Should BYU Drop its Football Program?

[bluebell]

36 minutes ago, california boy said:

So are you saying that every war the U.S. had fought in your lifetime you would be ok with your son dying for?  If not, what wars in your lifetime has been worth the sacrifice of your sons life?

If my son enlisted to fight so he could accomplish something good and to help others, then it would be worth it, regardless of the war.  It’s the motivation behind the risk that I believe matters.

That doesn’t mean that I believe every war or engagement the U.S. has been involved with was a good idea.

[california boy]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

If my son enlisted to fight so he could accomplish something good and to help others, then it would be worth it, regardless of the war.  It’s the motivation behind the risk that I believe matters.

That doesn’t mean that I believe every war or engagement the U.S. has been involved with was a good idea.

You have a lot more confidence in the value of war than I do.  I have yet to see a war fought by the United States that I would be willing to have my son even participate in.  

It is the motivation behind the risk that matters to me as well.  Death is a pretty big risk.  And the lives of thousands is a pretty big reality.  And just who is being helped?  Is Vietnam better off today because of all of those that are now dead?  Is Iraq better off because of all those that are now dead?  Tell that to all the mothers who have lost their children to the glories of war.  Ask them if it is worth the cost.  

Football injury vs death, maimed bodies, children dying, homes destroyed,   And you think getting rid of football is a better idea than getting rid of the ROTC?  For me, not such a big decision.  I will gladly watch a football game any day than see coffins draped in American flags coming off of transporter planes.

Edited November 19, 2017 by california boy

[strappinglad]

Had Germany and the axis powers won WW2 , I wonder if the freedoms we have enjoyed for the last 70 years would exist. One thing I am reasonably sure of is that had we lost that war , there would be many fewer Jews and the closet would be jam packed. Some wars are worth fighting, most are not. If/when the US followed the general rule of offense outlined in the D&C , war was justified. When it struck the first blow , it usually was not justified. The Nephites gave a quite good example of when war was and was not justified.

[Rain]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

You have a lot more confidence in the value of war than I do.  I have yet to see a war fought by the United States that I would be willing to have my son even participate in.  

It is the motivation behind the risk that matters to me as well.  Death is a pretty big risk.  And the lives of thousands is a pretty big reality.  And just who is being helped?  Is Vietnam better off today because of all of those that are now dead?  Is Iraq better off because of all those that are now dead?  Tell that to all the mothers who have lost their children to the glories of war.  Ask them if it is worth the cost.  

Football injury vs death, maimed bodies, children dying, homes destroyed,   And you think getting rid of football is a better idea than getting rid of the ROTC?  For me, not such a big decision.  I will gladly watch a football game any day than see coffins draped in American flags coming off of transporter planes.

I do not like war in the least.  

I think there have been an awful lot of wars we should never have stepped into. I don't think most have been justified and I have been relieved that my children have not shown interest.  

I do think though that preparation to defend is essential if you want to protect home and family. Oh,  I'm not big on having a huge defense etc. Just that I think something should be happening. I also find that the military helps us in times of tragedy besides war - the shootings, the hurricanes etc. So I see a good reason to have a military that is prepared.

That does not mean that those of us who feel this way love war. That we think it is more important to stop  maiming bodies and destroying homes for shallow/selfish reasons is more important than football. It means we see it is different than football. That football is a game and that the military is there for protection. 

Bluebell isn't trying to say it is more important to quit football than to quit destroying lives. Given what you have seen of her on this board do you really think that low of her? 

Edited November 19, 2017 by Rain

[california boy]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

I do not like war in the least.  

I think there have been an awful lot of wars we should never have stepped into. I don't think most have been justified and I have been relieved that my children have not shown interest.  

I do think though that preparation to defend is essential if you want to protect home and family. Oh,  I'm not big on having a huge defense etc. Just that I think something should be happening. I also find that the military helps us in times of tragedy besides war - the shootings, the hurricanes etc. So I see a good reason to have a military that is prepared.

That does not mean that those of us who feel this way love war. That we think it is more important to stop  maiming bodies and destroying homes for shallow/selfish reasons is more important than football. It means we see it is different than football. That football is a game and that the military is there for protection. 

Bluebell isn't trying to say it is more important to quit football than to quit destroying lives. Given what you have seen of her on this board do you really think that low of her? 

