Andrewmc wrote:
"I don't understand why any athlete would want to support a doper's clothing line, it is insanity to me. I got shit on for speaking up for what I think is right"
This is what she said whilst wearing hincapie clothing and being coached by a child rapist........
Rapists suck
can i just say that in all your posts about virtue signaling, which started well enough, you're starting to sound conspicuously like what you're arguing against. i'm not particularly a fan of hincapie; nor of sutton; nor of the prince of bahrain; nor of michi weiss; nor of a lot of people who have behaved badly, very badly, or questionably in their pasts. but my post in fun an hour ago didn't seem to have it's intended effect.
the one idea to which i most strongly cling, that i must believe in, that would sink me if i didn't believe in it, is redemption. to be clear, redemption should only be offered to those who seek it, and if you don't think you're guilty you don't seek it. so, yes, one problem we have with all the bad actors discussed here is that their various bad acts have only imperfectly been cleansed by the acknowledgement of the actions and the request for redemption.
nevertheless, some folks have seen their ways clear to offer redemption. (yes, i think those folks might want to speak to why they've seen fit to offer it; but i don't begrudge anyone extending redemption.) please give these folks the freedom to offer redemption.
now, yes, i get it, you're objecting to the hypocrisy of pointing out the sin in others while harboring a sin yourself. but when one person objects to the virtue signaling of another, and then a third party virtue signals against the virtual signaler, where is that going to stop? what we end up with is the inability to allow anyone to extend redemption, which resolves into a giant circle virtue jerk.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman