An editorial on a news program said that Michael Vick, pleading guilty to promoting dog fighting, should be banned from the NFL for life.
But it also said the REASON the NFL should take this action is that it should not promote or condone violence.
Professional football IS violence: 300-pound giants trying to flatten one another into a pancake.
I agree that dog fighting is sick (I love dogs but would feel this way regardless).
For his crime, I think Vick — a sick and despicable creature — should be given the maximum punishment allowable under the law.
But after that, he should be allowed to earn a living in his chosen profession.
(If he makes you sick, boycott his football games. If we all do that, his team may let him go — that’s their call.)
But do you see a logical disconnect in the NFL taking an overall anti-violence stance? (Maybe the NRA could join them.)
What you say — in an ad, press conference, article, letter, speech, sales meeting, or at a cocktail party — has to be logically consistent.
The minute you take a stance that is in logical conflict with reality (e.g., vegetarians for meat; a subprime lender foreclosing on its mortgage owners portraying a kindly father image in its TV spots), you confuse your audience, lose credibility, and destroy the persuasiveness of your argument.