No I don't.  But I am interested in how she feels about it.

Edited November 19, 2017 by california boy

[Anijen]

I do not like war., but as long as there is evil in the world there will be war.

 

"In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom. and our peace, our wives, and our children." ~Captain Moroni (Alma 46)

 

[california boy]

41 minutes ago, Anijen said:

I do not like war., but as long as there is evil in the world there will be war.

 

"In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom. and our peace, our wives, and our children." ~Captain Moroni (Alma 46)

 

I f that was what war was about, then you might have a point.  Can you tell me how our religion, and freedom and our peace our wives and our children were in danger that was solved by the Vietnam war?  or the war in Iraq?  Or the people of Pakistan?  

I have heard the platitudes.  I have yet to hear what they are based upon.  None of those countries were attacking any of what was written on the flag of liberty.

[Bernard Gui]

11 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Let me make sure I understand you. Are you saying that the NFL players should not protest police brutality and systemic racism because abortion and murder among the African-American community are greater problems?

If so, you are engaged in the logical fallacy of a red herring. Whether or not abortion and murder are greater problems doesn't affect whether or not people should protest police brutality. Look back at my previous explanation:

That shows that your logic is flawed. You can't say "don't protest this because there are greater problems" because then we end up in the absurd situation of everyone in the entire world only protesting one problem.

If I didn't understand you correctly, please clarify your position.

I did not say “don’t protest.” On the contrary, I specifically said they can protest whatever and however they wish. I even asked why they limit it to one issue rather than include other issues such as the two I cited. They chose a disastrously wrong way to protest. There are better ways they could have drawn attention to their concerns that would have avoided the acrimony and division they have created.

They have only hurt their cause, destroyed any hope of unifying their teams and communities, and probably have ruined the institution that pays their salaries and gives them their pulpit. Despite the sincerity of their cause, most Americans believe their method of protest is disrespectful.

I understand this as a matter of immediacy, priority, urgency, severity, and practicality. You may see it differently. 

 

11 hours ago, Gray said:

If you're African American,  you will sit down with your parents and have "the talk" at some point. Not the sex talk, the talk about what to do when the police pull you over. Being pulled over by the police for a black person is a perilous situation. They're frequently pulled over because the police noticed they were black. Many don't survive the experience

 

Please define “many” and provide proof that “many don’t survive” being pulled over by police. What percentage of stops results in death? CFR.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[bluebell]

16 hours ago, california boy said:

You have a lot more confidence in the value of war than I do.  I have yet to see a war fought by the United States that I would be willing to have my son even participate in.  

War's only value is in protecting the innocent from evil men and people from tyranny.  While I don't believe every war (or even the majority necessarily) accomplishes that, I do think that it sometimes does.

But even if a country goes to war for less than honorable reasons (such as Vietnam), individual soldiers can still enlist for honorable reasons.

Quote

It is the motivation behind the risk that matters to me as well.  Death is a pretty big risk.  And the lives of thousands is a pretty big reality.  And just who is being helped?  Is Vietnam better off today because of all of those that are now dead?  Is Iraq better off because of all those that are now dead?  Tell that to all the mothers who have lost their children to the glories of war.  Ask them if it is worth the cost.  

There are many mothers who agree with you, but many mothers who have lost children in war that don't.  And there are mothers who's children were saved because someone else's child was willing to go and fight against those who put their children in harm's way.  War is messy and multifaceted and I struggle with those who try to use 'think of the mothers' as a rally cry for their personal agendas.  Neither you nor I can speak for 'the mothers.'  We can only speak for ourselves.

Quote

Football injury vs death, maimed bodies, children dying, homes destroyed,   And you think getting rid of football is a better idea than getting rid of the ROTC?  For me, not such a big decision.  I will gladly watch a football game any day than see coffins draped in American flags coming off of transporter planes.

I think that getting rid of football might be a good idea, and I think that there is no legitimate comparison between the risks that football players take and those taken by soldiers because one risk is for entertainment and money and the other risk is to serve and help others.

[Gray]

9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I did not say “don’t protest.” On the contrary, I specifically said they can protest whatever and however they wish. I even asked why they limit it to one issue rather than include other issues such as the two I cited. They chose a disastrously wrong way to protest. There are better ways they could have drawn attention to their concerns that would have avoided the acrimony and division they have created.

