – WHERE IS THE NBA IN ALL THIS?
Donald Sterling has a history or racism, and has paid fines before for his shameful bigotry. What makes this different? Charles Krauthammer on the “Bill O’Reilly Show” of Fox TV claims the groundswell of reaction to this tape recording is evidence of the huge shift in public opinion in the past 50 years.
That said what is disturbing to me is the invasion of privacy, the violation of free speech, and the overwhelming emotional piling on that everyone seems to be engaged in without a moment’s reflection on what it may mean – down the road – to everyone else in terms of freedom of speech.
So, Donald Sterling is a despicable human being, but even a despicable human being under the United States Constitution has certain rights, among which are found in the Bill of Rights with the first amendment of those rights the Freedom of Speech.
Can the NBA franchise owners vote a franchise owner out of his ownership because he made some racist remarks in the privacy of his own home?
If this emotional madness is taken to its logical conclusion, and Donald Sterling is forced to sell because of these remarks, what does that say for the rest of us that are not billionaires, not millionaires, indeed, working paycheck to paycheck?
Can we lose our jobs, lose our homes, or be ostracized from our community if a son or daughter, brother or sister, uncle or aunt, or other friend or relative uses an iPhone to record what we say in the privacy of our own home about anything or anybody?
Is there no sanctuary where we can express ourselves, vent our spleens, damn the world, damn the boss, or our company, the cat or dog, neighbor next door, or down the street for any imagined or real slight that gets our dander up?
If that is the case, more people will be like Rex, finding it impossible to understand sincerity, because sincerity will have died, for no one will be able to afford to say what they think or trust anyone to keep the confidence of their most private thoughts. It will mark the end of spontaneity.
By punishing a reprobate for his sick mind and hostile spirit who happens to be an NBA owner, could we be punishing us all in abstentia?
Not one more dime to anything that has anything to do with the NAACP.
Not one dime of my money to anyone or any company that supports Jessee Jackson in any way.
All of this is nothing more than opportunistic greed by the bottom feeders.
It will not stop until we take the money out of it.
Show me the agreement he signed that has a morals clause or some other clause regarding his conduct.
I'm not guessing any more or less than you are. If the NBA doesn't have legal justification for their actions, Sterling will have no problem obtaining relief from a court of competent jurisdiction.
I’ve heard endless talk on Sports radio about how this player wouldn’t play for him and encouraging that player or coach not to play for him.
The man has a sordid history. The signees knew this when they signed on or shortly thereafter.
All this faux outrage is precisely that.
And he is known as a ferocious litigant. Should be fun to watch.
It depends on the Bylaws, and contracts etc. that Sterling agreed to when he initially bought the team and joined the NBA, and any modifications since then.
If anything in these pertained to speech/behavior, then yes they can. Anyone can sign away their rights by agreeing to do so in a contract. So it depends on what he agreed to.
Also known as exercising their First Amendment rights. I personally have no problem with Sterling losing whatever reputation and credibility he may have had - he is a repulsive human being. As for his property - I have no problem with anyone choosing to terminate any associations they may have with him, subject to whatever contracts or agreements may be in existence.
The NBA can do what it wants. Doesn’t make it right.
If they violate their own bylaws (which Sterling would have had a voice in creating) or violate any contracts or laws, that's a problem. But if they just take available legal steps to disassociate from someone who is obviously bad for business, I don't really see the problem.
try reading the 5th amendment. it limits the power of the FEDERAL government, not private organizations like the NBA
Just like the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment does not apply here.
He's a known asshole whom everyone who knew him already hated; that's true. I don't think it's "faux outrage" - I think it's just an opportunistic reaction to Sterling finally showing his jackassery in public in a way they feel like they can do something about.
I don’t know how “equal protection” applies in non-governmental situations, but I suspect that Sterling’s lawyers will make a strong case that the NBA has applied these sanctions “unfairly”. I’m sure there are plenty of glass houses among NBA owners, and they should be very cautious throwing stones at only Donald Sterling. Mark Cuban has said as much. If Sterling sues the NBA, the discovery process could be very interesting.
Donald Sterling undoubtedly harbors racists thoughts, and occasionally voices them. Bad on him. But his stupidity is the bigger issue here. Sharing a girlfriend with Magic Johnson, the one person most likely to want the LA Clippers and in the best position to profit from Sterling’s woes, shows bad judgment. Sincerely sharing his racist thoughts with said girlfriend, even in private, is dumber.
Here are the NBA bylaw:
http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/NBA-Constitution-and-By-Laws.pdf
There is stuff in there on conduct detrimental to the league.
You are correct in what you stipulate. So, who guarantees property rights?
It’s a pity that no one here appears to see the danger to basic property rights.
contracts. sterling has a contract with the NBA. sterling is notorious for defending his rights in court. if the NBA is violating its contract with him (the NBA Constitution), have no fear, he will assert his rights in court
That’s what I’ve been hearing.
there is no danger to basic property rights. if sterling did not want to obey the NBA’s rules he should not have bought a team
I disagree.
Our culture these days apparently trumps property rights, justice, and morality.
I’d also like to know when the NBA’s constitution and bylaws were instituted and when Sterling bought the Clippers. Which came first?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.