Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Serious Question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Leonard Tose View Post
    OK, no offense toga, but i don't think pre- and post-mythical Noah's Ark conditions really have a role in the Michael Vick debate.
    None taken, but it's entirely relevant to why I believe it's ok to kill an animal to eat meat but not to kill an animal for my entertainment.

    BP is seeking to understand how people can justify one type of killing over another. And I know he has a Christian background.
    www.disciplerocks.com

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by balto-eaglefan View Post
      But, the employees on those farms don't work there because they get off on the suffering of the animals. And if they do, well, they need serious psychiatric help of their own. If Kevin Kolb ever took his time killing a wild boar (because he liked watching it suffer) instead of just finishing it off, I don't think I'd want him as an Eagle either.

      Heck, I used to joke that vegans didn't love animals, they just hated plants.........

      Vick was breeding fighting dogs for an illegal "sporting" activity. In the process, he was treating animals in an inhumane fashion.

      What's the difference in how the the animals are ultimately used or whether someone "gets off" on it? The fact remains that the lives of these animals are miserable and their treatment inhumane, whether they are kept on nasty, industrial livestock farms or bred for dogfighting.

      There is really no substantial difference in the lives of these poor creatures. They are bred for a purpose, treated badly while alive, and then killed. On industrial livestock farms, it's a bolt gun. With Michael Vick, it was drowning or electrocution or some other crummy means.
      Don't kid yourself Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd kill you and everyone you cared about!

      Comment


      • #33
        I would much prefer to die slaughter-house style than be tortured until I died. I can't understand the mentality of people who take pleasure in that kind of cruelity. And because I don't understand them, I don't understand how they can change.

        When people get involved in substance abuse, over 90% who try to change are unable to. I don't know the rate of people like Vick being able to chnage. But I would think that would also be a long shot.

        I used to wear my Eagles jackets with pride. We may not have won a Superbowl. But for the past decade, we always had competant teams with good character and chemistry. Now I would be embarassed to do so. I simply cannot defend my team being the one to give Vick a 2nd chance. And I really feel that people will think of Vick when they see an Eagles jacket.

        I think I could deal with the Eagles going 3-13 easier than I could with a Superbowl win with Vick on the team. I'll see if my view changes over time.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Leonard Tose View Post
          Vick was breeding fighting dogs for an illegal "sporting" activity. In the process, he was treating animals in an inhumane fashion.

          What's the difference in how the the animals are ultimately used or whether someone "gets off" on it? The fact remains that the lives of these animals are miserable and their treatment inhumane, whether they are kept on nasty, industrial livestock farms or bred for dogfighting.

          There is really no substantial difference in the lives of these poor creatures. They are bred for a purpose, treated badly while alive, and then killed. On industrial livestock farms, it's a bolt gun. With Michael Vick, it was drowning or electrocution or some other crummy means.
          You are for real???
          http://shop.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gifOK, let's try this again...

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by saratoga View Post
            He is entitled if he asks for it. He didn't say that he did ask for forgiveness in the press conference, but if he does and means it God certainly would forgive him. I guess I don't understand the line of questioning because I didn't say anything about that aspect. I was simply answering your "apples and oranges" comparison.

            What he did was awful; he paid his legal, financial and personal price. He should be allowed to work again. I don't think he's a good enough QB to be on the Eagles.
            * Sorry about that. I took it a step off the path. Thanks brother.
            Carson Wentz ERA


            NFC East Titles:
            Playoff Appearances:
            NFC Title Games:
            Super Bowl Titles:

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by FRESH View Post
              You are for real???

              Absolutely. Industrial livestock production is an utterly inhumane activity at its very core. The treatment of animals at industrial facilities is vile and outrageous, and done on a scale that dwarfs all of the dogfighting breeders combined.
              Don't kid yourself Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd kill you and everyone you cared about!

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by BIGPHILLY View Post
                Toga -

                If you want to get biblical - Didn't Jesus also die for our sins and reconcile us with God based on the fact that we are all sinners and needed a Savior?

                Wouldn't Michael Vick qualify?

                Didn't Jesus eat with tax collectors and prostitutes and say he came to save the sick not the healthy?

                Didnt' Christ tell us to forgive and keep forgiving?

                Isn't Michael Vick entitled to the same forgiveness as you and I?

                (I would kindly ask that anyone who does not believe in the Bible not respond to this with "I don't believe in the Bible so I don't care". I'm responding to those who do)
                Absolutely, We all have sin upon us and whether we acknowledge that or not doesn't make it less true. Judge and ye shall be judged.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Leonard Tose View Post
                  Sure they are. Conditions in industrialized livestock farms are beyond inhumane.
                  Quoted for truth. A cow (or pig, or chicken) on one of those factory farms DREAMS of the kind of life that Vick's dogs had.
                  The definition of insanity is to continually repeat the same action and expect different results.

                  Thus the Redskins and their fans are, by definition, insane.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    You are both very very lost.

                    How do you support one bad practice by referencing another? How can you feel that getting off on cruelty as Vick was is not absolutely repugnant? Moreso than your livestock scenario? I don't understand the defense of these anaolgies.

                    Obama is bad, but Hitler was worse.

                    Ummmm...OK. Go Bama!!!!!

                    Ludicrous.
                    http://shop.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gifOK, let's try this again...

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      For the biblical folk, one can forgive the sin, yet still recognize the repugnance of the sinner.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by FRESH View Post
                        You are both very very lost.

                        How do you support one bad practice by referencing another? How can you feel that getting off on cruelty as Vick was is not absolutely repugnant? Moreso than your livestock scenario? I don't understand the defense of these anaolgies.

                        Obama is bad, but Hitler was worse.

                        Ummmm...OK. Go Bama!!!!!

                        Ludicrous.
                        Fresh, I'm not trying to rationalize Vick's activities by comparing them to other bad things that go on in our society. Michael Vick did a very bad thing. He was rightfully convicted of a felony and served substantial prison time as a result.

                        By pointing this out, I'm questioning what I believe are excessive levels of outrage directed at Vick. While condemning Vick to the heavens, our society turns a blind eye to all manner of inhumane treatment of other animals.
                        Don't kid yourself Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd kill you and everyone you cared about!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Feel free to correct me please, but I don't think the question BP asked is about using one misdeed to justify the other so much. It is, IMO, being asked how can one form of cruelty be (justifiably) vilified and the other tolerated when they both have the same end result for the unfortunate recipient of said cruelty?

                          Again, correct me if I am wrong here but I don't believe that LT, et.al. are in no way supporting or condoning what Vick has done. They may mean that the same level of outrage should be expressed in any of these circumstances, whether the innocent victim of this cruelty is a dog, cat, cow, bull, or a human. And if it is not, then why not?

                          At least I THINK that's what they meant!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Agree with both LT and ThoughtProcess said above. My statements are not intended to justify or condone Vick's past actions. I do believe that there are valid questions about what sorts of animal cruelty are tolerated in this country and what are despised.

                            I also believe that people have the capability to change their lives for the better, and that we should allow those who have been punished for their crimes an opportunity to prove as much. If Vick is still the same scumbag that he was before, the truth will out and he'll be judged one way or the other. Tony Dungy seems to be convinced that Vick actively wants to be a better man, and that means a lot to me.

                            There's room for disagreement on this, and I can understand where FRESH and some of the other posters are coming from. Personally, I doubt that this will be a positive move for the Eagles, but I believe this because of the football/PR/media aspects of the situation. This is a move with a whole lot of risk, and pretty limited rewards. No matter what sort of person Vick is now, the media circus is coming to town, and that NEVER ends well.
                            The definition of insanity is to continually repeat the same action and expect different results.

                            Thus the Redskins and their fans are, by definition, insane.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              C.L.T.M., that is one of my big concerns too. The effect of the impending media circus on the players and staff. Will the reward be worth the risk? I am skeptical. I think they could have done without it. Well we will see I guess.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Risking the entire season by inviting the hordes of media coverage and team distractions that will come vs allowing a scumbag to prove you were willing to give him a 2nd chance?

                                Sorry still not buying it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X