NFL has a proportion and consistency problem

posted at 10:41 am on May 13, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Both Jazz and Allahpundit have already weighed in on the Michael Sam draft choice and what it means for the NFL, but I took a different look at it for my column at The Week today. The Miami Dolphins hit defensive back Don Jones with a fine and an indefinite suspension for tweeting his reaction to the seventh-round selection of Sam by the Rams, or more likely, the televised kiss from Sam’s boyfriend as they celebrated the selection. The Dolphins and the NFL have had some embarrassing episodes of late about bullying in the locker room, and whether Jones likes it or not, he’s a public figure whose communications reflects on his team and the league.

So a fine seems reasonable, and a lengthy session of butt-chewing does too. But the indefinite suspension is wildly disproportionate to the offense — and a very sharp contrast to what the league hasn’t punished similarly:

Defensive players usually have to commit multiple helmet-to-helmet attacks on defenseless opponents to even get a time-limited suspension from the league, and those plays can end careers and leave life-long damage. Meanwhile, trash talking during the game has practically become de rigueur for the NFL. [T]aunting celebrations from the School For Talentless Mimes now follow even the most routine tackles. Players spit at each other, and as my friend Jazz Shaw pointed out, a few players in the league mocked Tim Tebow for his Christianity with fake prayer-kneeling on the field.

In other words, the players in this league spend more time taunting each other than in actually playing the game. Yet the Dolphins and presumably the NFL see fit to send Jones to the re-education gulag over an ill-considered tweet far off the field, one that was not even explicitly directed at Sam.

Fox Sports’ Clay Travis noted that the league is strangely inconsistent when it comes to off-field behavior, too. In February of this year, Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice was charged with beating his fiancée into unconsciousness in an Atlantic City casino. A grand jury handed down an indictment for third-degree aggravated assault, perhaps convinced by video footage of Rice dragging her out of an elevator, with no one else in sight. Rice has since asked for a pretrial “intervention” to avoid a conviction and a potential three-year sentence, expressing through his attorney that “he’s ashamed of his conduct and he’s sorry for what he did.”

And yet, as Travis notes, the Ravens and the NFL have yet to do anything to Rice — even though the league has spent the last few years marketing heavily to increase its audience among women. “You get in more trouble for a Tweet about men kissing on a sports television show,” Travis writes, “than you do for allegedly knocking out your girlfriend and being charged with domestic assault? The message is clear: Words matter more than actions.”

It’s impossible to take Jones’ punishment seriously in this context. The Dolphins and the league wanted to avoid embarrassment during the draft, and made Jones an example as a signal to the rest of the league. That makes sense, and it’s important to understand that Jones isn’t owed a spot on the roster any more than Michael Sam is. But the indefinite suspension over a tweet given the behavior that this league either ignores or actively encourages is absurd, as is the Mao-esque demand for a re-education camp as a prerequisite for keeping his job. That doesn’t help Sam, and it should prove much more embarrassing to the NFL than any one-word tweet by a young man without a sense of discretion could generate.

Your thoughts, as always, are welcome in the comments.

Update: Here’s a market signal on the draft selection, via Allahpundit:

Michael Sam might have been the 249th player chosen in last week’s NFL draft, but his St. Louis Rams jersey is No. 2 in sales among rookie shirts being sold on NFL.com.

The St. Louis Rams picked the Missouri product in the seventh round of the draft Saturday, making Sam the first openly gay player to be drafted in the NFL. The jersey of Johnny Manziel, drafted in the first round by the Cleveland Browns, is the top seller. In fact, his jersey has outsold all NFL veterans since April 1. From Thursday to Saturday, the days of the draft, almost as many Manziel jerseys were sold as Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III and Tim Tebow jerseys combined on their draft years.

Update: For those claiming any punishment is not “conservative,” try this experiment. Go out on social media, identify yourself and your company, and claim a new hire is “horrible.” I doubt one would escape disciplinary action for that stunt once it came to management’s attention regardless of their political inclinations, but YMMV.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

A. Jones was reacting to a display of sexual perversion on daylight TV that normal people

Right, you can stop there as you’ve just lost the argument.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Yep. And on my beloved Jets team. *sigh*

THIS is making the rounds too..

