Obama's Public Support of Michael Vick

[suebee]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Actually, as a matter of reality, we DO have a hierarchy whether we like it or not. Like June, if my house caught fire and I could ONLY save either my granddaughter or my dog, I would save my granddaughter. Anyone who says otherwise is almost certainly lying and if they aren't, then they may need a reset of their moral compass. If it were a question of my family starving or eating the neighbor's chickens (with his permission, of course, otherwise it would be theft) then I feel like chicken tonight! Am I valuing the life of my granddaughter over that of my dog? Yes. Does that mean I don't *really* love my dog? no.

As far as 'what that has done to our planet', you mean what has been done that hasn't been topped by, say, very large rocks periodically striking the planet at several multiples of the speed of sound? Are we doing damage? Yes. Should we stop? Yes. But are we really on course to do worse than, say, the K-T extinction where a rock the size of Manhattan struck the Earth at around 30K mph and killed off half of all sea life and about 70% of all land life? No. That doesn’t mean that we should be sanguine about the extinction of tigers (and it is, at this point, almost certainly a fait accompli that tigers are going extinct) but it does mean that some perspective is in order. Human beings have been hunting, killing and eating animals since before we were Homo sapiens. We've been at it since *at least* the time of Australopithecus. Those canines you have in your mouth aren't there for decoration and they aren't vestigial like the wisdom teeth. In fact, our transition away from a plant-based diet to a mixed plant-meat based diet is written all over our bodies. Wisdom teeth used to be useful when we ate more plants, they were a third set of molars for grinding up plant material. Our brain size is ENTIRELY explained by meat-eating (your brain is very energy hungry and the only diet that would support the explosion of our brain size in the ancestral environment was a protein-heavy (therefore meat-based) one). Our eye-hand coordination was adaptive for hunting.

We are, whether we like it or not, apex predators. Again, that doesn't mean that animal cruelty is acceptable but it *does* mean that this idea that we have, at any point in our evolutionary history, lived in peace and harmony with other animals is a fallacy. The last time anything in our evolutionary ancestry remotely lived a life resembling that myth was when we were pray animals and the last time THAT circumstance obtained was more than 15 million years ago. This idea that we are the only animals that do violence for anything other than sustenance is also not true. Again, NONE of this is a defense of Mr. Vick or an argument in favor of animal cruelty. It is simply to say that somehow, we are supposed to be something more than the large-brained primate that we are is to argue for a fantasy and an inconsistent one at that. If you argue that we should know better than other animals then you are elevating us above the rest of the animal kingdom. If you argue that other animals aren't cruel or are only violent in pursuit of food you are falling into the Disney-fication of Nature (chimps, just to name one species amongst many, fight and kill over territory, mates, and because of rivalry and they do it in coalitions just like we do).

The truth is, suebee, that chances are you value the life of any random human being more than you value the life of any random species of rodent. That doesn't mean that one cares nothing at all for rodents (or any other phyla) but it does mean that, truth be told, if you could only save the life of a baby or a cat and you HAD to choose because the house is burning down, you'd pick the child. That isn't license for animal cruelty but it is a recognition of the reality of our moral instincts (and our morals, despite religious claims to the contrary, are instincts).



Can we take this to mean that you don't believe in redemption? One strike and you're out? I was not a fan of Mr. Vick before his conviction and I'm not a fan of Mr. Vick after his conviction. I am, however, a believer in redemption. Mr. Vick was arrested, tried, convicted and did time for his crime. His sentence was up and he was released and now he is trying to get his life back. Now, to some here, perhaps he should pay for the rest of his days. Perhaps some think he shouldn't be allowed to play in the NFL but I wonder if there is ANY job they would think he should be allowed to do. I doubt that there is.

You may have no use for him but Mr. Vick is still a human being, he still needs to eat, and he still deserves to be able to make some kind of a decent living doing something he is, I presume, competent at.

Cheers
Aj

lol I don't think we as a species are responsible for everything. No. There is a hierarchy - obviously. There is also the very natural instinct to preserve your own species first. NONE of that Aj, absolves of of responsibility for what we have done AND I might add - for what we have not done. This entire planet is made up of interdependant life forms. Many believe that animals are here to serve us. That view point is not only arrogant, but incredibly short-sighted. All creatures have to do what they have to do to survive. Unfortunately humans excell at cruelty just for the fun of it.

