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

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

So Rice punched his woman.

"his woman"... Now, that tells us something about how the males on A2K really feel about women. And, Frank isn't the only male on A2K who feels this way. Obviously, no one commented on this statement that suggests that women should be treated as "property". Those days are long gone, BOYS!

On another post, where Bill was discussing a gun show in Florida with David, I noted that Bill said, women are "children", who need to be "protected"... Since David didn't comment on this, I'll have to assume, that he agrees with Bill.

If one wades through the millions of posts on A2K, you will notice, that A2K has become progressively more sexist.

Why do you suppose, that in the year 2014, when so many have advocated for racial justice, so few men really believe that women are entitled to the same rights as men?

Why do so many males believe that all men have every right to be sexist, to treat wives and girlfriends as property,and to abuse them both physically and mentally?

Why would any person, who considers himself to be a "man" advocate for the rights of a football player (Rice) , avoid the issue of sexism and basically forget that all women in any civilized society have rights equal to males .

And one of these rights, is the right to be treated as a HUMAN BEING...

Why would any male be more concerned with the so-called" MORALITY" of firing a black football player and be UNCONCERNED about the abusive treatment of women?

It may be 2014, but how far have we advanced from the days of the "Scarlet Letter"?

3 Replies

@Miller,

Quote:

Bill said, women are "children", who need to be "protected"

Bill says that this is how society treats women, and he says it with contempt.

0 Replies

@Germlat,

Quote:

maybe they will set him up on dates with their daughters.

If you are so ill informed on the thread topic that you dont know that he is already taken you best avoid commenting in this thread.

Quote:

That is reason for the felony charge.

That would be a charge that upon conviction rarely rates jail time, a charge that Rice was offered a plea deal with no jail time that he turned down, A charge that Rice was never convicted of and if all goes to plan he not only will not be convicted of but the arrest will be rubbed off his record.

0 Replies

@Miller,

Frank Apisa wrote:

So Rice punched his woman.

Miller wrote:

"his woman"... Now, that tells us something about how the males on A2K
really feel about women. And, Frank isn't the only male on A2K
who feels this way. Obviously, no one commented on this statement
that suggests that women should be treated as "property".

Do u ever speak of a girl and "her guy", Dr. Miller ?
During the history of America, have any females in competition
ever demanded of one another: "U stay away from him; he's MINE!"
Has that ever happened?? Indeed, has a girl or a woman ever
taken up a weapon and violently attacked another female
in gender-based jealousy, that u have ever heard of??
Defending a perceived proprietary interest?

Miller wrote:

Those days are long gone, BOYS!

On another post, where Bill was discussing a gun show in Florida with David,
I noted that Bill said, women are "children", who need to be "protected"...
Since David didn't comment on this, I'll have to assume, that he agrees with Bill.

Your assumption was un-founded.
My laziness exceeded my available energy, at that moment.
Maybe u have some medical advice.

Miller wrote:

If one wades through the millions of posts on A2K, you will notice,
that A2K has become progressively more sexist.

Why do you suppose, that in the year 2014,
when so many have advocated for racial justice, so few men really believe
that women are entitled to the same rights as men?

I have always believed in laissez faire free enterprize,
as the Founders did. For the most part, I support gender-based equal rights,
but that chics shud remain immune from military conscription.

Miller wrote:

Why do so many males believe that all men have every right to be sexist,
to treat wives and girlfriends as property, and to abuse them both physically and mentally?

I never did.

Miller wrote:

Why would any person, who considers himself to be a "man"
advocate for the rights of a football player (Rice),

That is purely a matter of DNA, being of Man, as distinct from fish or tree.
Man is our species; in terms of nomenclature & semantics,
chics r female men.

Miller wrote:

avoid the issue of sexism and basically forget that all women
in any civilized society have rights equal to males.

And one of these rights, is the right to be treated as a HUMAN BEING...

Y begin a sentence with a conjunction??
To WHAT is it being conjoined ?

Miller wrote:

Why would any male be more concerned with the so-called "MORALITY"
of firing a black football player and be UNCONCERNED about the abusive treatment of women?

Its just addressing the topic that presents itself, from the events of the day.
BillRM has pointed out that the NFL has effectively attacked the victim
by destroying her future income (to which she has objected).

Miller wrote:

It may be 2014, but how far have we advanced from the days of the "Scarlet Letter"?

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

If an employee's behavior out of the office hurt my brand or resulted in a reduction of revenue, I would fire him or her in a heartbeat.