JetBoy on May 13, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Oof the Jets huh? I never put that together. Sorry to hear ;)

As for that video though, I gotta say in response to “Dad why do homophobic men think that gay guys want them all the time?” Well it’s because we are guys, and we know what would be going on if you put us in a shower with a bunch of athletic young women. In fact even the thought of that… oh yeah. mmm hmm.

Sorry what?

I’m not saying keep the dude out, I’m just sayin, it’s not like this is all coming from nowhere.

Dash on May 13, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Right, you can stop there as you’ve just lost the argument. Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:36 PM

This is known as begging the question, since you are declaring victory without an argument.

So there’s no such thing as normal?

If everything is normal, then nothing is.

Unless my guess is wrong, your definition of abnormality includes things like “homophobia.” Huh?

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 3:45 PM

I guess sucking d….pays.

vnvet on May 13, 2014 at 3:46 PM

A. Jones was reacting to a display of sexual perversion on daylight TV that normal people, including children, were watching.

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Can explain further what you meant by “normal people”?

weedisgood on May 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM

But the NFL is still not the same as a bunch of McDonalds franchises either because individual McDonalds stores don’t have to get together to produce their product – NFL teams do – because that’s their product – “the game”. So it can’t really be directly compared to any type of commercial corporation.

dentarthurdent on May 13, 2014 at 1:34 PM

Legally, a franchising system is exactly what they are. I understand the practical differences, but I think Ed’s business analogy is a poor one for any number of reasons, including that.

gryphon202 on May 13, 2014 at 3:49 PM

Unless my guess is wrong, your definition of abnormality includes things like “homophobia.” Huh?

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 3:45 PM

You’ve got it. The legitimate feelings are feelings of homosexual desire. Acting on those feelings should be celebrated.

Feelings of revulsion at homosexual activity are illegitimate feelings. Any expression at all of those illegitimate feelings will be vilified and punished.

Gays just better hope that who decides what are and are not legitimate feelings never changes (like after the Muslim population has increased substantially).

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 3:53 PM

Can explain further what you meant by “normal people”?
weedisgood on May 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM

In this case it would be people who are shocked by the unannounced conduct of two men kissing passionately on TV when children might be watching, pretty much as I described it.

Do I need to go into detail about the unnatural acts implied by such activity?

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 3:53 PM

In this case it would be people who are shocked by the unannounced conduct of two men kissing passionately on TV when children might be watching, pretty much as I described it.

Do I need to go into detail about the unnatural acts implied by such activity?

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 3:53 PM

That would mean by your definition that gays are not “normal people”.
Now you see why the gays are winning in federal/state courts everyday?
Who made you the sole authority on defining who is normal and who is not?

So many ways the gay agenda could have been defeated but folks like you have ruined any chance of us reversing this trend.

weedisgood on May 13, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Can explain further what you meant by “normal people”?

weedisgood on May 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM

People that don’t play politics with everything are normal. People are acting like Michael Sam is freaking Jackie Robinson. He’s not.

Some people think PDA is nasty. Period.

Spliff Menendez on May 13, 2014 at 4:04 PM

That would mean by your definition that gays are not “normal people”.

Wow, your powers of deduction are are unfnbelievable.

Now you see why the gays are winning in federal/state courts everyday?

How would surrendering to them be a win for us?

Do you think it’s normal for a man to engage in aval sex with another man?

Yes___

No___

Who made you the sole authority on defining who is normal and who is not?

The issue here is not whether or not I am the sole authority on planet earth about anything. So for this failure of logic you lose points, meaning that you are now in the negative.

Taking a position on an issue is not the same as claiming to be the sole authority on that issue. Just so you’ll know. You know, just like when you take a position on some topic here, it doesn’t mean that you are claiming powers of insight and reason unique to yourself. So if anyone ever does that, be sure to sarcastically call them “genius, okay genius?

