GTWT

So, if I understand correctly, you were so anxious to pin the label 'infanticide' on a nasty progressive, that you were willing to take the term completely out of context. The article was about an idea - the Green New Deal - that can & is supported by a wide spectrum of intelligent people of different political affiliations and ideologies. You should real the draft and make an intelligent decision on what you agree with & what you don't. To simply say you reject the entire idea makes you an ideologue, and I think you're better than that

So, infanticide really wasn't in the Green New Deal?

FFR, I did a quick e-search of the document & failed to find the word 'infanticide' what are you talking about?

Nonsense. I said I supported nearly all of the environmental positions of the Green New Deal. There are other parts I strongly disagree with.

Where did you ever reach the conclusion that I advocate abortion?

Climate change is global Rick. What difference does it make which side of the border those children are living on?

What makes you think previous episodes of climatic change are never considered or discussed? Every geology text and earth history text discusses these in detail. The difference between these earlier episodes and today's is that today the cause is anthropogenic. Which mean we could do something about it if we only had the will.

Ortasio-Cortes is, in my humble opinion, an idiot but don'r pretend she's a spokesman for climate science. The solutions for climate science are complex & will be expensive. I suspect we'll choose to do nothing & that will be catastrophic.

No Rick, I didn't miss the memo. We need to have fewer children - not zero children.

I can't imagine what the two posters giving the article down votes found objectionable.

No need to move the thread... Football played a role.

Most hunters abide by a 'hunting ethic', one aspect of which is to not cause unnecessary pain & suffering. Well, we do have some pretty graphic video posted by Mr. Mohammad showing us pretty clearly what happened.

You keep making this to be about it involving a raccoon. It doesn't matter if it was a raccoon a badger, or someone's Chihuahua. It's still wrong to participate in in or be amused by cruel behavior. As said before, university & civil authorities will investigate the incident and Muhammad's role in it. It will be up to those authorities to decide the proper consequences. Your attitude toward inhumane behavior bothers me nearly as much as what happened. I spent 12 years working as a biologist for TPWD & four more years working for a Federal agency. I worked with a lot of hunters & fishermen and they were, nearly to a man (and woman) appalled by unnecessary suffering. Animals die. That's part of nature & it's part of fishing and hunting but to take pleasure in causing pain & suffering is not something that should be tolerated - even on a sports message board.

I know you've had trouble understanding this, but the fact that it was a raccoon is irrelevant. What does matter is that this was cruel and sadistic behavior. Being disturbed by such behavior is not "dumb".

No matter what you think about wildlife, including raccoons, no animal deserves to be treated the way this animal was treated.

Michael Vick suffered serious consequences for his cruelty to animals. Muhammad's behavior should have consequences as well. Whether he should be gone depends on what happened on that day and the role Muhammad played. I hope local law enforcement will determine what was done & by whom. They will determine whether criminal charges should be brought. UNT also has a role to play & we'll see how SL, WB, & the President handle that.

No, I just get you. He was in attendance at an event featuring animal cruelty. He filmed it & posted the video. He posted it under his name which is associated with UNT athletics & the University of North Texas. This is wrong on so many levels.

We know he found the video amusing enough to post it under his name - a name associated with UNT athletics & the University of North Texas. It's disturbing that you find it possible to defend the young man. Of course, it's just a raccoon.

That's the thing about team sports - it just takes one bad actor to taint the entire program. we'll see how Littrell, Baker, & Smatresk deal with the situation. They can go a long ways towards mitigating the damage this young man did to the program & university.

It appears that Muhammad posted the video & participated in the torture. He apparently found it amusing.

Why do you think sadistic behavior is okay if it's directed towards a raccoon? Would it still be okay with you if it was a dog being torn to bits? Or a child?

Disgusting.

Vito's comment wasn't "lightly regarded", rather it was "lightly recruited".

Totally agree. However, corroboration of what is usually a private event is usually difficult. Do we still assume innocence until guilt is proven?