Channel Zero wrote:
That doesn't look good for Vick.
I heard recently that some columnist made a statement that was both shocking, but had some sense of truth to it.
The columnist said something to the effect that Vick might have better luck being accused of rape than what he is accused of now.
Two ways to look at that:
* What does that say about being a rape victim?
* What does that say about a suspects presumed innocence under different circumstances?
Heard this repeated again and again on msm. My question: If Vick had abused one dog, would he be getting the heat he is getting now? I don't think so. He would be getting heat, but not like this.
If Vick was a serial rapest and murderer would he be in as much trouble as he is now? YOU BET! How about if he were gambling on how seriously he could injure women? Yup, still in BIG trouble.
Running a dog fighting ring and raping a women are not in the same category unless you add all the repeat offenses. Rapests should be put away but our misogynistic citizenry don't do that. And who said Vick isn't a potential rapest if he isn't one already? Cruel people do cruel things. Don't think so? Want to leave your seven year old daughter alone with someone who runs a dog fighting ring?
Now, if you find sense to the idea either raping A women or extreme cruelty to many animals is equal, you probably also find sense in condoms and murder being the same thing and both should be punished equally.
Come join my neighbors. You can all chat amicably.