Quote:
Originally Posted by jkray25
Since when do we slam a guy CONTINUOUSLY for generating conversation on an open forum based on his opinion.
Just let it be; he has his thoughts you have yours, surely 13 pages has shown that. No need for continued comments like this.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
|
I'm sure Josh and Dustin, who seemingly defended the viewpoint, are great guys, but you cannot walk into a forum full of passionate baseball fans with such an ill-conceived argument and not expect to be the nail. The opposing viewpoint is very clear: Jackie wasn't Babe F'n Ruth. Yet, after plenty of evidence that backed up his induction not only by the monumental importance of his accomplishments, but also by his statistical achievements they continually circled the path of the debate and his merits to the color of his skin. The statement in the opening post: "His induction seems like a charity case to me" is horrific and an insult to not only the thousands of minority ballplayers who followed him at all levels of professional baseball, but also to the thousands before him who were never graced the privilege of staking a major league diamond because of something as pathetically trivial as the color of their skin. I would pray that the family of the man being debated here would never suffer the indignity of hearing him labeled a "charity case" being as he earned more on one April day in 1947 than any of us will earn in a lifetime. No, today is not the day to "debate" him. The point of this day is to educate people about the importance of his life and others through
celebrating him. A debate of his merits is embarrassing to witness. If it takes hammering someone to make this evident, I'm for it. I won't hold this debate against anyone foolish enough to consider Jackie Robinson unworthy of any praise he has ever been bestowed, but I will also applaud anyone who will fight against him being marginalized in any way.
Steven Finley