NFL Should Dump Vick

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by freshnesschronic

Yesman you didn't read the thread correctly. Shawnee attacked me first.

No, she attacked your opinion.

Ignore me please ~snip~ Ignore me, I beg you. Ignore me. ~snip~ Fucking ignore me you cunt. That's why it's the option is here. Your life will be better. Mine will be tons.
Whatever, just don't even respond ok, please. blah blah blah block me please. ~snip~ So block me please so you won't have to care.

I wouldn't give you the satisfaction nor the opportunity to post your HATE without a rebuttle.

[freshnesschronic]

Originally Posted by richlevy

Ok, I'm speechless.

Originally Posted by freshnesschronic

Everyone who has previously posted holds a cultural bias. Well duh, so do I. But many African Americans don't feel the same way about animals.

[freshnesschronic]

Originally Posted by yesman065

No, she attacked your opinion.

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Every sentence, every word, every nuance of your post shows you are more racist than anyone here who claims to be. You're excusing bad behavior because of race.

We automatically assume OJ and MJ are guilty because we're racist? Fuck you.

That was the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard. Sorry. It's just true.

Compensation, she attacked me and my opinion.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by freshnesschronic

Ok Flint? They were examples you dolt.

They were examples of things that are morally equivalent to animal cruelty? Yeah, I'm the dolt here. Jackass.

[yesman065]

Byrd on Michael Vick: Going to Hell
In a floor speech Thursday, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W. Va.) lashed out, indirectly, at Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, who was recently charged with running a dog-fighting ring in Virginia
"It is a brutal, sadistic event motivated by barbarism of the worst sort and cruelty of the worst, worst, worst, sadistic kind," Byrd said in a 24-minute address on the matter. "One is left wondering: Who are the real animals? Who are the real animals, who are the real animals -- the creatures inside the ring or the creatures outside the ring?"

[yesman065]

By the way - anyone know what happened to this????

Woman claims star NFL quarterback passed along herpes in 2003
APRIL 5--Claiming that Michael Vick gave her herpes, a Georgia woman is suing the star NFL quarterback for negligence and battery. According to the below lawsuit, Sonya Elliot, a 26-year-old health care worker, was infected with the sexually transmitted disease in April 2003 after an unprotected encounter with Vick at the athlete's Duluth, Georgia home. Elliott alleges that after testing positive for Herpes Simplex 2, she confronted the Atlanta Falcons star, 24, about her condition. "I've got something to tell you. I've got it," Vick admitted to her, according to Elliott's State Court complaint, which alleges that Vick then told her that "he had not known how to tell her about his condition, and that it was not something that he liked to talk about." Elliott's complaint also contends that Vick "apologized profusely" for not telling her he was infected with the STD. Elliot's lawsuit alleges that Vick has used the name "Ron Mexico" and, in a related court filing, her lawyers are seeking Vick's admission that he used the "Mexico" alias--and perhaps other fake names--"for the purpose of herpes testing and/or treatment."

[Elspode]

Originally Posted by yesman065

Byrd on Michael Vick: Going to Hell
In a floor speech Thursday, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W. Va.) lashed out, indirectly, at Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, who was recently charged with running a dog-fighting ring in Virginia
"It is a brutal, sadistic event motivated by barbarism of the worst sort and cruelty of the worst, worst, worst, sadistic kind," Byrd said in a 24-minute address on the matter. "One is left wondering: Who are the real animals? Who are the real animals, who are the real animals -- the creatures inside the ring or the creatures outside the ring?"

Oh my...Robert Byrd and I agree on something? Quick, sometime call the time and temperature number in Hell.

[yesman065]

Could this whole "argument" be settled with a "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" I know they are "just dogs", but . . . ? ? ?

[busterb]

Someone said it was a cultural thing. By that asinine statement and according to rumors, history. It was a cultural thing to lynch blacks in the south. By that line of thinking, do I need to buy rope? Hell! It's a cultural thing. Race card time again.

Having herpes is a non-issue.
The color of his skin is also, unless you are a racist.

As far as his job is concerned, I can argue that no one should be fired for being indicted on - not convicted of - these charges. However, in certain professions, his extracurricular activities could potentially pose a threat, and a firing would be warranted. i.e. the Disney employee who got busted with child porn.

Right, Disney employees work with kids, football players do not work with dogs. Even if he is shown to be guilty, and he has not been, he does not work with dogs.
If he gets fired it would be well within his right to sue.
I have issues with employers fucking with people over what they do with their private lives.
His job is to win football games, that is all.

[Happy Monkey]

Maintaining the image of the NFL is in his contract, and therefore part of his job. Anyone can sue for anything, but he would lose.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

His job is to win football games, that is all.

Then he still should be fired -

[smurfalicious]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

he does not work with dogs.

I see the point you're trying to make, but I think you're missing one as well: this has more to do with image and reputation as it relates to the employer, not whether or not Vick works with dogs.

The NFL has made a huge campaign about the image of its players, and thus the respectability of the NFL and the game. If the NFL's idea of maintaining an image requires players to be not felons, stoners, abusers, whatever, and the NFL believes - and can prove - that the image of the league, teams, and/or players would suffer or even be tarnished by the actions of a singular individual within the sport, they may very well be within their right to fire him for a conviction, or even on suspicion of these charges.

Image and reputation are the hardest things to attain and maintain, and even harder to get back once tarnished.

[yesman065]

excellent points smurf - not sure about the legality of it all, but I agree in theory. Too bad it will all come down to whether they will lose more money by keepng or firing him. They will most likely play the middle ground and offer up some type of suspension.

[smurfalicious]

It's basic contract law, not necessarily my opinion. (For the record, I believe he's guilty, and I believe he's a sick fuck, and I'd love to have a chance to cattle-prod his balls.)

Vick signed a contract. If the contract stipulates he must refrain certain activities, and maybe (definitely) includes a catch-all phrase that would cover all the bases in the event the 'certain activities' are not set out specifically (i.e. must test negative for steroids, weed, opiates, etc.) that leaves it up to the interpretation of a jury should he attempt to sue in the event he is fired as to whether or not his extracurricular activities did, in fact, have negative repercussions on his employer.

And, also, I don't how much employment law would really apply here as far as his "rights" with his "employer" - he's under a contract and the contract, as long as it isn't deemed illegal or that any party signed under duress, would supersede over employment law.