I totally agree.I think that if people remember all the bad things that we all have done, and judge us today for what we've done in the past, we would all be goners.
Judge a person today for what he/she is today. Watch the life; watch the behavior .... you don't need to judge by the words. Just watch and see if the life lives up to the words.
And then decide.
That's all we can ask of others; why not ask with regard to Michael Vick as well?
Exactly. Thank you.I'm all for not judging people on their past but NOT at the expense of an innocent animal. Better safe than sorry and he should be restricted from EVER having pets.
I don't know about you but I sure as heck wouldn't let him catsit/dogsit for me.
That's probably a reasonable restriction. Forgiveness does not relieve the obligation of the consequences of one's actions. Felons live with the consequences of their crime for the remainder of their lives. However, he's paid the debt that society and the justice system imposed on him. If the debt is insufficient, then change the law.Better safe than sorry and he should be restricted from EVER having pets
This is a valid point and I'll give you it; in America we reserve a special **** for the public spotlight. Yet, Kimmel's spotlight is on the past. If he spotlit Vick today, would Kimmel find the same horrible and heartless person? Illegal is a moot point as the justice system says that is a thing of the past, and he's already taken the consequences decreed for the illegality of the act.Being a public figure and making millions on endorsements and commercials means he gets to be a public figure with all the consequences when he does something horrible, heartless and illegal.
Well said.I think there's a difference between doing "bad things" and the basic character flaw that allowed Vick to do the things he did to innocent animals. I don't believe that the utter lack of humanity that he displayed is something that can ever be rehabilitated. If it were a one time thing, done in fit of anger, I could see where rehabilitation is a possibility, even a liklihood. But the repeated violent acts over years and years says this is who he is. He may have learned how to say and do the right things to make him somewhat socially acceptable, but underneath the leopard can't change it's spots, this behavior is part of his basic nature.
Some commentators have argued that Vick should be allowed to play because he “made a mistake” and has now “paid his debt.” Perhaps these people are under the mistaken impression that all Michael Vick did was fight some Pit Bulls. But dog fighting, as cruel a crime as it is, is the least of what Michael Vick did.
Purnell Peace conspired with Vick, Phillips and Tony Taylor to kill dogs.
According to the prosecutor's statement of facts in the case, between 2002 and 2007 Michael Vick and his co-conspirators Purnell Peace, Quanis Phillips and Tony Taylor killed thirteen dogs by various methods including wetting one dog down and electrocuting her, hanging, drowning and shooting others and, in at least one case, by slamming a dog’s body to the ground.
Michael Vick didn't make a mistake. He didn't "make a bad choice." Over a period of five years he forced dogs into deadly fights, and he personally killed, or conspired to kill, thirteen dogs. He didn't pick a quick, painless method of killing, but instead chose a variety of means that qualify as torture. Pit Bulls are powerful dogs. Imagine how hard you would have to work to kill a Pit Bull by forcibly drowning him.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution also reports, "Sometimes [the dogs] were starved to make them more vicious in the pit."
And Michael Vick didn’t confine the abuse and killing to his own Pit Bulls.
Quanis Phillips, like Vick and Peace, "thought it was funny" to place family pets in the ring with trained fighting dogs.
According to a November 2008 ESPN.com news story, a report prepared by the USDA's inspector general-investigations division revealed that Vick, Purnell Peace, Quanis Phillips and Tony Taylor also put family pet dogs into the ring with trained pit bulls.
The report, dated Aug. 28, 2008, says, "Vick, Peace and Phillips thought it was funny to watch the pit bull dogs belonging to [Vick’s] Bad Newz Kennels injure or kill the other dogs."
Supporters say Vick apologized for his actions. But in his famous press conference apology, Vick admitted only to fighting dogs, despite the fact that he pled guilty to all charges, including the killings. He admitted to “making mistakes” and “immature acts.” But deliberately and repeatedly planning dog fights and repeated premeditated violent killings of dogs are not “mistakes.” They are not the acts of someone who’s merely immature. They are the acts of a sociopath and a predator.
If we can't admit that the crimes to which Michael Vick pled guilty make one a bad person, then we have no definition of morality anymore.
Vick supporters who want to see him play football again should, if they’re being honest, say “We don’t care what Vick did to dogs, we just want to watch him play football.” But please don’t say he apologized, nor that he paid his debt. You can’t pay a debt you’ve never admitted you owe.
A man who can look a dog in the face and deliberately pick the most brutal and prolonged way of killing that dog, for nothing more than being insufficiently vicious – I think most people could reasonably wonder if such a man could ever genuinely be rehabilitated.
I believe a lot of people can be rehabilitated, but certain people, like sociopaths, have such a flawed personality disorder that it can't be cured.I don't believe any human being is so irreversibly flawed as to be beyond saving. We'll have to revisit this issue in a few years to see if you cynics were right.