My integrity isn't compromised because I enjoy watching players whose moral compass is completely against my own. There are probably players on every single NFL team who have DWI's. I have a huge problem with people who drink and drive. My integrity isn't compromised because I root for them to win a football game. Your position is ridiculous.
At no point have I excused Vick of anything. I've said several times that he's a dirtbag. The NFL IS filled with dirtbags. The point that you can't seem to understand is that I don't give a fucking rats ass if they're scumbags. I also personally find it more offensive when someone attacks other people, particularly women than when they attack dogs. I'm watching them because they're good at football not because they're good dudes. When I see people say they don't want someone on the Jets because they're a scumbag I have to point out there are many other scumbags in the league. Vick gets more outrage than Roethlisberger or Stallworth. Go figure.
and we obviously disagree so we can just move on. I have another question for you though. When Roethlisberger and the Steelers face the Patriots do you root for the Steelers?
you can root for the Steelers without supporting or being happy Roethlesberger is on the team. you are confusing two separate issues -- whether you support the team regardless of who is on it and whether you would prefer that a specific player not be on a team. I could wish Roethlesberger was in jail without having any issues wanting the Steelers to win the game. I am not excusing Reothlesberger by wanting the Steelers to win a game. no, your position is simply dependent on trying to make an illogical and irrelevant correlation. nobody is talking about wanting to see their team lose simply because they don't like a particular player, they are talking about preferring a particular player not being on the team to begin with, even if he could possibly help them win. that isn't a ridiculous position. your problem is you are confused.
So is life. If we all let the actions of others stop us from things, all the good people would wind up committing suicide because we'd have to choose to stop living using your logic. I'm not gonna let the baseness of others' character and their crimes ruin what I think is a beautiful sport or my life. I can choose not to want those types on my team, choose to think that the NFL or other professional sports shouldn't allow them to stay. I can be a passionate football and Jets fan, but still not like a lot of what the NFL allows, and can still keep my priorities in order. Football is just something I like, it doesn't rule my life.
I'm not confusing anything. I thought I made it pretty clear I was asking a question different from the topic we obviously disagree on. I wanted to know his position on that. I'm trying to understand his point of view. It seems you are the one who is confused in this case. I am easily confused though. Again, I don't believe I'm confused at all. You think my integrity is compromised if I want a player on the Jets even if they're a player whom I disagree with morally. I don't believe it's possible for my integrity to be compromised by what players I want on a football team I want to see win. If you do believe that is possible then we need to explore all the known wrong doings of all players we want on our favorite team unless we want to risk compromising our integrity over who we want to win in football. That is unless their is only a specific set of actions we need to be concerned with in which case we'll need to define that set.
Ron Mexico would bring back that livelyness that has been missing from the media the last couple of weeks.
It doesn't matter whether you believe it, it is. integrity is absolute, not situationally specific. you either have it or you don't, and having it means having it at all times. you don't get to say you have it, but then take a position that is lacking integrity by the very definition of the word. having integrity, like being good or bad, is not based on whether you do so some of the time, or even the majority of the time, but all of the time. Richard Kuklinski loved his children, but we don't judge him as a loving person because he loved the people he should have, we judge him as a monster because of the people he murdered. Jeffrey Dahlmer didn't eat every human being on the planet. in fact, he killed far fewer people than he did not kill. do we say he wasn't a bad person because he only killed a few people and could have killed more, or do is he judged by the incidents in which he did do something evil? same with integrity. whether you have it or not is indicative in the situations that you lack it, not whether you exhibit it in the deeply personal scenarios most people, even monsters, generally exhibit the best moral tendencies. it is easy to have integrity when it is something important to you. but who you are deep down is how you exhibit it in situations that may be trivial. that is when your true person comes out. if you want to explore all the wrong doings of every player and can reveal information about players that may make me change my mind about them, I am happy to change my mind about them. please do so, but it is not hypocritical on my part not to condemn a player without that information just because you want to make the speculative argument that many players may have committed disgusting acts that they should be judged for. you are, though, dependent on presenting that information. that any player may have done so is not a valid position. Vick, on the other hand, is known to have committed disgusting acts, and all you are doing at this point is attempting to deflect from that fact with ridiculous hypotheticals in a failed attempt to make the claim that I shouldn't enjoy football at all if I believe it isn't unreasonable to not want a player on my team who has committed the criminal acts that Vick has.
