Over the past several months, I have engaged in a debate, at times fierce, with friends over what should happen to Michael Vick. For those that do not know, Mr. Vick was convicted of running a dog fighting ring. He personally killed dogs that were not deemed to be championship material. Dogs were summarily drowned, electrocuted, etc. Dog fighting is illegal in the USA. Vick was convicted and served a two-year prison sentence.
The crux of the issue is that Vick, as a professional football player is viewed as a role model. As such, some feel that he should not be allowed to play because he this “sends the wrong message”. Furthermore, there are dog lovers who are appalled that he has been reinstated into the National Football League (NFL) and have vowed to protest. Many of these protestors are members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and are in a pother citing their love of animals as th
eir reason for disliking Michael Vick.
I grew up watching Michael Vick playing. As a native Virginian, I watched Vick almost single handedly win Virginia Tech University a national championship. His electrifying play captivated the nation. As a professional quarterback, I rooted for Vick, even though I am not a fan of the Atlanta Falcons. I was a fan of Michael Vick the player. However, I have never viewed him as a role model. Therefore, I find the argument that reinstating Vick “sends the wrong message” utterly ridiculous. How many other athletes are not people we would want our sisters and daughters to date? Yet we continue to root for them. What kind of hypocrisy is this?
PETA is another issue. Generally, I support animal rights. I am
a vegetarian. My main reason for choosing this lifestyle is because I believe it to be a far healthier lifestyle. (Vegetarians have a longer life expectancy and are far less susceptible to myriad diseases.) However, I have also read the book Fast Food Nation. This book, by Eric Schlosser, portrays how American society has been fundamentally altered by fast food restaurants. No longer are Americans abstemious about what we eat and drink. Rather, we spend half of our budget for food in restaurants, mainly fast food chains such as McDonalds, KFC, etc. Schlosser also graphically details how slaughterhouses operate:
“The animals keep strolling up, oblivious to what comes next, and he stands over them and shoots. For eight-and-a-half hours, he just shoots. As I stand there, he misses a few times and shoots the same animal twice. As soon as the steer falls, a worker grabs one of its hind legs, shackles it to a chain, and the chain lifts the huge animal into the air. I watch the knocker knock cattle for a couple of minutes. The animals are powerful and imposing one moment and then gone in an instant, suspended from a rail, ready for carving. A steer slips from its chain, falls to the ground, and gets its head caught in one end of a conveyor belt. The production line stops as workers struggle to free the steer, stunned but alive, from the machinery. I've seen enough.”
How many of these verdant PETA protesters are vegetarians? How many are religious. The Bible, Quran, and Torah all have passages referring to caring for all of God’s creatures. The horrors of a slaughterhouse do not live up this high ideal. Essentially, these protesters have a double standard. Many of these verdant protesters eat meat and could not care less how chickens, pigs, cows, sheep, and goats are slaughtered, but woe to the person who kills a dog. Asian countries where dogs are eaten for their meat are seen by these protesters as barbaric and backwards as is Michael Vick. PETA’s organizational mores dictate that they fight cruelty to animals. The organization has seemingly experienced a a tergiversation by waging a battle against a high-profile athlete who engaged in a criminal action and subsequently served a two-year prison sentence. PETA should instead be focusing its efforts on large businesses that make a huge profit from being cruel to animals.
The beauty of Michael Vick is that if you do not like him as a person, you have the right to root against him be
cause he is an athlete. Make no mistake, Michael Vick does not represent a paragon of virtue. It just irritates me that so many are now saying they will not root for him because of high minded ideals, which are in essence hypocritical. I am not a Philadelphia Eagles fan, but I am more inclined to be one this year. I actually hope that Michael Vick has learned something from this experience and is a better person for it. I hope that he finds redemption on the football field and can make a positive contribution to society for the rest of his life as a result of these life experiences. So while some may hide their beagles because Vick is an Eagle, I say kudos to the Eagles for giving Michael Vick a second chance and unless the Eagles are playing my beloved Seahawks, I will be rooting for Michael Vick and hoping he is successful.
eam, like the Americans before them, rely much to heavily on a vaunted midfield for scoring. The English strikers are wastrel
s. Wayne Rooney failed to find the back of the net during the entire tournament, as did Emile Heskey (whose introduction today seemed to amount to a capitulation.) So England's three goals came from a defender, a mid-fielder, and a striker (and Dafoe's goal against Slovenia was just bad goal-keeping, which England know a little about...right Mr. Green?)
is his own making. While Wayne Rooney and Heskey were clearly weak links, Peter Crouch spent most of this tournament on the bench. What was the reasoning for this? Would it not have not have been better to be viewed as a mugwump who waffled back and forth between players in search of the right combination than one who stubbornly stuck with a losing formula? Mr. Capello failed to do anything creative to give his team a chance to overcome the lack of cohesion.
