Posted on 07/23/2007 10:46:58 AM PDT by newgeezer
All the breathless debates about Michael Vick are missing the point. The bigger issue has nothing to do with whether or not he deserves the right of due process, or whether NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell should suspend him, or whether Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank should enable him or give him tough love. It's not even about whether ... Nike should be launching another designer shoe with his name on it.
All of those are minor distractions from ...:
How did someone like Michael Vick ever come to exist?
Are we really ready to have that conversation? Do we dare explore how a young man of such unique athletic gifts and such obvious on-field marketing appeal was allowed to turn into just another unfortunate mug shot and potential ruined life? How did that remarkable athlete get a $100 million contract with the Falcons, become Nike's poster boy, rake in endorsements ..., then find himself on the verge of blowing it all because of an incredible tale that seems to come straight out of some hardcore gangsta rap video?
... The ultimate symbols of black athletes in our society used to be men of substance and positive image. Men with social conscience and resolve such as Jackie Robinson, Curt Flood, Jim Brown, ... They carried a burden and deep-rooted responsibility to portray themselves with a sense of dignity, pride and purpose. Even ... rebels such as Muhammad Ali ... stood for something more meaningful than a multimillion-dollar shoe deal.
But somewhere between Jackie Robinson and Michael Vick, ... "Street cred" became the anthem of the modern black athlete, this misguided notion that the only way to appeal to the young demographic of the sneaker-buying public was to adopt the negative attitudes of the thug life popularized by black hip-hop/gangster rappers. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
Stereotypes come around because of some truth. Here is a man that makes millions playing football but he wants to be a thug and many blacks have pit bulls as a status symbol.
Your a gross animal abuser.
At first I did not know what you meant, now I do. Vick the devil dick has herpes. good, everything helps.
My standard of morality is the Bible which tells us to treat animals humanly.
The laws against animal cruelty are based on that true Biblical morality.
You said there was no moral issue involved and I gave you a scripture that stated otherwise, Pr.12:10.
So, when the law is based on true moral principles as anti-cruelty to animals, it is good law.
No other way to say it, but that you are ignorant.
Vick tortured animals, not people, and now he is facing federal charges and hopefully prison time.
Animals have rights. You can be in denial about that fact if you wish, but your denial makes it no less of a fact.
Well said.
Re: Dogfighting does not violate anyone’s and any law that would punish a person for action that does not violate another person’s rights is immoral.
You are truly an idiot.
Seek help. Please.
You say animals have rights but never where they come from. I understand the Christian perspective that does not give animals rights but demands they be treated humanely but whats yours?
That’s my thought, too. Did Jim Brown toss some gal off the balcony of a hotel in the Caribbean? I heard that story several times, but I don’t know if it’s really true.
I don’t think Hollywood people were ever that wonderful either. They just used to be able to hide their shenanigans from the public.
If animals have no rights, then why is Vick facing federal charges?
Cause the government says dogfighting is illegal. Please don’t tell me you think that the government decides what rights we have. The Constitution makes it clear that government only is supposed to protect our rights, not define them.
>After reading your second paragraph I looked to the bottom expecting to see a sarcasm tag. LOL <
You weren’t looking in the right place. It’s on the right side of the post, just below his signature.
>Treat your dogs and horses how you like but can you stand there and honestly tell someone what to do with their own property?<
Cruelty to animals has been a criminal offense for some time now in this country. Dogfighting is a felony.
Perhaps you missed it somewhere along the line.
I’m not disputing the fact that it’s illegal, just that it’s being illegal is wrong.
That’s my thought, too. Did Jim Brown toss some gal off the balcony of a hotel in the Caribbean? I heard that story several times, but I don’t know if it’s really true.
I believe the women recanted after he was charged.
Dogs have saved innumerous lives of US servicemen. perhaps you should educate yourself as to their “value” before sounding like a fool:
>I’m not disputing the fact that it’s illegal, just that it’s being illegal is wrong.<
Well, you are most definitely in the minority. While I do not believe animals themselves have “rights”, I don’t find it at all difficult to understand the concept that in a civilized society, purposeful cruelty to dumb beasts cannot be condoned, much less encouraged with betting, as is done in dogfighting and/or cockfighting.
It’s the will of the vast majority of Americans that dogfighting be punished in this country as a felony.
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.