• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sterling vs Vick

Who is worse?

  • Stirling (racist comments)

    Votes: 5 13.9%
  • Vick (dog abuser/fighter/killer/torturer)

    Votes: 29 80.6%
  • Don't know/undecided

    Votes: 2 5.6%

  • Total voters
    36

Scrabaholic

certified batshit crazy
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
27,375
Reaction score
19,408
Location
Near Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Stirling makes racist comments in a private conversation and is banned for life from the NBA.

Vick fights, abuses, tortures, kills dogs and is welcomed back into the NFL.

Who is worse?
 
Stirling makes racist comments in a private conversation and is banned for life from the NBA.

Vick fights, abuses, tortures, kills dogs and is welcomed back into the NFL.

Who is worse?

Just shows you how screwed up pro sports are.
 
Stirling makes racist comments in a private conversation and is banned for life from the NBA.

Vick fights, abuses, tortures, kills dogs and is welcomed back into the NFL.

Who is worse?

One is an NFL player, the other is an NBA owner. One faced prison, the other one didn't. One's crime had nothing to do with the sport, the other one's crime had everything to do with the sport.

That being said, they are both despicable.
 
anonymous polls suck

sterling didn't objectively hurt anyone or anything. Vick was twisted MF who tortured animals

not even close
 
anonymous polls suck

sterling didn't objectively hurt anyone or anything. Vick was twisted mf who tortured animals

not even close

this!
 
Mike Vick is a sick individual whos abuse of dogs is truly despicable. But Donald Tocowitz "Sterling" is worse, and here is why:

In my opinion, with all of the atrocities committed against the jewish people over the ages, and all of the handwringing and whining over the same by jews, I believe that any jew who demonstrates this same hateful racism, especially against an even more persecuted group such as American blacks, deserves a special scorn and loathing, precisely because he is guilty of the same racist vileness that jews are mortified by when inflicted upon themselves. Donald Tocowitz is a disgusting racist hypocrite and deserves all of the heaping scorn and ridicule that a racist jew merits.
 
Even if you are not an animal lover - how can uttering racist comments in private be remotely as bad/sick as torturing dogs...often to death...for some sick pleasure?


The former is stupid, wrong and legal.

The latter is sick, depraved and illegal.
 
Stirling makes racist comments in a private conversation and is banned for life from the NBA.

Vick fights, abuses, tortures, kills dogs and is welcomed back into the NFL.

Who is worse?

Well, when you put it that way . . .
 
Sterling. Racism is far more damaging to society than dog fighting. It's not even close.

One of the major problems we have in this country right now is that there are too many idiots who care more about animals than people.

(Before some braindead moron tries to pretend that I'm saying it's OK to kill dogs and that Vick didn't deserve any punishment, I'm not. I'm saying racism is a lot ****ing worse than killing dogs. If you disagree, then feel free to explain exactly why you think racism is better than dog killing).

I often find it hilarious that some people will rail on and on about Vick's actions while they eat meat every night. Now that is some retarded ass hypocricy right there.

What Vick did is the moral equivalent of having a beef farm. He killed animals, often very cruelly, for profit. How is that different than what happened to a Big Mac?
 
anonymous polls suck

sterling didn't objectively hurt anyone or anything. Vick was twisted MF who tortured animals

not even close

Sterling has had lifetime of hurting people. This comment of his was not the first thing that happened. When you look at his history what he has done to people he is far worse than vick.
 
In my opinion, with all of the atrocities committed against the jewish people over the ages, and all of the handwringing and whining over the same by jews, I believe that any jew who demonstrates this same hateful racism, especially against an even more persecuted group such as American blacks, d

Blacks are more persecuted than jews over the ages? I am guessing world history wasn't a favorite class of yours.
 
Sterling. Racism is far more damaging to society than dog fighting. It's not even close.

One of the major problems we have in this country right now is that there are too many idiots who care more about animals than people.

(Before some braindead moron tries to pretend that I'm saying it's OK to kill dogs and that Vick didn't deserve any punishment, I'm not. I'm saying racism is a lot ****ing worse than killing dogs. If you disagree, then feel free to explain exactly why you think racism is better than dog killing).

I often find it hilarious that some people will rail on and on about Vick's actions while they eat meat every night. Now that is some retarded ass hypocricy right there.

What Vick did is the moral equivalent of having a beef farm. He killed animals, often very cruelly, for profit. How is that different than what happened to a Big Mac?

I don't really that someone is an idiot for caring for animals, the rest of your post is spot on. The meat industry subjects countless animals to far worse torture than any dog fighting ring but people are good at ignoring things that benefit them.
 
One is an NFL player, the other is an NBA owner. One faced prison, the other one didn't. One's crime had nothing to do with the sport, the other one's crime had everything to do with the sport.

That being said, they are both despicable.

Exactly, although to be accurate one didn't only face prison - he served 21 months in prison for that crime.
 
jewish people ........the same by jews, .......any jew .......vileness that jews .......racist jew .

Hmmmmm. There seems to be a theme here. :confused:
 
I don't really that someone is an idiot for caring for animals, the rest of your post is spot on. The meat industry subjects countless animals to far worse torture than any dog fighting ring but people are good at ignoring things that benefit them.

Caring for animals does nto make someone an idiot. But caring about animals MORE than people does, imo.
 
Sterling. Racism is far more damaging to society than dog fighting. It's not even close.

One of the major problems we have in this country right now is that there are too many idiots who care more about animals than people.

(Before some braindead moron tries to pretend that I'm saying it's OK to kill dogs and that Vick didn't deserve any punishment, I'm not. I'm saying racism is a lot ****ing worse than killing dogs. If you disagree, then feel free to explain exactly why you think racism is better than dog killing).

I often find it hilarious that some people will rail on and on about Vick's actions while they eat meat every night. Now that is some retarded ass hypocricy right there.

What Vick did is the moral equivalent of having a beef farm. He killed animals, often very cruelly, for profit. How is that different than what happened to a Big Mac?

Humans by nature eat meat, as do many other animals. A beef farm isn't illegal. Dog fighting is. To compare the torture of dogs with beef farming is ridiculous.

Society wasn't damaged because an old man didn't want his young girlfriend to take selfies with a black man who has HIV. Can you be any more dramatic?

Society was more damaged by young kids seeing a convicted animal abuser come back to a hero's welcome in the NFL than it was by Donald Sterling.
 
Stirling makes racist comments in a private conversation and is banned for life from the NBA.

Vick fights, abuses, tortures, kills dogs and is welcomed back into the NFL.

Who is worse?

Sterling's actions with regards to the housing situation is pretty low; but I've got a soft spot for dogs so I definitely feel like Vick's ACTIONS were worse.

That said, it's a stupid question to ask as it relates to you pointing out their stance with their respective leagues.

Sterling was an owner of a franchise; a position with significant impact to the league. His actions were set to cause the league significant financial damage in the way of lost sponsors, potential legal ramifications of games being cancelled (multiple players were reportedly going to boycott playoff games had the league not acted strongly), and an absolutely toxic franchise (multiple free agents, including their coach, and even members on the team made it clear they would not play for the team if he was there).

Thus, the NBA made a business decision. There was no fathomable way for them not to take a significant and problematic financial and logistical hit without removing the owner.

When it comes to Vick, despite his popularity before hand was still essentially just a game piece upon the NFL's board and one that could be discarded without much of an issue. The actions of a single player, on a single team, is unlikely to warrant the same type of significant public and personnel outrage that an owner will because a single player simply doesn't have the same level of impact and control.

Additionally, the NFL was aided by the fact that Vick was undoubtably going to jail. This allowed them to easily wait a significant period of time before actually making a decision. As the phrase says, time heals all wounds. The fervency towards Vick as he was close to being out of Jail was FAR less than it was right at the start. Additionally, the act of actually going to jail create an already established "punishment" for what Vick did, lessoning the feeling that the NFL would necessarily need to significantly act to "punish" him for his actions.

Finally, when it comes to the NFL, this was not an uncommon situation in a general sense. Players had previously had run-in's with the law and were allowed back in then NFL.

So whether or not anyone personally feels the actions of one or another is worse, that's somewhat irrelevant as to whether or not it was justified for each league to act in the way they did.

Especially considering the most obvious option...you're comparing two different leagues with two different decision makers and expecting them to have some kind of similar action simply because they're both sports.
 
Sterling. Racism is far more damaging to society than dog fighting. It's not even close.

Here's my issue with this Tucker.

On a macro level, if you're asking me what's "worse" for society....fighting dogs or racism, I'd say racism.

That's different than asking on a micro level who is "worse"...someone who killed some dogs or someone who said racist comments.

I think, in terms of damage to society, racism is far more damaging than rape is. The political and societal ramifications of racism and how it can play into so many things makes it something far more damaging to me. On a MACRO level, I'd say racism is "more damaging" to society than rape.

But if you asked me "Who's 'worse', a guy who raped a woman or a guy who spits at black people" I'm going to say the rapist 100 times out of a 100.

That's because the CONCEPT of Racism is more damaging, but the question isn't about the concept...it's about the individual people and their individual actions.
 
Sterling. Racism is far more damaging to society than dog fighting. It's not even close.

One of the major problems we have in this country right now is that there are too many idiots who care more about animals than people.

(Before some braindead moron tries to pretend that I'm saying it's OK to kill dogs and that Vick didn't deserve any punishment, I'm not. I'm saying racism is a lot ****ing worse than killing dogs. If you disagree, then feel free to explain exactly why you think racism is better than dog killing).

I often find it hilarious that some people will rail on and on about Vick's actions while they eat meat every night. Now that is some retarded ass hypocricy right there.

What Vick did is the moral equivalent of having a beef farm. He killed animals, often very cruelly, for profit. How is that different than what happened to a Big Mac?
What exactly did Sterling do to society? He had a girlfriend that was 50 years younger than him, said he didnt care if she was doing black guys, just not to parade them around at Clippers games (ostensibly because he was having an affair with her and people that knew him knew that). He didnt jack up prices for black people to keep them out of the arena. He didnt underpay his players, didnt underpay his staff, and has contributed many millions to minority causes. The NAACP was about to give him an award. So...other than a whole lot of people expressing moral outrage and a fair amount of butthurtedness...what exactly did Sterling do again? He made himself look like an ass. He exposed himself. And...thats about it.
 
Saint Michael has turned his life around and has been apologetic for many years. He has become an excellent human being and a model citizen.

Sterling has doubled down on his vile arrogance and publicly talks **** on Magic Johnson after being exposed as a bitter racist.

Everyone has a dark side. It's our willingness to conquer and become better people that defines us. Vick has demonstrated that. Sterling refuses to.
 
Saint Michael has turned his life around and has been apologetic for many years. He has become an excellent human being and a model citizen.

Sterling has doubled down on his vile arrogance and publicly talks **** on Magic Johnson after being exposed as a bitter racist.

Everyone has a dark side. It's our willingness to conquer and become better people that defines us. Vick has demonstrated that. Sterling refuses to.

There's nothing Sterling can do to make the PC crowd forgive him.
 
There's nothing Sterling can do to make the PC crowd forgive him.

And there's nothing Vick can do to make racists forgive him, but he didn't need the promise of their forgiveness to know that apologizing for his wrongs and changing his outlook on life was the right thing to do.
 
Back
Top Bottom