grrrr...

I'll admit it: I've developed a Pavlovian response to hearing or reading the name "Michael Vick". It brings out a side of me I don't really like - that evil little part of me that likes to dream up extremely inhumane punishments for him. As much as I'm horrified and sickened by what he did, I'd like to think my belief that no one should be treated brutally could stand up to this situation. But I'm sorely tested.

There are several issues involved for me. First, by default I root for Philadelphia sports teams. So the fact that he's going to play for the Eagles makes me extremely unhappy - like to the point of nausea. I've never been a big football fan anyway, so it's not that hard for me to walk away from them. Thank GOD he's not a baseball player, because I am a lifelong, die-hard Phillies fan and would've been subjected to a massive crisis of faith over that one.

Second, I would like to think of myself as a fair person. I believe strongly in justice. And while there's justice and then there's justice, he did go bankrupt and spend 18 months in prison (but I'll bet you nobody tried to make him their bitch - now THAT would be justice. See? There's that evil ugly side of me I don't like. Rape is never deserved, but then I kind of think in this situation, it might have made him realize just how heinous his actions were. Argh.)

It raises real questions for me about what justice is - the whole "eye for an eye" thing versus our more "civilized" modern justice system. I think the animal lovers like me really want to see him suffer physically and helplessly, like the treatment to which he subjected (or condoned the subjection of) those poor dogs. But on the other hand, I didn't think the terrorists in Guantanamo Bay should've been tortured, and that's not necessarily all that different from this; terrorists also subject the innocent to fear, pain and suffering without any choice on the victims' part.

I was discussing this with my brother last weekend, and his point was that Vick served his time and is fulfilling the rest of his court-mandated punishment, and it's not fair to keep punishing him for the rest of his life; plus, since the guy apparently has no other skills than playing football, he can't really earn a living unless he's allowed to play.

In theory, from a legal standpoint, I can understand that this is generally a reasonable position. But emotionally, I still want to have Vick covered in honey and set fire-ants on him.

Someone - I forget who - once said something like, 'We never know the strength of our principles until we have to apply them to the treatment of our enemies.' So, while I don't really joke about wanting Vick to be painfully punished for his wrongdoing, I'm forced to admit ...ugh, I can't believe I'm even saying this... please don't hate me... that he probably should be given the chance to a) earn a living and b) make up for the horrible, despicable, evil, evil, evil things he did.

I feel like vomiting and then scrubbing my mouth out with soap. But I feel like I have to stand by my belief in justice, no matter how much I detest the situation to which it applies.

I think it would be easier if 'earning a living' for him didn't involve a six-figure salary, but again, I keep coming back to the underlying principles involved. It's like that story about Winston Churchill, where he (jokingly, we assume) asked a woman if she'd sleep with him for five million pounds. "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... We would have to discuss terms, of course..." she replied. Then he asked her if she'd sleep with him for five pounds. "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!" she exclaimed. "Madam, we have already established that," he answered. "Now we are just haggling over the price." In Vick's case, his only real skill-set happens to involve stupidly high salaries and national celebrity. Dammit. Couldn't he be taught to flip burgers at Mickey-D's or some other minimum-wage occupation?

I just read an article in which Vick says he's grateful for a second chance and is going to use his community service to "help more animals than he's hurt". If he really means that, then he ought to be given the chance to do it. And if he doesn't do it, THEN can we poke him with sharp sticks and set parts of his body on fire temporarily? Because that would feel a lot more like justice to me.