Web Letters: Vick and Clarett's 'Right of Return'

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who hurts an animal is the lowest form of life, and I have no sympathy for them

Pervis James Casey

Riverside, CA

I'm ambivalent about David Zirin's article. Those who serve their time in prison should be allowed an opportunity to present themselves in a positive light with job opportunities and a reformed lifestyle if appropriate. This is particularly important to the many who aren't either professional athletes or potential professional athletes like Clarett.

I'm extremely skeptical of both Vick or Clarett being "sorry" for what they've done, however. If both were released with the challenge of finding employment, supporting their family, moving on with their life in a positive manner without millions of dollars at stake with a professional atletic career, I'd find their cases more convincing. In addition, the pure idolatry American culture has for professional sports, the drive to sell sports by its leaders and the media, and its insidious affect on many younger athletes does not lead me to believe the drive to allow Clarett and Vick to play again is something done out of "caring" for reformed individuals.

I have no doubt Vick will be allowed to play again, because the NFL can count dollars with his name. What he did or whether he is truly remorseful is not something the NFL commissioner is even considering. What he is interested in is whether Vick can bring in more money to his team/the league.

I say this loving sports but no longer at the professional or college level. Show me a young boy or girl who plays a sports event out of the love for participating and, yes, winning and you can see good grounding for those same kids growing up with the right outlook on life.

Robert McGraw

Cleveland, OH