"Unanswerable" Questions

Attywood has a post today about redemption, in which he refers to a discussion comparing Ted Kennedy’s Chappaquiddick to Michael Vick’s dog fighting ring, asking if Kennedy could recover from his error had it occurred in 2009 instead of forty years ago and by implication pondering Vick’s future. The comparison is odious in the extreme.

I cannot answer as to Vick’s future, of course, but the two people and the two “crimes” are far different. One was a decision, a very bad decision, made in a moment; indicative, perhaps, of a flawed character, but nonetheless a momentary decision made without time to think, without time to ponder the implications of the decision. Vick’s actions were made over months and even years; rationalized, thought out, made coldly in the light of day. Vick saw the results of those decisions and did not alter course, but rather continued until caught by the law and only then “repented.”

A decision made in the heat of a panicked moment qualifies as a “mistake.” A course of action taken for many months while seeing the horrors caused by that course of action is no mistake, it is evil. One apologizes for a mistake; one cannot apologize for evil.

Ted Kennedy spent a lifetime in atonement for his error; went far beyond the requirements of that task. Michael Vick spends a mere few months in jail and expects to be forgiven for his evil; expects to be welcomed back in the public arena as “having paid for his error.” It was no mere error, and he has not paid for it.

These questions are not unanswerable; they answer themselves.