Sometimes the planet does work that way. If the question was "can I hit another adult?", the answer wouldn't depend. I don't understand why any parent (or the legal system) thinks that same answer shouldn't apply to a child. I get that you don't agree.

Sorry, way too wishy-washy for me.

You didn't answer my question though. Where's the line? You're telling me that some acts of violence toward a child are okay. I get that one is more severe than the other. But say I'm a judge, or a social worker. How do I know whether a given act of parental violence is wrong, or a legitimate parenting technique?

Can you explain this comment? How do you distinguish spanking from beating? I don't understand how you draw that line, and there clearly isn't any consensus on where the line should be drawn, if at all (I know you aren't claiming this, but plenty of people are claiming Peterson was just spanking his kid).

Did you know that 66% of ESPN.com readers agree with the Vikings decision? What the FUCK??!!

This was the correct response. I'm glad that someone else gets how bizarre it is that something that would be considered aggravated assault if done to an adult is somehow better when done to a child (because tradition). That something that he's missing... so are a lot of people.

Yep, if you spank your daughter in a way that draws blood, I hope her teachers/neighbors notice. The foster care system in this country sucks, but I like her chances better there than with you.

If those photos fit your definition of spanking (a 4-year-old!), I really hope you don't have kids.

Haha, of course it was Duke.

Yeah, I was impressed with Carter. And maybe that's why the other guys don't seem to be capable of nuance here. You should be able to say, "I think discipline, and corporal punishment when needed, is important for a child's development. This was way over that line. This was abuse." But guys like Ditka probably feel…

Agreed. It drives me crazy how sports issues are always instantly reframed into political issues with the usual liberal/conservative split. One of the glimmers of silver lining in the Rice thing is that, to a pretty large extent, that didn't happen. The anger with Rice and Goodell came from across the spectrum. But…

This was followed immediately by Ditka and another guy (Keyshawn?) telling their heart-warming "my dad beat the shit out of me and if he hadn't, I'd be nothing today" stories.

I know it was fucked up that he played last week, and I know this is way more about impression management than doing the right thing, but still... This means I can cheer for the Panthers today, right?

So it was pretty disingenuous of me to point that out without mentioning that I have AP in one of my leagues, and there's no way I'm dropping him. But, you know, do as I say not as I do, NFL...

So going by stars here, fewer people got his joke than didn't. That's too bad.

Just throwing it out there, the "I can't just drop him, I've got money on this" argument is essentially the same one that we've been so critical of from the NFL/Ravens/Panthers/49ers the last couple of weeks.

That setup was way too clean to be coincidental. We now know Ray's burner.

Whether or not he lied obviously matters. Here's the thing that frustrates me. Goodell has really cleverly made this all about whether he saw the video, and the angry mob (of which I'm a part, btw) has totally bought in. So for a lot of people, whether he saw the video is now the only question that matters. Guess…

Oh my god for the last fucking time, why does it matter if Goodell saw the video?

Who?