Donald Sterling At It Again

[Jack-Hammer]

You can hardly turn on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC or visit any news related website without the controversy surrounding Donald Sterling and his racist remarks being the top story. On Anderson Cooper 360 airing tonight, Sterling gives his first interview since the whole mess started and if the little bit of information that's leaked out since yesterday is any indication, he may have wound up making things worse by slamming an NBA legend.

In the interview, Sterling repeatedly denies that he's racist and that he's spoken to Magic Johnson a few times and alleges that Johnson has told him to "Wait, be patient, I'll help you, we'll work it out." Sterling has waited quite a while before giving his side of the story, which has many people all the more interested in what he's had to say. However, at some point in the interview, Sterling goes after Magic Johnson from everything in regards to HIV/AIDS and not doing anything to help the black community. Sterling has made allegations that Johnson has sort of helped to sabotage his reputation due to him being interested in buying the Los Angeles Clippers and spends a good deal of his interview ranting on Johnson's character with remarks like "What kind of a guy goes to every city, has sex with every girl, then he catches HIV? Is that someone we want to respect and tell our kids about? I think he should be ashamed of himself. I think he should go into the background. But what does he do for the black people? He doesn't do anything."

At the end of the day, I ultimately think that Sterling is ultimately just upset that a part of who he really is has been revealed to the world and can't do a damn thing about it. He's in a situation where he's powerless to make the outrage of everyone from fans, players, coaches, other owners and society in general go away and it's something he's not at all used to. His comments towards Johnson are not only inaccurate in most respects, but they strike me as some sort of desperate attempt to somehow shift focus from him to the 5 time NBA Champion.

As far as Johnson's character in regards to HIV, Johnson isn't the first famous person to revel in the trappings of fame and fortune. He's no saint but, then again, who is? He made errors in judgment in his personal life and the consequences have been pretty damn severe. Besides, who exactly is Donald Sterling to throw stones at somebody? After all, he's the guy running around behind the back of his wife of almost 60 years with an alleged fame hungry, attention seeking gold digger that's almost 50 years younger than he is. He also had a relationship that began sometime in the 90s and ended in 2003 with a woman named Alexandra Castro.

Pertaining to Johnson's activism regarding HIV/AIDS, he's the CEO of the Magic Johnson Foundation. The primary goal of the organization is to increase awareness and education of HIV/AIDS as a preventive measure against the disease. The Magic Johnson Foundation has also raised in excess of $20 million for charity and has awarded some $4 million in college scholarships. As it pertains to Sterling's claimes that Johnson "doesn't do anything" for those less fortunate, Johnson has also launched numerous businesses to stimulate the economies in impoverished areas as a whole, not just in the black community. His other company, Magic Johnson Enterprises, has invested in fitness & community centers, movie theaters, resteraunts, and various other businesses in a variety of communities.

I wonder if Sterling's problem is that he's simply an extremely wealthy 80 year old bastard that's so arrogant and set in his ways that he's simply not willing to pony up and admit his own faults.

 

[Slyfox696]

Actually, Donald Sterling is right. Magic Johnson should not be throwing morality stones from inside his glass house. Johnson blatantly cheated on his wife many times with women he didn't even really know and put his families life in danger by doing so. Magic Johnson has no right to question anyone's morals and values.

And spare me the Magic Johnson Foundation stuff. How come so many rich people only care about causes once it has an effect on their lives? Where was the Magic Johnson Foundation before? And Magic is going to criticize someone else's values?

Donald Sterling may be a bigot, but he's right about Magic Johnson.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Actually, Donald Sterling is right. Magic Johnson should not be throwing morality stones from inside his glass house. Johnson blatantly cheated on his wife many times with women he didn't even really know and put his families life in danger by doing so. Magic Johnson has no right to question anyone's morals and values.

Johnson contracted HIV some 20 plus years ago. Does that make him unable to reasonably cast judgment for the rest of his life? Johnson was singled out by Sterling on the tape as someone he doesn't want his mistress to be pictured or associated with (along with every other black person). How would you react if you were in Johnson's shoes?

And spare me the Magic Johnson Foundation stuff. How come so many rich people only care about causes once it has an effect on their lives? Where was the Magic Johnson Foundation before? And Magic is going to criticize someone else's values?