I think Vick is a fucker. That's my opinion. It's got nothing to do with redemption (which I don't happen to believe he has achieved, btw). It's got more to do with what he actually did. His self-serving statement a few weeks ago saying that he'd like to have another dog - and I'm paraphrasing here - so that people could see that he's changed - didn't impress me at all. He said it was hard to explain to his child why they couldn't have a dog. He said he misses having a dog. He didn't say anything to make me believe he's learned anything about the value of another creature's life.

[dreadgeek]

I'm curious, is there anything he could have said that would convince you that he was truly repentant? if so, what?

Originally Posted by suebee

lol I don't think we as a species are responsible for everything. No. There is a hierarchy - obviously. There is also the very natural instinct to preserve your own species first. NONE of that Aj, absolves of of responsibility for what we have done AND I might add - for what we have not done. This entire planet is made up of interdependant life forms. Many believe that animals are here to serve us. That view point is not only arrogant, but incredibly short-sighted. All creatures have to do what they have to do to survive. Unfortunately humans excell at cruelty just for the fun of it.

I think Vick is a fucker. That's my opinion. It's got nothing to do with redemption (which I don't happen to believe he has achieved, btw). It's got more to do with what he actually did. His self-serving statement a few weeks ago saying that he'd like to have another dog - and I'm paraphrasing here - so that people could see that he's changed - didn't impress me at all. He said it was hard to explain to his child why they couldn't have a dog. He said he misses having a dog. He didn't say anything to make me believe he's learned anything about the value of another creature's life.

[suebee]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

I'm curious, is there anything he could have said that would convince you that he was truly repentant? if so, what?

First off, I want to note that "repentant" is your word, not mine. If you're asking for specific words - I don't purport to know how another human being will express himself. As I said above, what I heard in his statement online didn't address whether or not he has learned that another creature's life has intrinsic value.

[BullDog]

I don't condone what Michael Vick has done, but I do find it interesting what people choose to focus on. I don't see a lot of protest over Ben Roethlisberger who was suspended by the NFL. Maybe there wasn't enough evidence against him. I don't know. He is of course a white quarterback.

Here's a list of players who have been suspended by the NFL since 2006. Many of them have to do with domestic violence. Again, I don't hear a lot of hue and cry about them. If you were to go back earlier than 2006 you will find even more news stories about football players assaulting and beating up women- wives, girl friends, women met in bars, etc.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5121614

NFL Conduct Violation Suspensions

The 16 players suspended under the personal conduct policy by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell since he took office in 2006:

• Rocky Bernard (assault, 1 game)

• Michael Boley (domestic abuse, 1 game)

• Fred Evans (fight with police, 2 games)

• Chris Henry (various arrests, 8 games)

• Larry Johnson (simple assault, 1 game)

• Tank Johnson (2-month jail term, 8 games)

• Pacman Jones (various arrests, 16 games, 6 games)

• Marshawn Lynch (weapons violation, 3 games)

• Ricky Manning (felony assault, 1 game)

• Brandon Marshall (various, including assaulting girlfriend, 1 game)

• Bryant McKinnie (street fight, 4 games)

• Rob Reynolds (domestic disturbance, 16 games)

• Ben Roethlisberger (misconduct-no charges/arrests, 6 games)

• Donte' Stallworth (DUI-vehicular homicide, 16 games)

• Fabian Washington (domestic violence, 1 game)

• Michael Vick (dogfighting, 2 games)

[Tucker]

I say give the man a nice cat.

[suebee]

Originally Posted by Tucker

I say give the man a nice cat.

Try and do some of that shit to a CAT and see what happens! My dogs won't even mess with my cats! lol

[Daywalker]

Forgiveness is essential in all our lives.





If we are to place any faith whatsoever in the importance of this in our own lives,
then we must acknowledge that it is essential in other peoples' lives.


With that said, if Prison time did not send any messages to Mr. Vick about
how wrong it was to use animals for wicked icky sport, then the Support
being offered up cannot possibly be genuine...as his
remorse would not be genuine.

Other than that, without being up close and personal in Mr. Vicks life,
I cannot make any further assessment of this article with great faith.

[Nat]

I think what Vick did was awful. But I also think if you eat meat you are most likely supporting animal cruelty. Anybody who chooses not to spay/neuter their animals is participating in behavior that leads to the killing of animals who end up at the pound.

I don't understand Obama's motivations but that extends beyond this decision. I do support the re-employment of those who have received criminal convictions and who have served their time.

As vile as Michael Vick's actions were, the inhumanity other football players have shown towards other humans (see bulldog's post) is also vile. The white racist reactions to Vick were also vile.

Most people in the US live in glass houses and have no business throwing stones when it comes to animal cruelty.