So many ways the gay agenda could have been defeated but folks like you have ruined any chance of us reversing this trend. weedisgood on May 13, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Yeah, well, your concern is duly noted.

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 4:21 PM

“You get in more trouble for a Tweet about men kissing on a sports television show,” Travis writes, “than you do for allegedly knocking out your girlfriend and being charged with domestic assault? The message is clear: Words matter more than actions Perverts matter more than women.”

Fixed.

itsnotaboutme on May 13, 2014 at 5:24 PM

Fascists saying what is moral?? Lol I’m sorry fascists can moralize mass genocide look at Stalin or Moa they have no place to tell anyone what is moral…

sorrowen on May 13, 2014 at 5:36 PM

So for those looking to homosexuality god and nature has spoken. Hence rampant mental and physical abuse,partner on partner violence and murder, rampant often fatal sexually transmitted diseases. Yeah I’m sure it’s logical to support that eventual bad ending. Not that libs care about their eventual self destruction…they just want their money and votes. However we have open display of their depravity be it Ellen Degeneras or Matt Bomer. And I see not moral difference between a homosexual or any other form of sexual depravity…..

sorrowen on May 13, 2014 at 5:45 PM

Why don’t we just jump right to the live-on-T.V. “Celebratory Butt-Blast” and get it over with?

Fathom on May 13, 2014 at 5:45 PM

I was trying to put a hierarchy to liberal “thinking”:
Gay trumps skin color…
Skin color trumps women…
Women trumps white men.

OccamsRazor on May 13, 2014 at 5:47 PM

Wasn’t Jeffery Dahmer techincally also gay/ homosexual/queer/sadist/pediphile/ necrophile?

sorrowen on May 13, 2014 at 5:47 PM

And a cannibal???

sorrowen on May 13, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Yeah, but he didn’t like cake, so…….

Fathom on May 13, 2014 at 5:49 PM

Indeed he did however libs today would likely think he was being discriminated against….despite all said acts of sadism.

sorrowen on May 13, 2014 at 5:52 PM

Wasn’t Jeffery Dahmer techincally also gay/ homosexual/queer/sadist/pediphile/ necrophile?

sorrowen on May 13, 2014 at 5:47 PM

This guy too:

Sandy Hook Killer Had ‘Movie Depicting a Man/Boy Relationship’ on His PC

Odd that this aspect didn’t get much coverage in the old media.

slickwillie2001 on May 13, 2014 at 6:11 PM

Hmmm that is news to me hmmm they want homosexuality to look despite evidence that it just destroys people eventually.

sorrowen on May 13, 2014 at 6:21 PM

Let’s face it, homosexual behavior is a perversion that is repulsive to a large majority of men. I’m not sure any amount of propaganda or brain washing can change that. If the heterosexual men would ban together and not watch or go to nfl games for just a short time we could stop this madness.

rich8450 on May 13, 2014 at 6:26 PM

OMG’ is a horrific and hateful word and saying ‘horrible’ is very vile as well. Just wait until a opposing fan screams ‘you suck Michael’ and see them get escorted out of the stadium for such vicious and bigoted words

journeymike on May 13, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Already happening in Australia because racism. A 13 year old girl was arrested for calling an Aboriginal player an ape even though she didn’t mean it as a racist jibe and had no idea it might be taken as one. The few conservative commentators who questioned the issue were also accused of racism.

The Thin Man Returns on May 13, 2014 at 6:45 PM

I guess Ed and Allah-P misjudged their audience in caving to the supplication of homosexuality acceptance, judging by the thread’s post. Good. Ed,s Catholic guilt and Allah’s…identity fool them into believing everyone sees the world as the do – or will, genetically, once they lose the dross of prior culturization, their stance no different than the superiority complex of the Left.

The only reason any player is punished is the heat it draws in the press. As a previous comment noted, homosexuality trumps all with the liberal press. Skin color next, unless it’s a conservative of color, then women over white men. This not only exposes the agenda of this misanthrope ‘journalists,’ but their inherent racism because deep down they believe bad behavior is excusable by color. It is so laughable to promote th importance of Sam, who as already shown his true ‘colors’ by whining about his late pick, putting the Rams, to whom he should be grateful, on notice of how any cut will play out. They will keep him despite mediocre play, and of course the first hard hit on him will draw fire as well (although it will happen, even in the coward’s position he plays). Let’s face it, he is only relevant because of his identity, and not his achievements.