Forgive me as a white person for not donating more money and time to starting a Sickle Cell Anemia Foundation. Do you really judge people for what they haven't done? Is that the mark of a human being? Are you a Celtics fan?

Donald Sterling may be a bigot, but he's right about Magic Johnson.

So bigots can throw stones but philanderers from 20 years ago can't? Sterling doesn't "value" black people (and clearly doesn't value his own wife of 60 years), Johnson didn't "value" his Cookie. I don't find the two comparable in timing or severity. They may both be values, but not all values are equal.

But what is Sterling so right about?

 

[Slyfox696]

Johnson contracted HIV some 20 plus years ago. Does that make him unable to reasonably cast judgment for the rest of his life?

When someone cheats on the person they claim to be committed to, it's so very hard to ever take their opinion on morality seriously. I don't care how long ago it was, cheating is the ultimate violation of trust and morality.

Johnson was singled out by Sterling on the tape as someone he doesn't want his mistress to be pictured or associated with (along with every other black person). How would you react if you were in Johnson's shoes?

If a bigot told me he didn't want me around, how would I react? Umm...just like I do every other day in my life? I can't say I'd really care what a racist thought about me.

Forgive me as a white person for not donating more money and time to starting a Sickle Cell Anemia Foundation. Do you really judge people for what they haven't done?

No, I just don't give credit to people for self-serving ventures and call them great human beings because of it.

So bigots can throw stones but philanderers from 20 years ago can't?

I have no interest in listening to Sterling preach about morality either. But when he says Johnson isn't a role model, he's right.

 

[The Butcher]

I've said my piece about Sterling's comments. From about day two or three of this controversy I was sick of it and ready for him to be out of the news. The fact that he's made more is unsurprising. Rather, I just want to throw my two cents in on a few points.

Johnson contracted HIV some 20 plus years ago. Does that make him unable to reasonably cast judgment for the rest of his life? Johnson was singled out by Sterling on the tape as someone he doesn't want his mistress to be pictured or associated with (along with every other black person). How would you react if you were in Johnson's shoes?

I agree with the sentiment, however I don't think we should be judgmental in the first place. That's just a personal belief, and I know as well as anyone that it's an improbable goal. Magic Johnson or any of us should at least take glance in the mirror before we condemn others. If I were in Magic's shoes I'd be perturbed, but I've faced much worse discrimination and suffered much more damaging arrows than being told I wasn't wanted around by an old bigot. Magic probably has, too. Gotta shake stuff like that off as best as you can and not let it distract you or interfere with what you've got going on.

Forgive me as a white person for not donating more money and time to starting a Sickle Cell Anemia Foundation. Do you really judge people for what they haven't done? Is that the mark of a human being? Are you a Celtics fan?

No, I just don't give credit to people for self-serving ventures and call them great human beings because of it.

Pretty much agree with both of you here. If I contribute to something that helps me and can help others as well, then that's no doubt a great thing to do. On the flip-side, the fact that my motivations are self-serving means that I'm clearly not being entirely altruistic and shouldn't be looking for praise.

So bigots can throw stones but philanderers from 20 years ago can't?

If someone throws a stone at you and you toss one back, you're both wrong. Not saying one shouldn't defend one's self, but trading barbs just ends up making both parties look bad, win, lose, or draw. With a guy like Sterling, it'd be much easier to just sit back, say nothing, and watch him dig himself into a deeper hole anyway. No need to dirty your hands or give him a chance to drag your name through the mud or your skeletons out of the closet.

But what is Sterling so right about?

I have no interest in listening to Sterling preach about morality either. But when he says Johnson isn't a role model, he's right.

Sterling is right to a degree. Magic Johnson is a human being, and like every human he has attributes that are admirable and attributes that are deplorable. If one were to follow his example as a basketball player or an entrepreneur, it'd be a smart move. Just don't follow his example as a husband. Same with Sterling. To go into law and do what it takes to become a success there and then get into real estate and build a fortune isn't easy, and that's not a bad example to follow. Just don't follow his lead and discriminate when you're selling/renting your properties.

Anyway, I'm past ready for the owners to convene and have their vote. Whatever lawsuits or arbitration that follows will hopefully get less coverage in the media. Sterling violated league policy, has been given a suitable punishment, and if his peers and/or employees don't want him around anymore, that's their prerogative. Magic Johnson isn't the one on trial here. Neither man is a saint, but few if any in their lines of work are.

 

[Gibby]

When someone cheats on the person they claim to be committed to, it's so very hard to ever take their opinion on morality seriously. I don't care how long ago it was, cheating is the ultimate violation of trust and morality.

Did Magic Johnson ever claim to not be pumping loads of women? Also somewhat interested to see who you look to in the wider world (ie not people you know) for moral fortitude.

 

[Slyfox696]

Also somewhat interested to see who you look to in the wider world (ie not people you know) for moral fortitude.

Why do I need to look to people I don't know for moral fortitude? My morals and values were instilled in me by the people I know the most and care the most about. Why would I ever need more?

 

[Gibby]

Well you skilfully ducked the more important question I asked, leading me to conclude that either Johnson never claimed to take a moral position on fidelity or that you haven't worked out a concept called relativism.

 

[#tamale]

Well you skilfully ducked the more important question I asked, leading me to conclude that either Johnson never claimed to take a moral position on fidelity or that you haven't worked out a concept called relativism.

Does that matter? So because Magic Johnson wasn't public about him having unprotected sex with various women while being married it gives him the right to criticize other peoples morals? Don't fire shots about morality when people can look at you and say that you aren't a beacon of morality yourself.

 

[Gibby]

Does that matter? So because Magic Johnson wasn't public about him having unprotected sex with various women while being married it gives him the right to criticize other peoples morals? Don't fire shots about morality when people can look at you and say that you aren't a beacon of morality yourself.

Morals aren't these essential, rigid things wherein you transgress once and are forever disbarred from the Kingdom of Having Morals. They're human, relative, constructed, contextual, fluid and everybody is continually stepping on and offending someone else's morals in some kind of world-size inept dance. If we barred everyone who offended a person's morals once then nobody would ever have the right to criticise anyone.

Now whilst I'd say that it's certainly not wise to go around banging anyone without proper protection (unless both parties are STI free, consenting adults), I don't think that anyone who has participated in such consensual acts should be barred from commenting on a person insulting a large swathe of the population for something they were born as. And that's whether Johnson contracted HIV 20 years ago or just last week, or whether they raised any money or substantially raised people's awareness of the unwise nature of such behaviour subsequently.

 

[JJ15776]

Actually, Donald Sterling is right. Magic Johnson should not be throwing morality stones from inside his glass house.

"Magic Johnson can't complain about being subjected to racism because he had unprotected sex with a woman he wasn't in a committed relationship with."

Read that sentence, either aloud or in your head, and tell me it's not among the stupidest things you've ever read or heard in your life. You can't do it, not with a straight face. That is an asinine statement on every level.

How come so many rich people only care about causes once it has an effect on their lives? Where was the Magic Johnson Foundation before?

Umm, non-rich people do the same thing. Is this seriously how you're going about attempting to criticize him? Most people care about causes that have affected them in some way. Are you seriously suggesting that diminishes their interest in that cause? Again, re-read that in your head and tell me it's not one of the most ludicrous things ever written. It can't be done genuinely. You make it sound like creating the Foundation was his only recourse when he contracted HIV, like he was forced to do it. It makes no sense.

And Magic is going to criticize someone else's values?

Magic Johnson called somebody a racist after they, having proven themselves to be a racist for 30 years, personality subjected him individually to a racist attack. How is that "criticizing (his) values" in any way? Sterling is the one who made generalized statements about Magic - funny how you chose not to address that here - not the other way around. Magic made very direct remarks about specific things that Sterling said. When you have to put words in somebody's mouth in order to attack them, like you've done here, you know you're doing something wrong.

When someone cheats on the person they claim to be committed to, it's so very hard to ever take their opinion on morality seriously. I don't care how long ago it was, cheating is the ultimate violation of trust and morality.

Again with the putting words in his mouth. When, exactly, did he claim to be faithful to his girlfriend at the time, who is now his wife? Many professional athletes sleep around. That's not a secret. It's not a secret from the public and it's not a secret for professional athletes' wives or girlfriends. Many of those wives and girlfriends openly acknowledge that, some of them have talked about how they simply try to limit the number of "groupies" their partner sleeps with.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Cookie, his girlfriend then and his wifei now(that's right, she didn't leave him), was unaware of what he was doing? Of course you don't. You're, again, putting your own biased spin on the situation. So you can spare me the "ultimate violation of trust and morality" nonsense, because it doesn't hold any water here.

You can also spare me the "putting his family in danger" garbage, too. Having unprotected sex in 1991 was not what having unprotected sex in 2014 is. HIV/AIDS and STDs were not what they are now.

No, I just don't give credit to people for self-serving ventures and call them great human beings because of it.

How, exactly, is creating a Foundation that helps other people self-serving? Do you think the foundation actually helps him somehow? You do realize he could use his money to privately research HIV/AIDS and not help other people if he wanted to, right? Or are you suggesting it helps his image to have the Foundation, and that's why he's doing it? Because it would be fascinating if, in addition to putting words in his mouth and making biased assumptions that fit your narrative, you were claiming to be able to read his mind and know why he was doing things.

By the way, his Foundation is far from the only positive contribution he makes to society. It's interesting that, with no actual knowledge of what he has and hasn't done, you would just assume he's done nothing...on addition to the aforementioned putting words in his mouth and possible attempted mind reading, this is now twice you've made baseless, biased assunptions to fit your narrative.

But when he says Johnson isn't a role model, he's right.

If you firmly believe there are no role models anywhere in the word, I have no problem with this. But if you believe you're going to find a substantially better role model than Magic Johnson, you're kidding yourself.

Why do I need to look to people I don't know for moral fortitude? My morals and values were instilled in me by the people I know the most and care the most about. Why would I ever need more?

Because you need somebody to do a better job of instilling morals and values. For all I know, those people you're referencing would be embarrassed by what you've written here and ashamed of any potential role they played in your views, but you need somebody who will instill non-racist views in you.

Yes, that's right, your cover is blown. I hate to break it to you, but didn't hide your racism well enough. It started with the fact that, in a conversation about Sterling and Magic, you chose to attack Magic. Nevermind the fact that your attack was completely without merit, and nevermind the fact that you had to fabricate things every step of the way to support your baseless attack, the fact that you would overlook what Sterling has said and done to use your post to attack Magic instead says it all.

Does that matter? So because Magic Johnson wasn't public about him having unprotected sex with various women while being married it gives him the right to criticize other peoples morals? Don't fire shots about morality when people can look at you and say that you aren't a beacon of morality yourself.

Sorry, I don't quite follow the logic here. Because Magic had unprotected sex with a woman that wasn't his girlfriend(she is his wife now but she was his girlfriend at the time), he's not allowed to complain about being subjected to racism? How does that work?

And, again, he didn't say anything about morality or values. He fired shots about Sterling being a racist. Has Magic ever said or done anything racist? We know that he strongly supports gay marriage, so he's certainly less bigoted than many people in this country. Sterling certainly cheats on his wife on a regular basis, and Magic didn't bring that up. So, again, for his actions to be remotely relevant here, there has to be a connection between unprotected sex and racism, which obviously there's not, or you're just suggesting that anybody who has ever done anything wrong should forever keep their mouth shut about anything that anybody else ever does wrong. If you're not allowed to fire shots at somebody for doing something wrong if you've ever done anything wrong, then nobody should ever call anybody out for anything. Is that the kind of world you want to live in? Imagine everybody looking the other way anytime somebody says or does something wrong, just because they too have made mistakes. That would be an ugly, ugly world.

 

[Slyfox696]

Well you skilfully ducked the more important question I asked, leading me to conclude that either Johnson never claimed to take a moral position on fidelity or that you haven't worked out a concept called relativism.

Actually, it was more like your question didn't make any sense at all.

Magic Johnson cheated on Cookie. This is indisputable. Cheating on someone you claim to be committed to is wrong. Furthermore, having unprotected sex with that many women, knowing full well about sexually transmitted diseases, is also wrong.

Perhaps you haven't worked out what it means to do the right thing, or maybe you're just a jackass who doesn't realize you asked a stupid question I ignored because it didn't make sense. I don't know.

Does that matter? So because Magic Johnson wasn't public about him having unprotected sex with various women while being married it gives him the right to criticize other peoples morals? Don't fire shots about morality when people can look at you and say that you aren't a beacon of morality yourself.

Shh...you're talking sense, he probably won't understand.

"Magic Johnson can't complain about being subjected to racism because he had unprotected sex with a woman he wasn't in a committed relationship with."

Read that sentence, either aloud or in your head, and tell me it's not among the stupidest things you've ever read or heard in your life. You can't do it, not with a straight face. That is an asinine statement on every level.

Magic Johnson wasn't subjected to racism. Your entire premise is built on a strawman.

The only stupid thing here is you providing that flimsy strawman and thinking yourself superior because you knocked it down.

Umm, non-rich people do the same thing.

Yes, but we don't glorify them, now do we?

It's like I'm having to speak with children today.

Is this seriously how you're going about attempting to criticize him?

As I've already said once before...

No, I just don't give credit to people for self-serving ventures and call them great human beings because of it.

The stupidity is running thick this morning...

Again, re-read that in your head and tell me it's not one of the most ludicrous things ever written.

The only ludicrous things I've read is people who don't take the time to comprehend what is a rather easy thing to understand. I'll say it again, maybe you can read it slowly this time to better understand.

Magic Johnson has made plenty of morality errors. He has no credibility with me on criticizing another's morality. Someone claimed Magic's done a bunch of good (which then gives him the right to criticize, theoretically), but the "good" he is doing is a completely self-serving interest. Starting a foundation to help yourself and people just like you is not altruistic, it's self-serving.

Magic Johnson called somebody a racist after they, having proven themselves to be a racist for 30 years, personality subjected him individually to a racist attack.

No, a racist told his girlfriend he didn't want her hanging out with someone in a way society does not accept.

Sterling is a racist, there is no disputing this. But he wasn't wrong either (about how society views certain things), and if you think he was, you're incredibly naive.

Just out of curiosity, have you even listened to the tape or read the transcript?

How is that "criticizing (his) values" in any way? Sterling is the one who made generalized statements about Magic - funny how you chose not to address that here

Because Sterling didn't. In fact, the only thing Sterling said about Magic on the recording was that he was someone who should be admired!

Again, have you even listened to the tape or read the transcript? And if so, how could you say something which is so obviously false?

When you have to put words in somebody's mouth in order to attack them, like you've done here, you know you're doing something wrong.

I didn't put words into Magic's mouth, but it seems as if you're putting words into Sterling's mouth, likely because you haven't even heard the tape.

Again with the putting words in his mouth. When, exactly, did he claim to be faithful to his girlfriend at the time, who is now his wife? Many professional athletes sleep around. That's not a secret. It's not a secret from the public and it's not a secret for professional athletes' wives or girlfriends. Many of those wives and girlfriends openly acknowledge that, some of them have talked about how they simply try to limit the number of "groupies" their partner sleeps with.

...you seem to be a big fan of re-reading things to evaluate the stupidity. I suggest you do that here.

You can also spare me the "putting his family in danger" garbage, too. Having unprotected sex in 1991 was not what having unprotected sex in 2014 is. HIV/AIDS and STDs were not what they are now.

Yes, they were. This is just false.

How, exactly, is creating a Foundation that helps other people self-serving?

How is creating a foundation named after himself to help a disease he has self-serving?

Geez, if you can't figure that out, then I don't know what to tell you.

If you firmly believe there are no role models anywhere in the word, I have no problem with this. But if you believe you're going to find a substantially better role model than Magic Johnson, you're kidding yourself.

There are many high quality role models in this world...Magic Johnson is not one of them.

I'm sensing you're extra defensive about Magic Johnson for some reason. The fact you seem to think there's no better role model than someone who has slept with copious amounts of women without a condom, who exposed his wife to be and child to a deadly disease because of his recklessness and inability to control his physical self, is frightening to me.

Because you need somebody to do a better job of instilling morals and values.

You're defending a cheater and someone who exposed others to a deadly disease because of his carelessness and you think I need better morals and values?

My morals and values are just fine. Yours could use a tune-up though.

For all I know, those people you're referencing would be embarrassed by what you've written here and ashamed of any potential role they played in your views, but you need somebody who will instill non-racist views in you.

Wow, you must be really stupid. You think I'm racist? What about what I've said makes me a racist? I think YOU are the one who needs morals and values. You go around calling me a racist (which anyone who is even semi-regular on this forum knows is false) simply based on the fact I would dare criticize a man who has black skin? Maybe YOU are the racist...after all, you assume my skin color is white and because I'm criticizing someone who is black, you believe certain things about me which aren't true.

Yes, the only person in this thread who has shown any care for skin color is you. You racist.

For what it's worth, I don't think you're racist, just stupid. I was making a point, though you may not be intelligent enough to handle it.

Yes, that's right, your cover is blown. I hate to break it to you, but didn't hide your racism well enough.

I'm not racist. How stupid of you to think I'm racist because Sterling said something which is accurate.

It started with the fact that, in a conversation about Sterling and Magic, you chose to attack Magic.

I didn't attack Magic, I said Sterling was right about Magic Johnson. I also called Sterling a bigot in the very same post, so am I racist against both white and black people now too? Or are you just a moron who doesn't understand what racism is?

I'm going with moron who doesn't understand the concept of racism.

Nevermind the fact that your attack was completely without merit

Oh, Magic hasn't admitted to having copious amounts of unprotected sex which put his family's life in danger?

and nevermind the fact that you had to fabricate things every step of the way to support your baseless attack

Again, are you saying Magic hasn't admitted to having copious amounts of unprotected sex which put his family (and others) in danger?

the fact that you would overlook what Sterling has said and done to use your post to attack Magic instead says it all.

I haven't overlooked anything Sterling said. Sterling being a racist is not new news. Of course, unlike you, I've actually HEARD and READ what Sterling said in these recordings.

Sorry, I don't quite follow the logic here.

I'm not surprised, I suspect you don't follow quite often.

And, again, he didn't say anything about morality or values. He fired shots about Sterling being a racist.

...you're right, racism isn't a moral issue at all.

God, you're fucking stupid. I can't handle anymore of this conversation. If you think you actually made a relevant point, feel free to re-post it again, but at least listen to the tape first before you do. And, for fuck's sake, sound more intelligent next time.

 

[Gibby]

Magic Johnson cheated on Cookie. This is indisputable. Cheating on someone you claim to be committed to is wrong. Furthermore, having unprotected sex with that many women, knowing full well about sexually transmitted diseases, is also wrong.

Perhaps you haven't worked out what it means to do the right thing, or maybe you're just a jackass who doesn't realize you asked a stupid question I ignored because it didn't make sense. I don't know.

So I was right, you don't understand moral relativism and I claim my $5.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

John Cena was once a heel who did horrible things. Now he is a good guy who cuts promos about values and chooses to point out his enemies lack of or negative values. I wish Donald Sterling would put Cena in his place.

Sly - if you are Magic Johnson and you want to start a foundation which brand do you think would get more attention, more donations, and therefore help more people?:

1. The Magic Johnson Foundation
2. The Generic AIDS Foundation

 

[The Butcher]

I think we're falling for Sterling's "Magic" trick. This isn't about Magic Johnson. Sure, Magic shouldn't throw stones when he lives in a glass house. He still had a right to be offended, and I know I would be too. Like I said, though, if he was smart he'd would have had kept his words short, let it be, and just allowed Sterling to talk himself out of the league. We can go ahead and discount Magic Johnson's opinion just because of his past, fine. There's still the small issue of all the other people who were offended by Sterling. The Clippers/league have lost sponsors, and the player's association is determined to see the name "Sterling" purged from the league. Sterling is by himself against a fast break and he's flopping to get a charge. Magic isn't perfect, but Magic isn't the one who's under the microscope here.

 

[Slyfox696]

So I was right, you don't understand moral relativism and I claim my $5.

You've yet to be right, you just understand it's easier for you to go off-topic than to address what's being said. It's old trick on forums. Let me know when you're ready to come back and discuss this.

Sly - if you are Magic Johnson and you want to start a foundation which brand do you think would get more attention, more donations, and therefore help more people?:

1. The Magic Johnson Foundation
2. The Generic AIDS Foundation

Well, judging from this list of the 50 largest US charities in America, probably not the one with someone's name...

http://www.forbes.com/top-charities/#page:5_sort:0_direction:asc_search:_filter:All categories

But I understand what you're trying to say...makes a person wonder how the American Red Cross, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and the American Cancer Society even stay afloat. We should rename it the Magic Johnson Cancer Society, that way they'll be able to attract donations.

I think we're falling for Sterling's "Magic" trick. This isn't about Magic Johnson.

You're right, it's not about Magic Johnson. Donald Sterling explicitly said Magic is someone worthy of being admired.

Sterling was very clear on what the problem was...Sterling may be a racist, but it wasn't his racism which was the reason Sterling was upset. This is what so many people don't seem to be understanding.


As I've said before, anyone who is a semi-regular around these parts knows I'm a firm believer (and staunch Internet forum champion) of equality. However, there's a big difference between idealism and realism. People slamming Sterling are doing so from a position of idealism, but Sterling very clearly was speaking in the recordings from a position of realism. I have absolutely no problem with the NBA banning Sterling from league related activities (though I do have a problem with people being deprived of property, but that was discussed in another thread). But just because Sterling is a racist, it doesn't change the fact he's right about Magic Johnson and Johnson's own moral failings.

I don't really think either man is worthy of judging another's morals. I can judge each man for myself. But just because Sterling said something which offended people, it doesn't change the fact he's right about Magic Johnson not being the ideal role model.

 

[Gibby]

Without resorting to anecdotal evidence, 'what I believe', received wisdom or hokey theories, tell me why infidelity is immoral with the conclusivity that 2+2=4 has.

I can save time for you and tell you that you won't be able to. But feel free to try.

Sterling's retort to Johnson is a total fudge. Sure he has the RIGHT to say things, but it's not the issue here.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Well, judging from this list of the 50 largest US charities in America, probably not the one with someone's name...

http://www.forbes.com/top-charities/#page:5_sort:0_direction:asc_search:_filter:All categories

But I understand what you're trying to say...makes a person wonder how the American Red Cross, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and the American Cancer Society even stay afloat. We should rename it the Magic Johnson Cancer Society, that way they'll be able to attract donations.

Oh stop, this is AIDS we are talking about. Do you really think marketing AIDS charity and AIDS awareness in the mid 90's would succeed as well with out a celebrity name attached to it? Just because other ailments and causes have succeeded over the course of many many doesn't mean an AIDS foundation in the 90's should have been marketed the same way.

Are you as critical of Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, or the Catholic Church for their foundations?

 

[Slyfox696]

tell me why infidelity is immoral with the conclusivity that 2+2=4 has.

Infidelity is a violation of trust, a violation of one's promise to another. Violating that trust can and has caused emotional trauma onto innocent third parties, sometimes to extreme degrees. In this case, violation of that trust also introduced a deadly disease to two innocent people.

Infidelity is an immoral act. Trying to argue otherwise is silly.

Oh stop, this is AIDS we are talking about. Do you really think marketing AIDS charity and AIDS awareness in the mid 90's would succeed as well with out a celebrity name attached to it?

Yes.

Just because other ailments and causes have succeeded over the course of many many doesn't mean an AIDS foundation in the 90's should have been marketed the same way.

Of the list of the top 50 charities, I believe only one of them had someone's name attached (and that may have even been a memorial foundation, I don't remember).

Are you as critical of Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, or the Catholic Church for their foundations?

It depends, are you trying to tell me having a foundation erases their past wrongs and makes them great and benevolent?

I'm not critical of Magic Johnson's foundation. I'm glad any time deadly diseases are being addressed. But starting a self-serving interest doesn't make a person altruistic. That's the point.

 

[Gibby]

Infidelity is a violation of trust, a violation of one's promise to another. Violating that trust can and has caused emotional trauma onto innocent third parties, sometimes to extreme degrees. In this case, violation of that trust also introduced a deadly disease to two innocent people.

Infidelity is an immoral act. Trying to argue otherwise is silly.

You're just parroting Judeo-Christian orthodoxy and making assumptions, abstractions and projections. You haven't proven anything, not in the empirical sense. You might think it immoral but it is not necessarily so. I might even agree. But you have failed to advance your argument other than erudite foot stamping and insistence. Poor show.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Infidelity is a violation of trust, a violation of one's promise to another. Violating that trust can and has caused emotional trauma onto innocent third parties, sometimes to extreme degrees. In this case, violation of that trust also introduced a deadly disease to two innocent people.

Infidelity is an immoral act. Trying to argue otherwise is silly.

True, but how does that make a person unable or unworthy of judging another? And while committing any act can not be erased from history, is redemption a futile endeavor? If so, I'd argue that professional wrestling is wasting everyone's time with all their stories and John Cena should have his mic turned off for what he did to Billy Kidman?

Of the list of the top 50 charities, I believe only one of them had someone's name attached (and that may have even been a memorial foundation, I don't remember).

I think Susan G Komen is named after the organizer's sister who passed away. Regardless, you seem to think naming Magic's foundation after himself was self serving. Isn't it possible that it was branding?

It depends, are you trying to tell me having a foundation erases their past wrongs and makes them great and benevolent?

Nothing can erase the past but it's foolish to judge someone solely based on just one piece of a person's past. Especially in matters of relationships and especially in one's youth (which includes one's 20s). This isnt a criminal matter. I think Magic Johnson has done great things despite his failings and that should be admired. AIDS and namely AIDS protection was still not well understood in 1991, Magic changed that. Ryan White opened eyes that AIDS wasn't just a gay sex or drug thing. Magic took that to another level by teaching about the difference of HIV and AIDS, how to protect ones self, and that HIV didn't have to be looked at as a death sentence. He created a tremendous amount of dialog that he could have hidden from like Rock Hudson but he didn't and I think that is brave.

Personally I wasn't sexually active when he revealed his health but seeing him and learning about his experience may have provided me with the education necessary to protect myself and make better decisions. It also helped being terrible with women.

I'm not critical of Magic Johnson's foundation. I'm glad any time deadly diseases are being addressed. But starting a self-serving interest doesn't make a person altruistic. That's the point.

And I'd say looking at things either altruistic or self serving is idealistic and not realistic.

 

[DarksideEric]

Regardless, you seem to think naming Magic's foundation after himself was self serving. Isn't it possible that it was branding?

Well, to point out:

He didn't start the foundation until after he was diagnosed with having it, correct?

Meaning, he seemingly had no plans or interest in funding a foundation to bring awareness to the disease prior to being told he was a victim of it. Thus, at least partially, one can easily say that Magic hopes that perhaps with his help, AIDS victims can be cured (which includes himself).

If Freddie Mercury had started the Freddie Mercury Foundation after he had found out he had AIDS, it would have been at least partially self serving as well.

And "branding" is always partially self serving due to you're trying to use your own name to gain recognition.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Well, to point out:

He didn't start the foundation until after he was diagnosed with having it, correct?

Meaning, he seemingly had no plans or interest in funding a foundation to bring awareness to the disease prior to being told he was a victim of it. Thus, at least partially, one can easily say that Magic hopes that perhaps with his help, AIDS victims can be cured (which includes himself).

Um, OK.

If Freddie Mercury had started the Freddie Mercury Foundation after he had found out he had AIDS, it would have been at least partially self serving as well.

Um, OK.

And "branding" is always partially self serving due to you're trying to use your own name to gain recognition.

Not sure how old you were in 1991 but I am old enough to remember that a black heterosexual non-hemopheliac wealthy superstar professional athlete admitting to having HIV let alone attaching his name to it was not exactly self serving.

It is not exactly popular today as well.

 

[DarksideEric]

Um, OK.

Um, OK.

Not sure how old you were in 1991 but I am old enough to remember that a black heterosexual non-hemopheliac wealthy superstar professional athlete admitting to having HIV let alone attaching his name to it was not exactly self serving.

It is not exactly popular today as well.

How is it not at least partially self serving to set up a foundation to find a cure for a disease you have when you set up said foundation?

You have the disease, do you not? You're setting up a foundation to try and find a cure for said disease, a cure you would benefit from.

How is that not at least 1% self serving? If a cure is found, you benefit from it because your disease is now cured.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

How is it not at least partially self serving to set up a foundation to find a cure for a disease you have when you set up said foundation?

You have the disease, do you not? You're setting up a foundation to try and find a cure for said disease, a cure you would benefit from.

How is that not at least 1% self serving? If a cure is found, you benefit from it because your disease is now cured.

I don't know where I said he wasn't somewhat self serving. Self serving is just not one of the first adjectives I would use to describe Johnson's starting and branding of his foundation. I will also say that I don't find any fault in being self serving. If you get mugged and someone tries to kill you on the street am I supposed to describe you as being "self serving" for defending yourself? I mean you didn't start fighting muggers until you were confronted by one even though you knew muggers existed before. Isn't that petty?

Right or not, isn't Sterling being petty? And deflective?