That it's never happened speaks to the quality of the people I hire, not my employment practices.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

This is an argument you've made before, but it is and always has been based on a belief that an individual has a "right" to their job.

Rice doesn't have a right to play in the NFL. If he did we all would, and obviously we don't.

If the "collective" and corporate NFL can deprive you or I (or any actual football player) of our "right" to play professional football because we can't run fast enough or throw a ball far enough, then I don't see why you have a problem with them preventing Rice from playing because he socked a woman in the face, or did anything else for that matter.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Zirin is absolutely correct and is saying a lot of what I posted earlier. (it's amazing the coincidence there don't you think? Smile

)

In any case this was never about Janay Rice. It wasn't about what was best for her or what she wanted, but when she involved herself with Ray Rice she involved herself with his fame. She may not have realized it at the time, but I doubt it. This is not to say she's a gold-digger who latched on to Rice for his money and fame (we'll see if that's the case if their marriage doesn't survive his drastic reduction in income), but, like it or not, the spouses of famous people don't get to live like people who aren't famous.

It might be nice if the media considered what running the video meant to Janay, but that was never going to happen, and I'm not sure it should have.

There's a point where continuing to run it is sensationalistic, but I doubt if all of the outlets had limited themselves to running it for one week only, that it would have had less of an impact on her.

It's news and that's what the media is all about - making money by providing us with news.

The fact that the victim in this case is suffering, perhaps even more than the perpetrator is unfortunate, to say the least, but no outlet was going to suppress this story because of that possibility. They don't care about her, not one whit, and this fact is what makes the sanctimonious sermons of pundits and sports "journalist" so repellant. Not only do they not care about the victim of this case of spousal abuse, they don't care about any others, not really. They care about themselves and their careers. Clowns like James Brown and Adam Schefter are desperate for opportunities to demonstrate that they are "real" journalists.

It's sports, it's fantasy. Unless they have demonstrated it off the field, I don't think any of these men and women are heroes, but I don't really care about what they do off the field, and really don't want to know. Why do I need to? They're lives off the field don't affect me. I don't care what charities they're involved in, and what obstacles they had to overcome as children, and I don't care about the troubles they get into, except to the extent it keeps them out of a game, like an injury.

The world of sports is not a microcosm of society. These people are obviously not like me or you or they wouldn't be getting paid millions for doing things you and I could never do. The unique personalities that drive someone to the top of their profession can be interesting, but I can read about them in books and magazines if I care to.

First and foremost, and almost exclusively, I care about how they perform in their sport. In terms of what they think and say, it only interests me if its about their sport.

It's never going to go back to the "good old days" when all we knew about athletes was what they did on the field, but allowing "real life" to encroach on the fantasy world of sports has made it less enjoyable for me.
How can you escape into a world that is just like the one you're leaving?

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

it is and always has been based on a belief that an individual has a "right" to their job.

I was in unions for a lot of years and as a union man I believe that there should be only two valid reasons to fire a worker..lack of work or poor job performance.

Quote:

then I don't see why you have a problem with them preventing Rice from playing because he socked a woman in the face, or did anything else for that matter.

hopefully you do now.

1 Reply

@Miller,

Point well taken...to an extent.

A couple of sexist comments about women don't indicate the membership of this forum has become more sexist.

In some cases what you are addressing relates to people who simply enjoy being provocative, in others it's an example of the priorities of liberals, and, regardless of why, feminism and sexism are trumped by other concerns.

It's why so many liberal Feminists, let alone most liberals, found it possible to support an obviously sexist president like Bill Clinton, right in the middle ot the furor over his sexist behavior.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

So why don't you or I have a right to play in the NFL?

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If an employee's behavior out of the office hurt my brand or resulted in a reduction of revenue, I would fire him or her in a heartbeat.

That it's never happened speaks to the quality of the people I hire, not my employment practices.

I fire for poor job performance. If I have a front of the house person who is driving customers away normally this would qualify as poor performance. However, if the reason those customers go away is not reasonable then everything changes. If those customers are for instance that this employee of mine happens to be gay then **** them I say, I will get along without them. Closer to the Ray Rice case if my customers see in the paper that my employee was arrested for drunk driving my response is that 1) this employee has not been convicted and 2) if he is convicted the courts will look after seeing to it that he makes his amends to society. If the employee cant get to work due to lack of transport or if he is in jail for more than a few days then he has to go, but otherwise this is not my business or my customers business.

I dont see how this is any different than it was in a couple places that I worked where the employer decided to hire ex cons (including at least one killer) , and customers would not be happy about it. The employer would tell the customer that they believe in giving people another chance, that these people had paid their debt to society according to the courts so who were they to dispute this? That if they did not want to come into this business that was their right but that it was the employer's right to hire the convict. Generally speaking the customers came back.

2 Replies

For the elucidation of better clarity,
let's apply the principle at hand
(i.e., firing athletes for immoral conduct)
to boxing, so its just 1 guy, not a team.

If the World Champion is de-throned because he did what Rice did,
then how much is the title worth to the next, substitute champion???

Everyone woud know that the substitute is a fony,
NOT the best fighter in the World. This has ethical implications.

IF some team defeats Rice's team,
will that have resulted from his conduct in an elevator, or be on the athletic merits???

Will the winners be exposed to scorn ???

I can see where the substitute champion
might very well REFUSE TO ACCEPT, so as not to make a fool of himself.

David

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If an employee's behavior out of the office hurt my brand
or resulted in a reduction of revenue, I would fire him or her in a heartbeat.

That it's never happened speaks to the quality of the people I hire,
not my employment practices.

I fire for poor job performance. If I have a front of the house person who is driving customers away normally this would qualify as poor performance. However, if the reason those customers go away is not reasonable then everything changes. If those customers are for instance that this employee of mine happens to be gay then **** them I say, I will get along without them.

Does that depend on HOW MUCH
of a pariah he really IS?

Will u keep him
if revenue dives 3O%? 7O%? 9O%? 1OO%??

Tell us, Hawkeye; elucidate!

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Tell us, Hawkeye; elucidate!

no doubt my willingness to stand on principle has limits.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

They care about the ex con more than the customer?

Not everything is as it appears.

1 Reply

@One Eyed Mind,

One Eyed Mind wrote:

They care about the ex con more than the customer?

Not everything is as it appears.

they demand that the business they own represent their values, and they are willing to sacrifice sales for doing what they consider to be the right thing.

The NFL will never be accused of doing this.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Ex cons are like foreigners - we let them in not for freedom, as we make it seem, but because their labor is cheaper than our own citizens.

1 Reply

@One Eyed Mind,

One Eyed Mind wrote:

Ex cons are like foreigners - we let them in not for freedom, as we make it seem, but because their labor is cheaper than our own citizens.

Partly, restaurants hire illegals in large part because they are willing to work cheap and take a lot of abuse because they dont have options. I am not blind to this. But if this were all that it is then as soon as a customer objected they would be gone.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

The family of Ray and Janay Rice have had discussions with lawyers about potential strategies and actions in the wake of his indefinite suspension by the NFL following the release of video tapes of him assaulting his wife, and there are no shortage of attorneys who believe the former Pro Bowl running back has a strong case against the league.

The NFLPA, which has until Tuesday to formally respond to the suspension, is also planning on fighting the suspension, sources said, not wanting to allow a precedent where a player is sanctioned multiple times by the NFL for the same incident.

Rice was originally suspended two games for his actions, then, after being released by the Ravens in the aftermath of the video appearing on the Internet, he was subsequently suspended indefinitely by Commissioner Roger Goodell.

In his letter to Rice explaining the second suspension, Goodell explains the need for additional discipline stemmed from Rice's account given to the league being “starkly different” from what the video displayed, but lawyers I've talked to believe the concept of “new evidence” in this case is erroneous.

They have advised the family that they would aim to recoup his salary lost for 2014 beyond the original fine he was facing from the first suspension, and demand that he be re-instated shortly after the Super Bowl.

The source said a player like Donte' Stallworth, involved in vehicular manslaughter cases the result of DUI, have been reinstated in a similar timeframe, and would be a precedent any potential Rice legal team would focus on.

Furthermore, the lawyers would argue that this video has been in existence since the night of the incident itself, that it was seen and documented by various law enforcement officials who described Rice punching his wife and knocking her unconscious in the police report, and that two of Rice's direct bosses -- coach John Harbaugh and general manager Ozzie Newsome -- have said that Rice gave them a thorough and graphic account of what he did to his wife.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24708350/ray-rice-case-family-exploring-legal-options-nflpa-maneuvering-re-instatement-by-2015

I am all in favor of hardball. The number of players and fans who have come out in support of Rice shows that the NFL is on shaky public opinion grounds here, they will probably back down.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

If this is so, then they care more about the money than the people.

Money is a drug, well, it activates our chemicals of happiness, which induces drug-like circumstances.

Money should be removed - commitment of any kind is a sign of a dying brain full of universal potential. Lest Man let's go - the harrowing flames that tag along side us, will not.

1 Reply

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know