"We believe Michael Vick has served his time, paid his debt to society and deserves a second chance and the animal rights groups want to hold him hostage for the rest of his life," J. Whyatt Mondesire, president of the Philadelphia chapter of the NAACP, said Wednesday. "We think that's patently unfair. It denies Michael Vick's basic civil rights, denies him his ability to make a living."
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Apparently the first demonstration in Philadelphia about Michael Vick, is for Michael Vick. The local chapter of the NAACP along with other civil rights groups are planning to 'march' on Lincoln Financial Center when Vick takes the field tomorrow.
Look this would make sense if Vick's civil rights had been or were going to be infringed upon. Michael Vick may have served his jail sentence and done what was required by the court, but his record wasn't expunged. The fact that people and animal rights activists may want to protest against Michael Vick is their civil right (it should be noted that so far there hasn't been any major call to protest/boycott Vick and the Eagles). Also, even if they do exercise their Freedom of Speech, Michael Vick wasn't banished from the NFL. Had he been expelled from the league Vick had opportunities to play in other professional football leagues, such as the UFL and CFL. Furthermore, playing in professional sports leagues has always been seen as a privilege not a 'right'. And to have that privilege one must live by a standard set forth by the league. Michael Vick failed in his responsibility to live up the standard (not to mention basic nature principles of not killing dogs). He deserves whatever punishment is handed down. Also, if Vick's chosen profession was a lawyer, teacher, doctor or any number of other jobs he would have lost his license because of his conviction. Vick is actually getting preferential treatment for being a professional athlete than what he'd have to deal with in the "real world".
I think this 'preemptive march' is a bit excessive. If you are a Vick supporter defend him, and if you are a Vick hater, boycott him that is your right. But to attack each other on baseless claims is cheap and petty. The problem with this demonstration is that its being had for the wrong reasons. To suggest that Vick's accusers and detractors are 'denying Vick his basic civil rights', is scurrilous and malicious and that is one 'right' that these supporters don't have.