"It's so sad Michael Vicks isn't playing football anymore!"

[BroomJockey]

Because if you do bet on your own team, you may be throwing games which is against the spirit of the sport.

They don't want you betting on your SPORT, not just your team. After all, if you're betting on the sport, you can work out a gambling ring with other players. "Hey, I'll throw this game if you throw that one, we'll clean up!"

They can't get hired doing anything else.

There's a fair number of places that will hire an ex-con. You just won't have your OLD job anymore.

[Greenday]

They don't want you betting on your SPORT, not just your team. After all, if you're betting on the sport, you can work out a gambling ring with other players. "Hey, I'll throw this game if you throw that one, we'll clean up!"

Eh, I suppose, but a large group of players getting together to throw games is a lot less likely than one player doing it.

[BroomJockey]

Eh, I suppose, but a large group of players getting together to throw games is a lot less likely than one player doing it.

Likely or not, the sport would probably never recover if it did happen. People wouldn't wanna bother if there was that large of a conspiracy to fix games. So they make it so that if you do, you lose everything. It's basically a MAD policy.

[jayel]

I would like to ask all of you to think for just a minute about the torture and anguish those poor, innoccent animals went through at this bastard's hands.

I dare any of you to feel sympathy for him on any level.

[violetyoshi]

To the people who signed petitions saying Michael Vicks shouldn't have been suspended for being involved in dog fighting and gambling: Fuck you. To the fans who ordered Mexico jerseys when the civil case alleging he infected someone with genital herpes and knew he had it because he sought treament as "Ron Mexico:" Fuck you. And to the guy who sat next to me in class and bitched about how sad it is no one wants to sign such a great guy: FUCK YOU!

Black people never do wrong. At least that's how our society sees things now, unless you want to be at risk of being called a racist.

[Flyndaran]

...
I dare any of you to feel sympathy for him on any level.

My objections have nothing to do with him as the despicable person he is.

[BroomJockey]

those poor, innoccent animals went through at this bastard's hands.

There are non-"innocent" animals? What kind? How do you define innocent? Your emphasis on the word seem to imply unusual weight granted to it, but I fail to see anything beyond appeal to emotion, which imo, is a crap reason to do anything.

[Flyndaran]

There are non-"innocent" animals? What kind? How do you define innocent? Your emphasis on the word seem to imply unusual weight granted to it, but I fail to see anything beyond appeal to emotion, which imo, is a crap reason to do anything.

Dogs and cats have enough intelligence to choose to be dicks. For example some will abandon their offspring or only offer token resistance, while others will give their lives to protect them.
Some dogs are pricks eventhough they were never abused.

[BroomJockey]

For example some will abandon their offspring or only offer token resistance, while others will give their lives to protect them.

So, jayel's never met these dogs. How does she know they weren't pricks?

And there's many animals who abandon their offspring as a matter of course. What about the ones that EAT their offspring? Same behaviour, or worse. Are they still innocent, just because we haven't judged them to be quite as intelligent as a dog?

[Boozy]

Black people never do wrong. At least that's how our society sees things now, unless you want to be at risk of being called a racist.

What exactly do you mean by this?

Do you honestly believe that all black people attempt to evade criticism by accusing others of racism? That IS a racist statement. Like with any race of people, there are a few who are jerks. But it's wrong (morally and objectively) to disparage an entire race of people based on the actions of a few.

[anriana]

Black people never do wrong. At least that's how our society sees things now, unless you want to be at risk of being called a racist.

Did you actually read anything posted or did you just see a black person's name and decide to come post something racist? No one, other than you, is talking about race. The debate is "OMG FOOTBALL STAR" vs. "OMG ANIMAL ABUSER."


And I took the "innocent" comment to mean the dogs hadn't done anything that would cause them to deserve being abused, made to fight each other, or shot in the head, whereas Vicks had things deserving of punishment.

[BroomJockey]

And I took the "innocent" comment to mean the dogs hadn't done anything that would cause them to deserve being abused, made to fight each other,

Yeah, but no animal really deserves that, so the comment still makes no sense other than as an appeal to emotion. "They're innocent! LIKE BABIES! YOU LIKE BABIES RIGHT?! SO LIKE THESE ANIMALS DAMN YOU." (yes, an extreme interpretation, but that's how any appeal to emotion sounds to me)

[Flyndaran]

So, jayel's never met these dogs. How does she know they weren't pricks?

And there's many animals who abandon their offspring as a matter of course. What about the ones that EAT their offspring? Same behaviour, or worse. Are they still innocent, just because we haven't judged them to be quite as intelligent as a dog?

Eating offspring is almost always a semi-sensible action due to deformities etc.
Forcing dogs to fight is major abuse, so it would trump any possible dickishness of the puppies. That's my interpretation at least.

[BroomJockey]

Forcing dogs to fight is major abuse, so it would trump any possible dickishness of the puppies.

Innocence of the animal still has nothing to do with how acceptable it is. After all, I still wouldn't support abuse of animals that didn't fall in to this vague description of innocent. I just think that choice of words is poor, and goes for outrage, rather than an actual consideration of the topic. After all, it's fairly simple. Guy does multiple illegal things, guy is banned from high profile job. Some people want guy allowed to do high profile job again, some don't. Replace it with any other crime, and the situation doesn't change. Swap the animals, and it shouldn't change, either. What if he was running his own version of bug fighting? (link's probably NSFW). Anyone outraged about using insects to fight? Why not? You should be. Same thing - cruelty to animals that didn't deserve it. But they're not all cute and cuddly, so it's not the same to most people. And THAT is why I have issues with portraying animals as "innocent," especially emphasising it. People don't mean innocent, they mean cute.

[Flyndaran]

...Same thing - cruelty to animals that didn't deserve it. But they're not all cute and cuddly, so it's not the same to most people. And THAT is why I have issues with portraying animals as "innocent," especially emphasising it. People don't mean innocent, they mean cute.

Comparing arthropods to dogs is worse than comparing humans to dogs. Dogs have emotions and can feel pain, arthropods don't and cannot.
That's just biology, so it's a very poor analogy.
I still think only jerks would mess with arthropods for fun.
I was just trying to think of way to make the concept of animal inocence a rational one.