Do you agree with the NFL for its ban on Gary Glitter. His "Rock and Roll (Part 2)," is played to excess at many stadiums, but the NFL has asked teams to stop playing the song in the aftermath of Glitter's conviction for child sexual abuse.
2006-09-15 05:17:35 · 9 answers · asked by Bigboi47 3 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Don't see how it will change anything. Regardless of what the artist has done I think 'Rock and Roll Part 2' is an excellent Stadium Anthem.
Plus, how many song artists abuse drugs or engage in other activities that the public does not necessarily agree with. You don't see the NFL banning 'We Will Rock You' just because the men from 'Queen' are gay.
To the homosexual readers:
I am just using Queen as an example...I have no problem with you. If you want to be gay that is your choice.
2006-09-15 05:24:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Look at it this way...
Right now in the NFL there are at LEAST twenty players who have been arrested for such serious offenses such as drug and weapons charges. Ray Lewis played the part in a MURDER for Christ's sake.
Now all of the sudden the NFL gets all high and mighty about some song played in their stadiums?!?! PLEASE!!!
If the NFL is serious about this, then what they should do is rid it's league of all of the thugs. Ooooops, can't do that, each team would be down to about 10 or 15 players a side then!!
2006-09-15 12:29:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ray Lewis didnt murder anyone, he was there when it happened, but he didnt actually put a knife into anyone, his entourage did. The guys they killed were the instigators so it was self defense by his enoturage, get your facts straight girl beforee youy come on here talking about Ray Lewis and "Murder". Yes there is 20 players on each team with criminal pasts, but i bet none of them are sexually molesting and having sex with young little children......big difference between a DUI , or weed possession and Sexually molesting little innocent children
2006-09-15 12:47:18 · answer #3 · answered by mr_loony_toonz 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i think they should stop playing it because its overplayed and irritating. as far as banning it because he was a child molester...... well, i dont think that too many ppl even know who he is, so i dont think anyone would get the point. he's a one hit wonder from 20 years ago. if i saw him on the street right now i wouldnt know him from any other jackass.
if he was well known, then yeah, dont play it. and, if he gets royalties from it being played at the game, then certainly, stop playing it.
2006-09-15 12:27:26 · answer #4 · answered by hellion210 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i don't really care about the artists past as pertaining to the playing of a song...just that the song is played out and boring
2006-09-15 12:58:39 · answer #5 · answered by Voicekiller 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
GOD YES! that tired old thing should have been put away years ago, let's try to do a little better than that
2006-09-15 12:20:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think they should. If you go do background checks on all singers and their past we might not have a lot of music to listen to.
2006-09-15 12:23:00 · answer #7 · answered by acenumm1 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes because everytime they play it they have to pay him royalties. The guy is a scum bag
2006-09-15 12:27:02 · answer #8 · answered by kildor01 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no because it's a classic sports anthem
2006-09-15 15:47:04 · answer #9 · answered by carguy30021 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