Anyone who knows me knows how I feel about the mistreatment of animals.
Animal abuse sends me into a white hot fury. I believe pet owners who beat or terrorize their dogs and cats should have the same pain inflicted on them ten-fold. And I regard those who condone or allow dogfighting as some of the most vile and cretinous creatures on the planet, right up there on the should-be-burned-in-a-gasoline-filled pit with child rapists.
That said, the Michael Vick debate gives me pause. The guy will have served his time come July. Should he be allowed to rejoin the NFL, if a team will have him?
First let me say this. Who am I kidding? The man is regarded as a world-class player. Of course team owners, concerned only with the bottom-line benefit to their franchise, will scramble over one another to make him offers. It will be up to the NFL Commissioner to decide whether to allow him back.
The Commissioner and those team owners aren't evil people. They may even have pets of their own. But I would imagine none of them will consider the pain and suffering Vick caused when they make up their minds about his return to duty. That he's a convicted felon may weigh on their minds momentarily but, in point of fact, they'll know a good spinmeister can make that seem irrelevant. A little picketing, a miniscule amount of lost revenue the first year. So what?
The guy served his time, the argument goes. Shouldn't he be allowed back into his profession? After all, the NFL is hardly filled with saints.
I see one small sticking point.
Dogfighting occurs only so gamblers can make money.
Mr. Commissioner, do you want someone with those kinds of connections on one of your teams?
No comments:
Post a Comment