High levels of asshurt in this thread. We're losing sight of the fact that Mike Vick isn't even that good, that's what makes this headache not worth our time.
You don't get it. Since I am not the one committing the crimes my integrity is not in question. Here's the database of NFL arrests. Feel free to pick and choose which ones are important. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/arrests/
Can I get a ruling on this personal integrity and character thing? I just want to say up front, I bought Michael Jackson's Thriller album WELL in advance of all of the child molestation stuff coming to light. Like back in 1982. Do I need to throw that album out now? Is it a personal integrity or character issue if I've kept it this long? I may have even loaded some songs onto my iTune account and they may, in fact, be on my iPod. Do I need to delete them? What about covers of those songs? Can someone please let me know what the appropriate steps are to regain my personal integrity? _
integrity applies to beliefs as well as actions. the more you circle around, the more you keep coming back to the exact same spot. your list of NFL arrests simply aren't applicable to this discussion. a marijuana arrest isn't an immoral or unethical act simply because it is a violation of an arbitrary law. beyond that, it still fails to address the fact that the discussion is about whether you would want someone on your team that has committed an act that opposes your moral preferences, not whether there are players that have done so. it does indeed appear you are still confused on what is being discussed. beyond that, are you really attempting to claim that killing animals is the same as smoking pot simply because both are illegal? I don't think anyone is opposed to Vick's killing animals simply because it is illegal. I bet most people would be opposed to it if he did it in China where slaughtering and torturing animals is as common as having them as pets. clearly being illegal or not is not the issue at hand so your attempt to make it simply an argument of criminal behavior isn't the issue at all. but to answer your question, no, I do not want A.J. Jefferson on my team either.
I'm going to post the definition here so we're on the same page. the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness. Maybe you are confusing integrity with another word or maybe you don't understand the definition. Either way you are wrong. Don't apply your ridiculous thoughts to me. The arrests database is relevant for the simple fact that their are immoral and unethical arrests in there. You bringing up pot arrests and acting as if that's the only thing in there is nothing more than a dishonest and very weak attempt at avoiding the truth. Your integrity is now in question. I never tried to make anything a legal issue. That's just another weak attempt at trying to avoid the truth. So to recap 1) If a player can help the Jets win I don't care if they're a scumbag 2) I believe Vick is a scumbag. 3) I think it's silly that people do care, but understand that's how they feel. We've pretty much agreed to disagree on that point. 4) I believe that people who assault and kill other people are worse than someone who hurts animals. I guess this isn't all that important but I wanted to make sure it was clear. 5) It seems to me if you're going to not want one scumbag on the Jets you shouldn't want others. 6) Which begs the question, where are you drawing the line? 7) I also wonder how people with moral issues can bear to watch and cheer for all the dirtbags, but I understand that's a different issue than several others being discussed. Personally I have a huge problem with NFL players who drink and drive as they could easily afford a cab and they're risking innocent human (not dog) lives. I would welcome Andrew Luck on the Jets if he were arrested for DWI and beating a woman though.
Vick is a piece of crap for what he did especially since he did not need the money and did it out of pure enjoyment . That said. I don't care what he did in the past IF he was a sure fire candidate to actually bring a super bowl here but he is a Short dumb QB who lost most his speed and does not know how to play the game the right way. It is about winning, Not fantasy stats!!
"To err is human to forgive is divine". From all accounts Vick has appeared to regret his actions and paid for them dearly. You can decide to forgive him or not but to judge someone else' s ethics because you do not is a bit hypocritical in my opinion. Unethical really?
Also, do I get to keep any of my integrity if I still go to see movies with Robert Downey, Jr. in them? He used to be a world class a-hole and druggie, multiple arrests, drug rehab, gun charges, etc. I'd really like to see the next Avengers movie but I fear that if I go see it, even though he has done his time and reformed, I may have lost some of my integrity. Holy crap, just realized Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is one of my favorite movies. I think I may need to go to church or something. _