If America can survive Obama, and so far that doesn’t seem plausible at this point, the backlash to this silliness will be hard. If not, the backlash against sexual deviants and their promoters will be even harsher, as Marxism always turns to the Billy club to try to sustain an ins sustainable system.

Klick the Dick on May 13, 2014 at 6:46 PM

A. Jones was reacting to a display of sexual perversion on daylight TV that normal people…

Right, you can stop there as you’ve just lost the argument.
Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:36 PM

You didn’t argue anything. You simply said “because…shut up!”

What the guy did on TV was perversion. That has been the judgment of societies since time immemorial.

Unless my guess is wrong, your definition of abnormality includes things like “homophobia.” Huh?
Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 3:45 PM

You’ve got it. The legitimate feelings are feelings of homosexual desire. Acting on those feelings should be celebrated.

Feelings of revulsion at homosexual activity are illegitimate feelings. Any expression at all of those illegitimate feelings will be vilified and punished.

Gays just better hope that who decides what are and are not legitimate feelings never changes (like after the Muslim population has increased substantially).

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 3:53 PM

You’re entitled to your opinion, but revulsion at sexual perversion is hardly “illegitimate.”

In this case it would be people who are shocked by the unannounced conduct of two men kissing passionately on TV when children might be watching, pretty much as I described it.
Do I need to go into detail about the unnatural acts implied by such activity?
Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 3:53 PM

That would mean by your definition that gays are not “normal people”.
Now you see why the gays are winning in federal/state courts everyday?
Who made you the sole authority on defining who is normal and who is not?
So many ways the gay agenda could have been defeated but folks like you have ruined any chance of us reversing this trend.
weedisgood on May 13, 2014 at 4:03 PM

No one made him anything, nor did they have to do so. OTOH, he is expressing the judgment of society since time immemorial. The bottom line is that everything we know says that homosexuality is a mental illness and perverted. If you have a problem with that, then you to have a perverted mind that is sick to its core.

Quartermaster on May 13, 2014 at 7:09 PM

You’re entitled to your opinion, but revulsion at sexual perversion is hardly “illegitimate.” Quartermaster on May 13, 2014 at 7:09 PM

He was describing the worldview of those who punish the defense of normality. Read his next paragraph.

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 7:29 PM

Quartermaster on May 13, 2014 at 7:09 PM

I was saying the opposite of what you think I was saying.

I was pointing out how insane the rules we are being ordered to live by are and how dangerous that way of thinking is to people like homosexuals.

My feelings of revulsion are not legitimate feelings? I should be punished for feeling that way?

Then when I get the upper hand in terms of political power, what moral principle keeps me from punishing homosexuals just because of the way they feel?

The barbarians are promoting a might makes right morality. They are out of their f…ing minds.

There used to be this thing called tolerance …..

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 7:35 PM

He was describing the worldview of those who punish the defense of normality. Read his next paragraph.

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 7:29 PM

Thanks. You were much more concise. I tend to ramble on.

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 7:38 PM

Thanks. You were much more concise. I tend to ramble on.
fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 7:38 PM

Be patient with yourself, grasshoppah.

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 8:44 PM

Thanks. You were much more concise. I tend to ramble on.

fadetogray on May 13, 2014 at 7:38 PM

It’s no great sin to take a few extra words to say the truth.

David Blue on May 13, 2014 at 9:24 PM

Fadetogray, you nailed it.

mike_NC9 on May 13, 2014 at 9:44 PM

Can explain further what you meant by “normal people”?

weedisgood on May 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM

Normal…as in not abnormal. A species, to perpetuate itself, requires sexual reproduction or asexual reproduction. Humans, require sexual reproduction, starfish can reproduce asexually. Now I will admit that modern science has progressed to the point where the actual physical act of sexual reproduction can be substituted with a test tube or your choice of turkey basters, but an egg and sperm are still required to perpetuate the species “normally”, unless you wish to clone humans which falls into the “abnormal” category. No sexual reproduction means extinction for the human race.

So….it is “Normal” for a Man and Woman to procreate. It is “Abmormal” for two of the same sex to attempt said jungle boogie. Left to their own desires, homosexuals are actually instigating the extinction of the human race. And in my book…that’s fcking ABNORMAL. Understand now?…or is a visual aid required for your lack of cognitive function?

Renee on May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM

Update: For those claiming any punishment is not “conservative,” try this experiment. Go out on social media, identify yourself and your company, and claim a new hire is “horrible.” I doubt one would escape disciplinary action for that stunt once it came to management’s attention regardless of their political inclinations, but YMMV.

A problem with that analogy is that a Miami Dolphins player is criticizing a St. Louis Rams new hire. I doubt a Ford employee would be disciplined for criticizing Chrysler’s newest hire.

Would he have been disciplined for Tweeting “Horrible” in regards to Cleveland’s selection of Johnny Manziel? Or of the hypothetical selection of a college player with a history of drug use or domestic violence?

Jingo95 on May 14, 2014 at 12:38 AM

So expressing one’s opinion on a moral issue must pass league muster. How is approval of that situation conservative Ed?

A lengthy session of butt-chewing? I always said that tolerance wasn’t enough, soon participation will be mandatory, and lookie here.

Akzed on May 13, 2014 at 10:53 AM

It’s anti-conservative. This country world is becoming a PC/feminized joke.

Fining Jones is ridiculous. One-sided free speech is not free speech.

GaltBlvnAtty on May 13, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Exactly.

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 12:47 AM

You heard it here first, folks: I’m being criticized for thinking Michael Vick is still a douchebag

gryphon202 on May 13, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Are you whining about being criticized after you’ve pompously lectured others, and presumed the worst about Vick? lol

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 12:56 AM

Meanwhile, trash talking during the game has practically become de rigueur for the NFL.

That’s stupid. Talking crap at guys has been there since Day One.

Don’t be such a pansy.

Moesart on May 14, 2014 at 1:12 AM

If I’m a team owner, I tell everybody to delete their Twitter accounts. And you will be fined heavy if you get stupid on Facebook.

Twitter is for shooting your mouth off and it’s where people tend to get in trouble.

Some owners ban beards, I would ban Twitter.

Moesart on May 14, 2014 at 1:15 AM

As to the insinuation that Jones was ‘bullying’ Sam, I’d argue that Sam and ESPN were and are ‘bullying’ the entire normal population, by foisting that revolting display on all and daring anyone to reject it on pain of harassment, and more tangible punishments.

pannw on May 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Excellent point. We are being browbeaten by a bunch of abnormals with severe butthurt and their gleeful enablers.

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 1:21 AM

A. Jones was reacting to a display of sexual perversion on daylight TV that normal people…

Right, you can stop there as you’ve just lost the argument.

Tlaloc on May 13, 2014 at 3:36 PM

“lost the argument”? Who did? To whom? Being sexually attracted to other men is the norm? lmao

“sex” is about reproduction. Gay guys are miswired, and abnormal. And unmanly, too. Grow up and face the truth.

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 1:26 AM

-

“Former NFL running back Derrick Ward received death threats after he went further in condemning the gay PDA he and his kids saw during the televised draft”

-
Oh the tolerance.

diogenes on May 14, 2014 at 6:57 AM

Some people think PDA is nasty. Period.

Spliff Menendez on May 13, 2014 at 4:04 PM

Bingo.

Cheshire_Kat on May 14, 2014 at 6:58 AM

You heard it here first, folks: I’m being criticized for thinking Michael Vick is still a douchebag

gryphon202 on May 13, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Are you whining about being criticized after you’ve pompously lectured others, and presumed the worst about Vick? lol

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 12:56 AM

Do you think it’s more reasonable to believe that Michael Vick is a changed man, or that he is working with animals because it looks good? For that matter, do you think it’s reasonable to believe that Michael Sam is whining about his draft position because he believes himself to be skilled, or because he’s homosexual?