They have only hurt their cause, destroyed any hope of unifying their teams and communities, and probably have ruined the institution that pays their salaries and gives them their pulpit. Despite the sincerity of their cause, most Americans believe their method of protest is disrespectful.

I understand this as a matter of immediacy, priority, urgency, severity, and practicality. You may see it differently. 

 

Please define “many” and provide proof that “many don’t survive” being pulled over by police. What percentage of stops results in death? CFR.

Knock yourself out, although your CFR is invalid, given the language I used

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/09/you-really-can-get-pulled-over-for-driving-while-black-federal-statistics-show/?utm_term=.6af8a78bb42d

 

https://mappingpoliceviolence.org

Edited November 19, 2017 by Gray

[Bernard Gui]

5 hours ago, Gray said:

Knock yourself out, although your CFR is invalid, given the language I used

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/09/you-really-can-get-pulled-over-for-driving-while-black-federal-statistics-show/?utm_term=.6af8a78bb42d

 

https://mappingpoliceviolence.org

You claimed many “don’t survive.”. Thanks for playing.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[strappinglad]

The borders of countries today are much more vulnerable than in the past. It is my understanding that the US and most Western countries are under constant attack from cyber troops . As one official said, " they are always hammering at the doors. " What would be an ' appropriate' response by the US if one of the hackers succeeded in shutting down the electrical  grid on the East coast in the middle of winter and a thousand citizens froze to death?

A. find the hacker and bring her to justice at the Hague?

B. find the hacker and assassinate him?

C. find what country the hacker worked from and send the leaders there a strongly worded note?

D. do nothing?

E. Nuke the place ?

F. other

 

[Bernard Gui]

12 hours ago, bluebell said:

I think that getting rid of football might be a good idea, and I think that there is no legitimate comparison between the risks that football players take and those taken by soldiers because one risk is for entertainment and money and the other risk is to serve and help others.

Does anyone here know or talk with people who participate in extreme sports or are attracted to dangerous activities? 

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, strappinglad said:

The borders of countries today are much more vulnerable than in the past. It is my understanding that the US and most Western countries are under constant attack from cyber troops . As one official said, " they are always hammering at the doors. " What would be an ' appropriate' response by the US if one of the hackers succeeded in shutting down the electrical  grid on the East coast in the middle of winter and a thousand citizens froze to death?

A. find the hacker and bring her to justice at the Hague?

B. find the hacker and assassinate him?

C. find what country the hacker worked from and send the leaders there a strongly worded note?

D. do nothing?

E. Nuke the place ?

F. other

 

It would be an act of war and should receive an appropriate, perhaps lethal, response when the perpetrators are identified.

[Rain]

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Does anyone here know or talk with people who participate in extreme sports or are attracted to dangerous activities? 

I do.

[Gray]

15 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

You claimed many “don’t survive.”. Thanks for playing.

Many don't survive. That's well demonstrated. Keep your head in the sand if you like, but that's why people are taking a knee.

[bluebell]

10 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Does anyone here know or talk with people who participate in extreme sports or are attracted to dangerous activities? 

Yes I do, but i'm not sure why that matters.

Whether or not watching gladiators kill each other was a moral thing to do has nothing to do with how the gladiators felt about it, right?  

And no, i'm not comparing football to mortal combat for entertainment.  I'm speaking about the argument that as long as the people involved want to be there, supporting the activity is moral.

Edited November 20, 2017 by bluebell

[california boy]

15 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

It would be an act of war and should receive an appropriate, perhaps lethal, response when the perpetrators are identified.

You got to be kidding me.  How does bombing another country, killing more young soldiers actually solve the problem?

[The Nehor]

13 minutes ago, california boy said:

You got to be kidding me.  How does bombing another country, killing more young soldiers actually solve the problem?

There is no problem so difficult or complicated that it it cannot be resolved by killing everyone even remotely involved.

