More Michael Vick vs. Martha Stewart

In this week's posts, questions have been raised - and answered - as to whether Michael Vick, like Martha Stewart, perhaps - is being used as an 'example' and therefore enduring more public humiliation than others with like criminal convictions.

Well, the husband has reminded me of the bottom line: Vick and Stewart both broke the law.

As the saying goes: que sera, sera.

Comment: Michael Vick vs. Martha Stewart?

Blogger-pal Oswegan has left the following comment on the post below (Nov. 27): It's an interesting case. Sometimes it seems as though they are using him as an example similar to what they did to Martha Stewart.

Interesting comparison between Mike Vick and Martha Stewart. My sister has also mentioned this to me.

I believe Martha Stewart's jailing - not conviction - truly was used as an example by Big Business (not the government or the public). With Vick, I believe his arrest and resulting charges were happenstance, but justly deserved. I do hope he pays dearly for his actions; in my mind, they are more severe than Martha's. Martha's crime was about money; Vick's crime was about life.

That said, I would agree that members of "the public" - specifically animal rights groups, etc. - are holding Vick up as an example. He set himself up as a perfect target, a perfect example: he is a known face, a liked and familiar person, someone "like us" and probably better - certainly more successful. If it were the guy down the street, no one outside of his neighbors and the local SPCA would care to raise a stink. Unfortunately for Vick, and fortunately for the rest of us, the timing in this country is such that animal cruelty can now be addressed on a national scale, and the opportunity to use a nationally recognized persona as an example is not to be missed. Vick is the perfect example of the guy you would least expect and representative of how even beautiful people can do the ugliest of things. He was the best of us, and we let ourselves down. I am not at all sorry for him.

Will Vick's arrest, conviction, and jailing stop others? On a grand scale, I doubt it. But if it stops people from believing they can get away with heinous crimes simply because they have money, success, or connections - and it stops one of them or gives them pause to reconsider their actions - then I'm all for it. And if it educates the public to further put an end to this ugliness, then I'm all for that, too. At least it's a first step in the right direction.

Comment: Gerard Cavlan

Per my post of September 2 re Gerard Cavlan, a considerate reader left the following comment:

Cavlan is a Gaelic Footballer who resides in Northern Ireland, a part of the United Kingdom, where it is allowable to own pit bulls.

In my earlier post, I wasn't sure if it was allowed to own pit bulls in Ireland. This has set me straight. Thank you!

Protest PetSmart Rabbit Policy

Here's a comment, left on an earlier post, that I thought it important to share.

This comment was left by "rabbitwise"

You can get all the up to date information on the PetSmart campagin on the Hot topics page at www.rabbitwise.org or go directly to http://mysite.verizon.net/vze27h5b/id90.html

There are links to the blogesphere on this topic including this one, photos from the Aug 30 PETA protest at PetSmart headquarters, links to petitions you can sign, and other ways to help fight this corporate greed at the expense of the lives of rabbits.

World Animal Day

Here's a Comment, left for an earlier post, by Nancy J. Kronk of the Interfaith Association of Animal Chaplains. (Posting it here so you won't have to search for the post.)

As the Chair of Animal Chaplains.com, I have been horrified to learn about dogfighting and the cruel torturing, maiming, and killing that takes place in it. I am saddened that celebrities like athlete Michael Vick and rapper DMX have been implicated in such unbelievably bloody crimes. The blogosphere seems to focus on the wrong questions, IMHO. Instead of, "Are animals as important as humans?", the real question should be, "Do animals suffer?"

Like humans, animals are sentient beings who feel pain. That is not only an intuitive reality, but a scientific fact. We are instructed by all of the worlds major faiths to care for animals in responsible, loving ways. It is our moral and spiritual obligation to protect them. Please join us on October 4th, 2007, in cities all around the world to celebrate "World Animal Day". On that day, animals will be blessed and honored, and we will hopefully all realize how lucky we are to have them in our world. For more information, search on the words "World Animal Day" for a celebration near you.

Nancy J. Cronk
Founder, Chair and Chaplain
Interfaith Association of Animal Chaplains
www.AnimalChaplains.com

Comment; Social Change

Here is a comment left for my posting directly below (from Anonymous, I believe in Washington State):

I think you have a good point about personal responsibility and people having to be held to account for thier actions.

Minor point: Colwell said it was PARTICULARLY hard for people from different class backgrounds to understand what might motivate the behavior. Not that people from lower class backgrounds will not also see it as bad behavior.

Also I don't think Goldberg was saying anything different than what you conclude. That atheletes get pumped up with a sense of themselves as 'gods'. i.e. given a sense of entitlement. The question is "where does that sense come from, if not from an adoring public that has it's sense of what is praisworthy askew." Where a person who can pass a football can earn tens of millions a year while a good kindergarden teacher can barely pay the electric bill.

July 29, 2007 10:06 AM

Anonymous made some good points, especially his/her "Minor Point."

So, as I posted earlier, if indeed "Society as a whole may be responsible for the perpetuation of ugly and abusive behaviors, but we are not responsible for individuals making the choice to engage in those activities," then where do we go from here? What actions do we take as a society? With all the uproar caused by these most recent events, we've certainly indicated that we are fast becoming a society that believes we can affect social change. Will we affect social change? Would that change be solely athlete-/sport-/animal welfare-specific? Or is this just the beginning of positive change?