I never realized that conservatives had such a propensity to see the world through rose-colored glasses. I thought that was a liberal thing.

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 8:51 AM

Do you think it’s more reasonable to believe that Michael Vick is a changed man, or that he is working with animals because it looks good?

This is a silly presentation. As a human who understands education and has seen plenty of people change for the better, it is unreasonable for me to presume the worst about Vick until there is evidence he’s being deceitful. There is evidence he has changed, and you don’t have any evidence he’s only putting on a show. Your cynicism, bitterness, and other personal feelings about him aren’t relevant to me.

I never realized that conservatives had such a propensity to see the world through rose-colored glasses. I thought that was a liberal thing.

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 8:51 AM

What a stupid and condescending statement. Not only are you a whiner, you’re a self-righteous jerk, too. =)

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 9:13 AM

I never realized that conservatives had such a propensity to see the world through rose-colored glasses. I thought that was a liberal thing.

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 8:51 AM

Life is full of disappointments.

David Blue on May 14, 2014 at 9:35 AM

Oh the tolerance.

diogenes on May 14, 2014 at 6:57 AM

At this point “tolerance” is just a euphemism for the total victory of the left.

It’s purge or be purged, and lefties will certainly do it to righties if righties don’t do it to lefties first.

If Brendan Eich ever had any chance of keeping his job, it was not by being nice to everyone and hoping for the best (the fatal unreciprocated “tolerance” option) but by methodically getting rid of the kind of people who would purge him for having given money to oppose gay marriage, and replacing them with right-wingers.

David Blue on May 14, 2014 at 9:42 AM

What a stupid and condescending statement. Not only are you a whiner, you’re a self-righteous jerk, too. =)

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 9:13 AM

Oh, I’m sorry. I guess you’re right. People that call themselves conservatives never embrace liberal tropes. Michael Vick is doing good work now and he’s paid his debt to society so all is forgiven. I’ll quit thumping my chest over other people’s sins in the future. Thank you for pointing out the error of my ways to me.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/sarc

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 11:21 AM

Oh, I’m sorry. I guess you’re right. People that call themselves conservatives never embrace liberal tropes. Michael Vick is doing good work now and he’s paid his debt to society so all is forgiven. I’ll quit thumping my chest over other people’s sins in the future. Thank you for pointing out the error of my ways to me.

/sarc

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 11:21 AM

Christians understand that we are judged by the same standards we judge others. As nasty as you insist upon seeing Vick, you really are seeing your own reflection, and I don’t believe you are smart enough to realize this truth. You think you’re clever. I think you’re not, far from it. You’re a ugly, unforgiving, self-righteous, and unserious person who isn’t worth my time. I leave you with your bitterness. I hope you continue to “enjoy” it. =)

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Christians understand that we are judged by the same standards we judge others. As nasty as you insist upon seeing Vick, you really are seeing your own reflection, and I don’t believe you are smart enough to realize this truth. You think you’re clever. I think you’re not, far from it. You’re a ugly, unforgiving, self-righteous, and unserious person who isn’t worth my time. I leave you with your bitterness. I hope you continue to “enjoy” it. =)

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 11:41 AM

I have never run a dog fighting ring. I have never paid a public pennance for the sole-and-express purpose of looking good. I don’t make hundreds of thousands of dollars doing anything, let alone playing a game for a living. If I am judged by the same standards which I judge by, I am absolutely 100% safe to judge Michael Vick. Just like I am safe to judge the murderers who kill babies by the tens of thousands every year in abortion clinics. Or are you suddenly saying to me that it’s not okay to be pro-life?

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 11:46 AM

To “weedisgood” (a mouthful of a description in a single word if there ever was!):

You ask what is normal. Let me help you out a little. First a statement. Yes, many on the Left have an agenda to blur the lines of what is normal, and using the power of government and PC rules, have done a good job. But it doesn’t change what normal is, it just warps the definition.

