Quote:
Originally Posted by 33girl
Clearly YOU missed the point. As I said, it is comparing apples and oranges. (If you don't know what that means, check wikipedia) You and BP were the ones who brought up "well Joe Limpdick only got 3 days in jail for raping 3 women." What Joe Limpdick got has nothing to do with Michael Vick.
|
"Women have consented to spending time with their attackers and dogs can't consent to being around thier attackers therefore are assumed to have never consented" does not mean "you are comparing apples to oranges."
We are not comparing apples to oranges when saying there are NFL players who have committed more heinous crimes against PEOPLE who are still allowed to play and have gotten lesser punishments. Based on this fact Vick should not be villified and should be allowed to play. Fighting dogs is not as bad as driving drunk and killing a person. If that crime does not require getting kicked out then fighting dogs should not either.
Threaded Mode
