NFL Fires a Player qua Domestic Violence; morally right??

@engineer,

And dont get me started on all the ways our legal system is fucked. I have been talking about it for years and no one seems to care. We now have proof that the state has killed innocent people and we still dont care. The state tortures people as it kills them and the masses cheer...this is where we are in America today.

The dark ages have returned.

EDIT: I was just reading yesterday somewhere a very long and good analysis on how our supreme court justices make up "facts" to support their rulings, which is just one of many observers in the last two decades complaining about how our highest court has become arbitrary and out of touch with reality. Dont bother coming to me with " but it is legal" and think that I am going to give that any weight.

EDIT2: this mob yelling for moral retribution on the grounds that standards must be maintained is either delusional or full of ****....anyone bothering to look around america today can see easily and clearly that moral standards have slipped badly. A generation ago cops could not take any cash they find just because they want to, but look at the news accounts of the day and we see that this taking place routinely in St Louis is one of the major reasons we just watched a riot take place there. Just one of thousands of places to look to be informed of what a moral hell hole America has become.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Not disagreeing with you, but the reality is that the capital owners do have the power to fire you if you cause them the least inconvenience. If the NFL does not want the bother of arguing this in the press, they can just make it disappear by canning Rice and that is what they did. Capital owners might not be able to "rub out freedom" but they can smudge it up pretty well.

Also, I don't think "the dark ages have returned" because I don't think it is any different now than it has ever been.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Heres a typical citizen of Kearney sporting a wifebeater tee shirt

Being a habitué of NJ, I thought you knew that these were required garments for "casual Fridays"

Ohhh...you mean a guinea tee.

0 Replies

Quote:

The release of the video may have changed everything, but no one should have had to see it to understand that Janay’s defense of her husband says little about his guilt or innocence. Setting aside the question of what the team and league management knew about the video and when, if they are going to investigate domestic violence claims about their players, they should know something about domestic violence. For instance, that victims frequently defend and stay with their abusers. That they do this because they are human and it's very difficult to accept that someone you love has this capacity for cruelty. That an abuser often isolates his victim from friends and family, making her emotionally dependent on him. By the time a man is beating a woman, he has gained some assurance that she will not leave him for it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/09/10/ray_rice_domestic_violence_janay_rice_is_standing_by_her_man_but_the_nfl.html

No, they do this because they were there, they know that what happened does not fit as cleanly into the good versus evil morality tale template as the minders pretend. We see here Amanda Marcotte ignoring the victim, and making excuses for doing so justified by her alleged superior morality, natch.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

"bringing dishonor upon itelf" is just what the Rice story is all about.
Many businesses have mprals clauses in their employee contracts
(I did in my first employment and then I merely copied that for my own company).

Mine did not. The deal was: u be a successful trial attorney for me
and I will pay u accordingly.

farmerman wrote:

These coddled athletes need not be "rewarded" for going off their tracks.
We make way too many excuses for them (as most of your responses seem to bear out).

What if the offender was the best asset
of the team; the strongest n fastest player??
What if it is predictable that the personnel decision
represents the expected difference between success n defeat??
What if the team's, and its owners' financial survival depends on the performance of the PERPETRATOR????

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

A lot of what ifs David. I don't know much about NFL, but I doubt any one player is that good. Luis Suarez was Liverpool's top player all last season, but after biting Giorgio Chiellini in the World Cup they were happy to get shot of him. It doesn't seem to have done them much harm.

1 Reply

@Buttermilk,

Buttermilk wrote:

Well the NFL is a company that maintains a particular image and because players of that company are extensions of that image, the NFL wants to maintain a healthy image therefore players are bound by particular codes of conduct. This is different than your average American job where, the company you work for, may not care what you do outside the company so long as anything you do privately, does not interfere with your continued employment with that company.

But because the National Football League is televised and has an image, the NFL wants to maintain an image of entertainment and family friendly. This is a situation where the league doesn't want to appear to be "silent" on issues that deal with domestic violence or drugs. I think also the league doesn't want to seem at odds with "female sensitivity" regarding gender related violence. Also, I'm considering the social perspective on this issue concerning domestic violence.

When Beyonce's sister attacked Jay-Z people applauded Jay-Z's restraint but there wasn't much backlash towards Beyonce's sister. But in this situation regarding Rice, there was much discussion on why men shouldn't hit women and how Rice is much bigger and stronger than her and therefore he should've shown restraint. So there are some societal double standards in the perception of domestic violence and responsive violence (or self-defense). i think the NFL wants to take a stance where it does not want to appear like it condones violence by not responding to the issue.

BTW I made a thread about this and didn't see this one.

In addition, the hiring or firing of a player is not a moral issue, this has more to do with the social politics of being an employee of a large company.

At the risk of going OFF TOPIC on my own thread,
I don t see how taking drugs can be a moral issue.
I don t take un-lawful drugs, because that is stupid.
Thay are toxic, but that does not involve violation of anyone else's rights.
To MY mind, taking drugs (or any self destructive conduct)
is not a moral issue. Suicide is not an issue of morality.
I guess that shud be another thread.

David

1 Reply

@Buttermilk,

Buttermilk wrote:

Well frank this is perhaps the issue where you and I disagree.

What Rice did is wrong but these are the societal issues that seem to be pervasive. Domestic Violence is wrong period, however there is this ideology of "men should walk away and not hit women" but its ok for women to be violent because of them being the weaker sex." I tend to think this type of mindset seems to be filtered through society's psyche as being an unwritten rule.

Was Rice wrong? Absolutely. Is he a scumbag? I wouldn't know, I don't know the man personally.

We were shown a video on TV wherein the wife spit in Rice's face
immediately before getting slugged and knocked out cold.

Let me address this question to EVERYONE:
In those circumstances, what is the morally CORRECT response
for a muscular athlete to DO??

4 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Let me address this question to EVERYONE:
In those circumstances, what is the morally CORRECT response
for a muscular athlete to DO??

request that she get counseling to deal with her anger issues. This is the current response no matter the gender,size, sexual orientation , or profession of either individual.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Logically his strength will cause more harm.

So if you shoot me with a 9mm regular and I respond by shooting you with 9mm hollow point then I am more wrong? No, you are the one who took the dispute to bullets, you are the most wrong. In this case it appears that the woman took the dispute to the physical, she is the one who is most wrong.

Wow if you were able to shoot a gun at me after being hit like that -- then you be like superman!

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Heres a typical citizen of Kearney sporting a wifebeater tee shirt

Being a habitué of NJ, I thought you knew that these were required garments for "casual Fridays"

Is this "TUB OF LARD" waiting for his ballet class?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

A lot of what ifs David.

U 'd have been a good lawyer, Izzy.
The rule is: one question at a time.

izzythepush wrote:

I don't know much about NFL, but I doubt any one player is that good.

That may be true,
but I was only raising the question in the abstract
for better elucidation of its moral elements.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

What if the team's, and its owners' financial survival depends on the performance of the PERPETRATOR????

I expect the powers that be on the NFL franchise would talk about how this was a matter for the courts and between the Rice's and then he would play on Sunday. I don't think the NFL is taking a moral stand, just a financial one so if the finances changed, the response would as well.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Let me address this question to EVERYONE:
In those circumstances, what is the morally CORRECT response
for a muscular athlete to DO??

Walk away - forever. Spitting on someone is not crime meriting a violent response.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

There is a reason for it -- the reputation of a company. That is why certain things need to be verified via an ethics department. The reputation of a business is huge to its profit and can be difficult to overcome once there is an issue.

I knew about these requirements when I was given an offer of employment along with all my benefits. It was within my power to turn this offer of employment down, if I felt it unfair or felt it wrong that I needed to pre-approve some actions prior to engaging in them. I felt it reasonable and not really impeding my personal life to pre-clear this items if I felt I would engage of them especially in considering the potential for conflicts of interests. If I felt otherwise I would not have accepted the job.

Really simple. I had the choice - same as if I didn't like the salary they were proposing, the hours, travel, or any other benefit or requirements of the job.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

Walk away - forever. Spitting on someone is not crime meriting a violent response.

Spiting on some in anger, and throwing a drink at someone in anger (to moves often used by women) is considered to be assault....aka a violent act.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Maybe, but your life or well being are not in danger. Walk away. I'd advise the same to a woman if the roles were reversed.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

DAVID wrote:

Let me address this question to EVERYONE:
In those circumstances, what is the morally CORRECT response
for a muscular athlete to DO??

hawkeye10 wrote:

request that she get counseling to deal with her anger issues.
This is the current response no matter the gender, size, sexual orientation,
or profession of either individual.

I was asking the opinion of each poster on this thread,
as distinct from: "the current response", as u put it.
Is your opinion "the current response"????

David

1 Reply

@engineer,

Agreed - the moral response to any sort of violence towards a person whether they are muscle bound football player or a pencil neck geek is to walk away unless you are actually is some sort of danger where you need to defend yourself.

A person significantly smaller and weaker than you spits at you -- you should walk away and have nothing to do with them not punch them so hard the get knocked out. And if it legally warrants as someone suggests this is an assault -- you press charges.

If he did so - then she would be the jerk and not him.

And yes she is in the wrong for being violent in the first place. But there is a huge difference between spitting (although disgusting and rude) is not physically dangerous and punching someone in the face whereas they are knocked out.

1 Reply

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

Maybe, but your life or well being are not in danger. Walk away. I'd advise the same to a woman if the roles were reversed.

Somehow, I think the option of "just walk away" is easier for someone like you or me, Engineer...than for a guy who is making it big in the NFL...where a willingness to be violent is expected...and considered an asset of sorts.

Yeah, we can say that what should happen is to "just walk away." But there are people who have life structures where such an option is to them...

...what picking up an ax and smashing someone across the skull several times might be to one of us.

Walk in the other guy's moccasins.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

We were shown a video on TV wherein the wife spit in Rice's face
immediately before getting slugged and knocked out cold.

Let me address this question to EVERYONE:
In those circumstances, what is the morally CORRECT response
for a muscular athlete to DO??
[/quote]

The wife, could easily have suffered extensive brain damage, ended up on life support, been pronounced DEAD and now be resting, at peace in a quiet cemetary. The abuser would be charged with MURDER, paced under arrest, and now be resting in a little jail cell.

Aside from morals, the abuser should have wiped the spit off his face, and WALKED AWAY.

2 Replies

NFL Fires a Player qua Domestic Violence; morally right??

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know