Topic: Social and Cultural Issues
Throwing stuff and killing dogs! Why athletes are not herosby Scrappy Koala
(libertarian)
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Why is it that as a society we worship people that throw stuff at each other? Ok I get it that Barry Bonds has an extraordinary gift at hitting a ball that's thrown at him and Joe Montana could throw a piece of pigskin many yards very accurately and it is impressive but are these people really heroes? I've heard a lot of crying lately about how football has lost a great warrior because Michael Vick is no longer throwing stuff at other people (unless it's in the prison yard). I have even heard some people say that Black people have lost one of their heroes. Uhhhh hero? This guy strangled dogs with his bare hands. I don't care what he can do on the field he will never be a hero and no there is no coming back after that at least not for me, but let's see what the definition of a hero is:
A man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.
By that definition not only would Michael Vick not be a hero but really not that many athletes either. When I think of bravery I don't think of a guy catching a ball in front of 60,000 screaming fans I think of a guy running into a burning building to save some one when no ones even around to know. In fact let's look at some black heroes:
Take Richard Allen for example. He was born into slavery in 1760. He saved up enough to buy his freedom and led what many believe to be the first protest by free blacks and founded the first black church as well as a school for black kids and a night school for black adults. Now that's a hero.
Paul Cuffe helped supply the American colonies during the American Revolution, smuggling goods past British patrol ships.
Vernon J. Baker led his 25-man platoon in a daring assault against dug-in German positions during World War II, destroying six machine gun positions and killing 26 soldiers.
I think the quality we think of the most when we think of a hero is someone doing something selflessly for others. This is something that a sociopath could never do. And clearly all people that torture and kill animals are sociopaths and incapable of processing normal emotions and feeling guilt. They have no conscience but can fake one when its convenient. What most people fail to realize when they worship and make the Michael Vicks of the world into gods and heroes is that a sociopath can't be fixed. But they can fake remorse pretty good. The latest quote I've heard is that Mr. Vick says he's a shy animal lover yeah and Grizzly bears are quite fond of Salmon too.
But why pick on Vick (had to try that word combo). There are plenty of bad apples out there to choose from in the sports world. Which is the whole point why pick those apples in the first place as heroes when we have much better examples to choose from?
Personally every parent that does a good job in the face of today's twisted society is a hero. Every teacher that goes into the ghettos and makes a difference is a hero. Joan of Arc was a hero. Jesus was a hero. Michael Vick is not even some guy that can throw stuff around good. He's a dog killer/torturer that can throw stuff around good. That's not a hero. The kid that got his leg blown off in Iraq is a hero
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 5 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Scrappy Koala only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Scrappy Koala is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Paul M. Green
Date: 2007-12-15 18:17:05
I like your article, but the one question I have about the whole Michael Vick thing is this: why the hell was that a FEDERAL case? Why in ANIMAL abuse a federal crime? Could the STATE in which it happened have handled the prosocution? While what he did was truly wrong, I don't think federal tax dollars should have been spent on it. What placed that crime in the federal relm? I'm discusted at how much stuff the federal governent is getting involved with. Doesn't the Constitution garrantee states' rights? Sheesh.
I agree that the fed has way too much power and if I could choose I would choose for the states to have 100% power and the fed 0% but in a perfect world I think that some things should be federal crimes. Killing a dog is out. Not because he killed the dog but because he is surely a sociopath that can not at this time be fixed and is therefore a very real threat to society. I read a book called "the sociopath next door". It's a must read. Most people think that socio's can be fixed. They cant at least not right now.
But I hear you and Ron Paul its just I guess I dissagree but still love Ron.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