[RevTestament]

On 11/18/2017 at 6:10 PM, strappinglad said:

Had Germany and the axis powers won WW2 , I wonder if the freedoms we have enjoyed for the last 70 years would exist. One thing I am reasonably sure of is that had we lost that war , there would be many fewer Jews and the closet would be jam packed. Some wars are worth fighting, most are not. If/when the US followed the general rule of offense outlined in the D&C , war was justified. When it struck the first blow , it usually was not justified. The Nephites gave a quite good example of when war was and was not justified.

This is a primary reason I was against the 2nd Persian Gulf war. It started a bad chain of events down to the current ISIS regime. Obama's undeclared wars in Africa and the Middle East were likewise contemptible and even treasonous.

[Bernard Gui]

20 hours ago, california boy said:

You got to be kidding me.  How does bombing another country, killing more young soldiers actually solve the problem?

Perpetrators, C.K. As in Bin Laden. ISIS leaders, you know, the perpetrators.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

On 11/20/2017 at 6:34 AM, Gray said:

Many don't survive. That's well demonstrated. Keep your head in the sand if you like, but that's why people are taking a knee.

Once again, define many. 

[Gray]

6 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Once again, define many. 

This is many:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/a-disproportionate-number-of-black-victims-in-fatal-traffic-stops/2015/12/24/c29717e2-a344-11e5-9c4e-be37f66848bb_story.html

[Bernard Gui]

On 11/20/2017 at 7:04 AM, bluebell said:

Yes I do, but i'm not sure why that matters.

Whether or not watching gladiators kill each other was a moral thing to do has nothing to do with how the gladiators felt about it, right?  

And no, i'm not comparing football to mortal combat for entertainment.  I'm speaking about the argument that as long as the people involved want to be there, supporting the activity is moral.

Are you saying that watching or attending extreme sport activities that can result in injury or death is immoral? I bring up Lou Whittaker again. He and his brother are mountain climbers and live in our area. They are the first Americans to summit Everest. I met him at a career day at a high school career day where he spoke about their business as mountain guides. In an accompanying slideshow he showed photos of many of their climbs. I was shocked by the number of his associates who had lost their lives over the years falling off mountains. Death and injury accompany motorized vehicle racing, skiing, snowmobile riding, hunting, scuba diving, Far more people are injured or die in traffic accidents than all sports combined. Could you please elaborate what you mean by moral? Is hiring Lou or his company as a climbing guide immoral?

Edited November 21, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

42 minutes ago, Gray said:

This is many:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/a-disproportionate-number-of-black-victims-in-fatal-traffic-stops/2015/12/24/c29717e2-a344-11e5-9c4e-be37f66848bb_story.html

Please just give a straight answer. To you, what does “many do not survive mean?” 1% of all traffic stops end in death? 5%, 25%, 50%? Are there mitigating factors? Millions of black babies have been aborted and tens of thousands of young black men and women have been murdered in our cities. I call that many. Of course any death by police action should be investigated and prosecuted if it was wrongful. To me the huge numbers of deaths by abortion and murder should have at least as much scrutiny and even more remedial action.

I got pulled over last Saturday for a moving infraction. The officer was verbally abusive and insulting, but I responded with apologies and called him sir. I didn’t try to grab his weapon, reach into my pocket, ask for his badge number, take a picture of him, curse him out. Granted I am not black, but I chose to cooperate and not confront him.

Please give a summary or the pertinent excerpt of articles with a citation. I don’t have the inclination to spend my online time reading the multiple long articles you post. As rebuttal, I could post articles contradicting yours and then we just trade sources that support our positions.

 

[Edit] I read the first half of your article. It does not support your claim of “many don’t survive.”

Quote

Stewart was one of more than 100 people shot and killed by police after a traffic stop this year, according to a Washington Post database tracking deadly police shootings. Like Stewart, 1 in 3 of them was black, making the roadside interaction one of the most common precursors to a fatal police shooting of a black person in 2015.

The shootings of blacks, whites and Hispanics were about equally likely to result from a traffic stop; across all races, getting pulled over was the precursor to about 11 percent of fatal police shootings, the Post database shows.

However, blacks accounted for a disproportionate share of ­traffic-stop deaths, a finding that experts on policing said provides fresh evidence that blacks are pulled over more frequently than other drivers.

No deaths would be the ideal, of course, but how many traffic stops did police make in 2015? What percentage of them ended in the person stopped not surviving? 

Edited November 21, 2017 by Bernard Gui