So how do we, as a culture, identify normal. Understand, each culture identifies normal. Each subculture does the same. You can have a gay community agree normal is man loving man, but hesitate and call it abnormal if the man loves a child. We can have blacks agree on what is normal, but applying that to the subculture inside a big city projects inhabited by blacks may encounter resistance. Let’s say a black group from D.C., all educated and refined, claim their kids must excel in school. Bring that work ethic and demand to the projects and you may get your kids beat up every day for “going white”. Happens all the time.

So, let’s define normal. Normal is what any majority of a group decides fits its description. If you put a hundred kids in a room, half girls/half boys, and let them play with an assortment of male and female gender identified toys (guns and battleships vs dolls for example) you will find the majority of the boys play with boy stuff, and the girls play with girl stuff. Regardless of how much we’ve blurred the gender line through lawsuits and boycotts. It is our nature. And that identifies “normal”.

Same with men and women, gender identities, drug users vs non users, and on and on. By simple review of attitudes and beliefs and activity a culture identifies itself.

Gays make up a small percentage of the population. Their behavior makes up a small percentage of the behavior in our society. However, the attention paid to that group and behavior far outweighs their percentage of the population. Why? They have the microphone and frankly the Left and government rules have warped the natural order of things.

So yes, Sam kissing his boyfriend is not normal. It shouldn’t be hated, but neither should it be shown on TV any more than if Johnny Football was breast grabbing his girlfriend when he got picked.

Why? Because the audience on ESPN was made up of a far greater percentage of normal people- those who would not participate or agree with the open display- than of those who think that behavior is okay. Included children, who haven’t been assaulted with the twisted effort for normalization that is pushed on them by the gay agenda movement. So you can see how people were upset. Especially parents, who are now going to have to field questions they should not have forced upon them by such a small percentage of the population.

Hope that helps. Or did you just hear “He must hate gays.”

archer52 on May 14, 2014 at 12:59 PM

a lengthy session of butt-chewing

Uh… Ed?

John the Libertarian on May 14, 2014 at 1:30 PM

I know Allahpundit already addressed this, but I want to get this straight. ;-)

On one hand we have a mediocre, 7th-round draft pick who is celebrated mostly because he is the first openly gay player in the NFL. We also have a veteran defensive back who received a sever penalty after he made a one-word comment about the draft pick which was not necessarily related to the sexual orientation of said draft pick.

On the other hand, we have a sensational first round draft pick named Tim Tebow who was openly and viciously mocked for being an openly Christian male, with no discipline exercised against those who mocked him.

Yeah, I’d agree that there is a proportion and consistency problem.

Mr. Bultitude on May 14, 2014 at 1:42 PM

a lengthy session of butt-chewing

Uh… Ed?

John the Libertarian on May 14, 2014 at 1:30 PM

Dog-whistle for the ghey.

slickwillie2001 on May 14, 2014 at 2:00 PM

I have never run a dog fighting ring. I have never paid a public pennance for the sole-and-express purpose of looking good. I don’t make hundreds of thousands of dollars doing anything, let alone playing a game for a living. If I am judged by the same standards which I judge by, I am absolutely 100% safe to judge Michael Vick. Just like I am safe to judge the murderers who kill babies by the tens of thousands every year in abortion clinics. Or are you suddenly saying to me that it’s not okay to be pro-life?
gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 11:46 AM

You’re Hitler.

Akzed on May 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

You’re Hitler.

Akzed on May 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Repeat after me, kids:

Being nonjudgmental is not a conservative value.

Good job, kids!

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 3:30 PM

You’re Hitler.

Akzed on May 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

He thinks he’s following a Christian standard by being unforgiving and presuming the worst about Vick. He’ll blindly lecture about this, too. His posts about Vick remain self-serving and boring. And self-indicting, too. =)

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 6:43 PM

He thinks he’s following a Christian standard by being unforgiving and presuming the worst about Vick. He’ll blindly lecture about this, too. His posts about Vick remain self-serving and boring. And self-indicting, too. =)

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 6:43 PM

I said nothing about following a Christian standard. You brought Christ into this, douchebag. But would you care to explain to me, outside of your preening Christian conviction, how my doubt that Vick is sincerely repentent really reflects poorly on me? For that matter, can you explain to me how you know with such certainty that my belief that most celebrity philanthropy is done by PR agents and accountants rather than celebrities themselves, is wrong?

I never said Michael Vick is going to burn in hell. I don’t believe that. I never said that Michael Vick deserves to pick up litter for a living for the rest of his life. I don’t believe that either. I simply don’t believe that Michael Vick had a sincere change of heart. Big whoop. Does it not strike anyone as being the least bit strange that I am being harshly judged for supposedly harshly judging someone?

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 7:10 PM

You brought Christ into this, douchebag.

My, what nice Christian values you have! lol

But would you care to explain to me, outside of your preening Christian conviction, how my doubt that Vick is sincerely repentent really reflects poorly on me?

No, I wouldn’t care to. You “debate” like the ex-HA poster frank, who also confuses verbal abuse and emotion for reason. And have you already forgotten that I said this to you? Apparently! =)

As nasty as you insist upon seeing Vick, you really are seeing your own reflection, and I don’t believe you are smart enough to realize this truth. You think you’re clever. I think you’re not, far from it. You’re a ugly, unforgiving, self-righteous, and unserious person who isn’t worth my time.

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 11:41 AM

I simply don’t believe that Michael Vick had a sincere change of heart. Big whoop. Does it not strike anyone as being the least bit strange that I am being harshly judged for supposedly harshly judging someone?

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 7:10 PM

No one who is intelligent would find it strange, “douchebag.” You’re with the obtuse on this one.

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 8:01 PM

My, what nice Christian values you have! lol

There you go again bringing Christianity into this. Considering that I neither belong to a church nor claim a denomination, your insistence on making this a religious issue reflects poorly on you.

No, I wouldn’t care to. You “debate” like the ex-HA poster frank, who also confuses verbal abuse and emotion for reason. And have you already forgotten that I said this to you? Apparently! =)

I’m not debating anything. I shared my opinion of Michael Vick’s supposed “repentance,” and you reacted somewhat violently. Someone on this thread even Godwinned me. I don’t think “You are hitler” counts as reasoned debate either, unless I’m just behind the times.

As nasty as you insist upon seeing Vick, you really are seeing your own reflection, and I don’t believe you are smart enough to realize this truth. You think you’re clever. I think you’re not, far from it. You’re a ugly, unforgiving, self-righteous, and unserious person who isn’t worth my time.

My own relfection. Okay. I’m glad you’re such a great judge of character based solely on what I think of Michael Vick and his “repentance.” I was ready to write it off as a difference of opinion, but that’s something you seem to have some problem with. So you can GFY and take your moral preening elsewhere.

I simply don’t believe that Michael Vick had a sincere change of heart. Big whoop. Does it not strike anyone as being the least bit strange that I am being harshly judged for supposedly harshly judging someone?

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 7:10 PM

No one who is intelligent would find it strange, “douchebag.” You’re with the obtuse on this one.

non-nonpartisan on May 14, 2014 at 8:01 PM

I shared an opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. I think it reflects on you that you feel so threatened by it. But whatevs.

gryphon202 on May 14, 2014 at 10:29 PM

Update: For those claiming any punishment is not “conservative,” try this experiment. Go out on social media, identify yourself and your company, and claim a new hire is “horrible.” I doubt one would escape disciplinary action for that stunt once it came to management’s attention regardless of their political inclinations, but YMMV.

That’s not what happened.

David Blue on May 15, 2014 at 12:54 AM

Let the punishment fit the crime.

The “crime” is acting as though free speech still existed.

Or: the crime is a spontaneous reaction to a piece of gay bullying: a deliberately in-your-face offensive display, and the Gay-G-B ready to crack down on anyone with a natural reaction.

David Blue on May 15, 2014 at 5:35 AM

The NFL can go to Hell imho. From its pink doodads to this latest chicanery … I think I may turn back to baseball.

You cant un-do the NFL. It is what it is.

ceraphym on May 16, 2014 at 6:09 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3