1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Tiger Woods Pile-on Thread: Next Up, Jim Brown

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Flash, Jan 24, 2008.

  1. T2

    T2 Member

    When I was growing up, the church had a different perspective on this sort of thing.

    Those who really believed the church's teachings were obligated (not merely entitled) to share the Gospel with anyone who would listen. It was called witnessing or testifying, not throat-ramming. Any listeners who disagreed were not stupid; they just had not yet had the opportunity to hear the whole story.

    A movie star or famous athlete, with the good fortune of being able to reach large numbers of unbelievers, would have an even greater responsibility to spread his heartfelt beliefs.
     
  2. markvid

    markvid Guest

    Penn went to see Chavez and told everyone how great he was.

    http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/lynn-davidson/2007/11/16/sean-penn-hugo-chavez-much-more-positive-venezuela-negative
     
  3. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    Since Tiger isn't an African-American I don't see what the problem is...
     
  4. novelist_wannabe

    novelist_wannabe Well-Known Member

    Earl Woods likely would have said something. Tida? Perhaps not. She seems pretty demure, and perhaps Tiger simply followed his mother's example on this point. Plus, you know, the world is his oyster. He can choose what form of social activism to pursue. He chose to build a school or whatever. In the long run, which thing is going to have the greater impact -- building the school or saying that "lynching" is an inappropriate word?

    In this country, we have freedom of speech. We also have freedom not to speak, and the freedom to choose when to speak. Tiger has his own reasons for doing what he does. I can think of worse ones than protecting one's livelihood. Other people who don't like his reasons are jealous of his success. Sorry, but nobody else, including Jim Brown, has the right to tell Tiger Woods how to live his life.
     
  5. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Tiger's statement about Kelly to me says this issue is done. If Brown doesn't like it, he can take it up directly with Tiger.
     
  6. forever_town

    forever_town Well-Known Member

    I'm only a couple of years older than you are and I can say conclusively that they're definitely NOT over.
     
  7. D-3 Fan

    D-3 Fan Well-Known Member

    This issue is DEFINITELY over, for sure.

    I used to feel that guys like Tiger should have an opinion. He does have an opinion: he'll tell us in his own way. I have started to come around on this and I feel that if an athlete doesn't want to speak out, that is his/her individual choice. This generation of athletes are not going to speak for any one group, race, or community, unless if they want to.

    This issue should be dead, if not for fucking tools like Dan Patrick and others keep talking about it like it's a major issue.

    I'm glad she's back and hopefully not lose her job. She apologized immediately after she said, apologized directly to Tiger, and served her suspension. And that's not enough for many. She doesn't owe you an apology, nor me. STFU and let it go.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page