.com-ments 

Responses to John Sugg's 'Doggone it!' in Fallout

NOTHING TO DO WITH WHITE OR BLACK: yes mike vick is wrong for fighting pit bulls. is it a black thing? no it is not. i have a pit bull and was raised around them and other dogs that have bad reps. but black people are not the only ones that involve themselves in dog fighting. most people want pits for just that dog fighting. it has nothing to do with white or black its about inhumane people as well as the society we live in.

tina3283

STUPIDITY? YES. RACISM? NOT REALLY: From the moment I saw the news coverage about Michael Vick and his bloodsport escapades, it never occurred to me that there were any overt racial undertones. In my (supposedly) uncommon way of thinking, I believe that any person engaged in such activities - whether they be black, white, yellow, purple, Hispanic, Native American, or Aborigine - should be brought to justice for putting living creatures through that kind of torture.

I've heard such things from people at work: "The NFL shouldn't be able to do anything since he's such a famous player.", or "It's only 'cause he's BLACK!", and even the one thing that makes my skin crawl - "They're just dogs. Who cares?" This kind of hero worship and suppression of natural empathy is really what's at the bottom of the debate, in my opinion.

We're willing to excuse all manner of crimes committed by people in positions of celebrity and prestige. When did this come about? Since when have we been willing to condone such acts perpetrated by celebrities - sports players above all others - merely because they can throw a ball perfectly, or tackle uncounted opposing players, or weave in between impenetrable defenses by another team to score a shot?

When they take off their uniform, they are just another Joe Schmoe walking down the street. They need to be treated as any other Joe Schmoe and punished for their crimes according to the law, not by their celebrity status.

MM

NO RACE IN VICK CASE: Michael Vick is going through the wringer because he's a highly paid star athlete and that's all. Pete Rose was kicked out of baseball for gambling and there was not outrage then. In a culture that wants to know about every minute in the life of Britney, Lindsey and Paris and a media apparatus willing to deliver, can there be any doubt why Michael Vick is taking such punishment?

Marc

ALL OF THE BLAME AND NONE OF THE FAME: Thank you, Mr. Sugg, for your very well-written and highly informative piece on the Michael Vick story. Such superior quality journalism reveals that there are actually some writers in our city who can comment intelligently on an issue without a slanted bias--to the left or right. You've commented thoughtfully on a timely story without selling out or pandering to the "poor, marginalized minority class" of ignorant Vick supporters who truly believe this issue is racially motivated. Thank you for writing the truth about what most Atlanta citizens are afraid to say! Vick deserves all of the blame, and none of the fame.

PQM

IT'S A HUMANITY THING: The Michael Vick case is not a racial thing. It's a humanity thing. Dog fighting is brutal, revolting, repulsive, and against the law. In a perfect world, every single person involved in that activity would be prosecuted and do prison time.

As far as I'm concerned, ANY athlete who commits a crime should be punished. If they deserve prison, that's what they should get. I don't care if they're black, white, orange, or purple. They should respect the laws of this society.

I would like to know why the good, decent, athletes don't get more attention. You know, the ones who love and respect their wives and take care of their kids. There are actually a few athletes out there who actually do a lot for their communities. They might not make good copy, but they make better role models for kids. Could it be because they aren't "exciting" to the press? If so, that's a shame. Those are the individuals who SHOULD be exciting be they black, white, orange, or purple. A good person is still a good person.

I admit, there is a bit of discrimination going on. Most households in this country have at least one dog. That's not counting cats, birds, fish, horses, etc. People spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to keep Fluffy happy and healthy. Most people feel tremendous empathy for all the little Fluffys out there.

When it comes down to beating a stripper, let's face it -- most people look down on strippers and hookers. They're still human, and deserve the same consideration as the rest of us. But good churchgoing people shun them.

Logically, who will people empathize with? Poor little abused Fluffy or trashy Ms Ho who probably "asked" for it? Both forms of abuse are heinous. Both should be condemned. Still, Fluffy wins out because everyone loves their dogs and can easily imagine their pet in those circumstances.

Let's face it. Fluffy trumps Stripper in the game of publicity.

Val

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Latest in Going Postal

All aboard
All aboard

Search Events

  1. Goat Farm Economics 5

    Can art and good old-fashioned capitalism breathe new life into one of Atlanta’s most historic and overlooked neighborhoods?
  2. Solving downtown's homeless problem begins with taking the red pill 95

    Peachtree-Pine homeless shelter is the root of downtown's image problem
  3. Unanswered: CL's metro Atlanta officer-involved shooting database

Recent Comments

© 2016 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation