This quote was taken from this morning's Detroit Free Press online, at www.freep.com. You may read the whole thing here: http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2014/09/16/detroit-lions-reggie-bush-adrian-peterson/15720293/ Anyway, the seemingly editorial remark appeared at the conclusion of an article where Detroit Lions running back Reggie Bush was supposedly defending Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson for having disciplined his 4 year old son with a switch, a twig from a tree. Peterson is facing charges of child abuse due to the incident. Bush was defending spanking while saying he was not in favor of beating a child. But then, what reasonable mind favors beatings of any sort?
Yet this isn't to defend anything which Peterson or Bush has said. We are okay with spanking and against beatings ourselves. But we wonder, what might be the meaning of adding such a commentary to an article which was decidedly unrelated to American football except in a vague, tangental sense?
It strikes us as a suggestion, however subtle, that Mr. Bush's lack of stellar performance on the gridiron thus far this season somehow reflects poorly on his abilities as a father. Or are we reading too much into it?
We're just asking a question. But it certainly sounds to us as though the writer is attempting to denigrate Bush's opinion in a red herring sort of way. What thinkest thou?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment