Save me your faux outrage. I have said numerous times that we should take a wait and see approach. But looking at the reality that there are numerous instances being reported cannot be ignored (all together they paint a disturbing picture that SHOULD be looked into). What the outcome is, neither I nor you knows. So stop pretending like you do. And please don’t put words in my mouth. It’s disingenuous.
You’re making judgements based on what you want me to have said not what I actually said.
Reading comprehension is very important. Sadly, many on this board do not have sufficient amounts of it.
Edit: yes I would hold myself to the standard I have stated here. The fact that you wouldn’t says a lot more about you than it does about me.
Additionally, the people that immediately convict him and those that immediately say it’s a smear job are the same. You’re just two sides of the same coin. As I’ve been saying all along, wait until it plays out. Making a snap judgment based on the little you actually know sitting on your couch is unfair, no matter which way you lean. But having concern about everything that has come out is acceptable.
If you're going to throw out the sophomoric catch phrase about reading comprehension, maybe you should take the time to actually read what I wrote. You either didn't, or you purposely chose to avoid the central question, which I'll pose again, and which I have no doubt you'll once again dodge since it clearly reveals the absurdity of your post that I replied to: how many NFL players can you list that have been booted from the league for unpaid debts?
Now I'll repeat the companion observation to the question, which you also didn't respond to: I'd wager a lot of money that you have close friends, probably even family members somewhere on your tree, that have unpaid debts. Unless you're willing to have all of those people lose their jobs, it's not reasonable to imply that AB should lose his for his unpaid debts. And you most certainly implied as much when you said that dismissing all of the incidents indicated a lack of a moral compass - the only implication that can be taken from this is that someone with a good moral compass would want AB cut or exempted because of said incidents - the majority of which are simply unpaid debts. You specifically stated, "all the incidents," as though the sum of them together warrant cutting him now - though, if by chance he didn't actually assault Taylor and it's just a money grab, you just ruined someone's life because of a few unpaid debts conflated with false allegations.
In an ideal world, would he be held accountable by the justice system for said debts? Absolutely. Does that have anything at all to do with whether he should be allowed to play football? It does not.
Even if you had been merely implying that he be booted because of the unsubstantiated allegations rather than the unpaid debts, which is
not what you did, it's the very definition of self-righteous to suggest that someone have his life ruined over
allegations before anything has been tried in court.
Your moral compass is really just a kangaroo court.