Please sign the petition below to remove the statue of Jefferson Davis currently in Kentucky’s Capitol Rotunda, and replace it with a tribute to Muhammad Ali, “the Louisville Lip” and “the Greatest of All Time.”
I just heard from the Ali family: It is the Champ’s belief that Islam prohibits three-dimensional representations of living Muslims. Accordingly, I have adjusted the petition to call for a two-dimensional representation of Ali (a portrait, picture or mural) in lieu of a statue.
UPDATE (Tuesday, December 2, 2014)
In this interview with WHAS-TV’s Joe Arnold, Governor Steve Beshear endorses the idea of honoring Muhammad Ali in the State Capitol (although he disagrees with removing Davis). Arnold explores the idea further on his weekly show, “The Powers that Be.”
Click here to check out WDRB-TV’s Lawrence Smith’s coverage of the story.
And here’s my op-ed in Ali’s hometown paper, the Louisville Courier-Journal.
UPDATE (Saturday, June 4, 2016)
In the wake of the 2015 Charlestown tragedy, in which a Confederate flag-waving murderer united the nation against racism, all of the most powerful Kentucky policymakers — U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell, Governor Matt Bevin, Senate President Robert Stivers and House Speaker Greg Stumbo — called for the removal of the Davis statue from the Rotunda. Today, as we commemorate last night’s passing of Muhammad Ali, there is no better moment to replace the symbol of Kentucky’s worst era with a tribute to The Greatest of All Time.
UPDATE (Wednesday, June 8, 2016):
Great piece by Lawrence Smith of WDRB-TV in Louisville on the petition drive to replace Jefferson Davis’ statue in the Capitol Rotunda with a tribute to Muhammad Ali.
UPDATE (Thursday, June 9, 2016):
Excellent piece on the petition drive by Jack Brammer that was featured on the front page of the Lexington Herald-Leader.
Highlight of the article:
Miller said he has received a few “angry comments” on his call to honor Ali.
“One of them encouraged me to kill myself,” he said. “You can quote me that I have decided not to take their advice.”
UPDATE (Friday, June 10, 2016)
The petition drives continues to show the Big Mo(hammed): check out these stories from WKYU-FM public radio in Bowling Green and WKYT-TV, Channel 27 in Lexington:
UPDATE (Saturday, June 11, 2016):
Still not convinced? Check out this excerpt from today’s New York Times:
There is no doubt Republican presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has a great following. He has thousands of motivated volunteers, a bunch of money, and a message that is resonating with many including the 18-25 demographic. He never panders to any audience or anyone. He has enormous crowds chanting “President Paul! President Paul! President Paul!” He has been a success in the early primary and caucus states and has a strong organization going forward. He has a seat at the reserved table of Republican presidential politics.
So what is the problem? When asked by ABC reporter Terry Moran if he sees himself in the Oval Office, Paul answered “Not Really.” Do you think Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, or Newt Gingrich think this? Ron Paul and his campaign team believe they can go all the way to the Republican convention and garner enough delegates to either win or play a major role. At this point, Paul has not really attacked frontrunner Mitt Romney choosing rather to go after other rivals in hopes to make it a mano e mano race with Mitt. Most observers and pundits view a Ron Paul nomination as an impossibility at this point, but see the Paul candidacy and movement as something that could alter the Republican convention and platform moving forward.
So is Ron Paul a prophet or can he really become President of the United States? In my opinion, if he “really” wanted to take up residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in January of 2013, he would run as a third-party candidate. His foreign policy message gives the hawkish Republican establishment hives. His social values and civil rights message excites some Democrats. His libertarian philosophy makes the young voters of this country do cartwheels.
Read the rest of… Jason Grill: If Ron Paul Wants to Be President, He Should Run with Third Party
In the long, storied history of the RP Great Debates (OK, it’s only been three weeks…), we’ve never had so many participants and so many opinions. There is something about Tim Tebow that certainly strikes a chord in so many Americans.
But to conclude where I began, the civility and positivity that Tim Tebow has added to the public dialogue is remarkable, particularly considering the hostility of some of his supporters and his detractors. And what’s even more remarkable is that the kid is only 24 years old! To be the idol of of millions and the devil to others, and to still retain such a modicum of humility is truly admirable.
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate Tim Tebow: The RP’s Closing Argument
Looks like this issue has almost been completely hashed out. Interesting responses and creativity throughout this entire debate on the RP.
Now, since I am charged with the late two-minute drill, let’s talk football:
Is it Tebow Time?
The Facts…
The Great: Career College Passing: 661 Cmp, 995 Att, 9285 Yds, 88 TD. Career College Rushing: 692 Att, 2947 Yds, 4.3 Avg, 57 TD, Heisman Award Winner (2007), BCS National Championship Winner (2007, 2009), 1st round NFL draft pick.
The Good: 8-6 as an NFL starting QB and 1-1 in the NFL playoffs.
The Bad: 18th QB scoring in Fantasy Football in 2011 (This is important to millions including me), ranked 32nd QB in passing yards (1,729), ranked 28th QB in overall rating (72.9), and ranked 34th QB in completion % (46.5) in 2011.
Tim Tebow is one of the best college QB’s of all time, but he is a below average NFL QB. Tebow will only continue to have a winning record in the NFL if his team’s running game and defense are great. In 2011, Denver finished 4th in the NFL in rushing and 6th in total defense.
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate Tim Tebow: Jason Grill Rebuts
The author is the Professor Emeritus and former Dean of the E. Stanley Jones School of World Mission and Evangelism at Asbury Theological Seminary
Thanks for the word on Tim Tebow (nice pose by the way–keep it up).
I think one of the things that people misunderstand about the John 3:16 scripture is the meaning of “eternal life.”
The tendency is to see it as something that starts when we die. Rather, Jesus clarifies it in John 17:3 when praying for us he says, “And this is eternal life, that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.”
Tim has already discovered that life, as have others of us. It’s now. God’s desire for us all is not just to get us into heaven, but to get heaven into us.
While Jonathan is right that we can’t say with certainty when a fetus is a life, science is finding out that a fetus is viable at a younger and younger date with each new medical advance.
I had a very good progressive female friend who was strongly pro-choice and would debate the subject with me vigorously. After she was married and decided to have children she had a sonogram.
She had a photo of a hardly recognizable fetus and she pointed it’s heart out to me. She stopped drinking, took extra vitamins and lived the healthiest lifestyle I had ever seen her live.
I didn’t bring it up, but she told me the whole pregnancy experience had made her think about abortion in a whole new way. She still believed a women had a right to control her own body, but the thought that that fetus might be a living person who could survive caused her to re-evaluate her position.
He underscores why Tebow’s brand of religiosity has lasting political relevance. The Focus on the Family ad is so effective because it attacks the pro-choice movement in one of its strongest places–abortions related to medical risks for the mother or fetus. Typically, the pro-life cause has dodged this line of attack in favor of a focus on abortions as a fallback when birth control fails, or abortions deep in the third trimester.
That the ad works so well, that it did not even strike many of its viewers as intensely political or even anti-choice, is an adman’s dream. And that’s no slight to Tebow or his mother; its actually a nod to the power of their testimony. But as Zack Adams appreciates, the ad is an argument for restricting or even criminalizing a different choice than Mrs. Tebow made. It’s not a plea for compromise; its a plea for codifying the value of unborn life even in the most morally complex, scientifically ambiguous context. With respect to Jonathan, calling it something less than that probably understates what the Tebows and Focus on the Family meant to say.
As a liberal with no religion, how I feel about Tebow’s existence in popular culture mirrors how I feel about, let’s say, Justin Beiber. What they do is somewhat annoying to me, but what is far more bothersome is the level of coverage they are given and how much I have to hear about their antics. Of course, I fully respect Tim’s rights to practice his religious beliefs and honestly, he seems like one of the nicest guys in the world. However, like Robert, I find his personal brand of Christianity to be a turn-off.
I believe Tebow could use his immense popularity to do something more worthwhile than appear in a 30 second Super Bowl spot going all anti-abortion for Focus on the Family, an organization that I plenty of problems with already. Sure, it was a cute commercial with Tebow and his mom, but the bottom line is that they were advocating a position that strips women of their reproductive rights. Mr. Davis put this far better than I could, I’ll just say I’m with him.
It seems like the overwhelming consensus of the previous posts is that Tim Tebow is a decent, compassionate person who has the right to share what appear to be genuinely held religious beliefs.
In his thoughtful lead-off piece, Jonathan Miller ventured significantly further, suggesting that Tebow’s example might offer a bridge between evangelical Christianity and other faiths.
Notwithstanding the constructive and enlightening commentary that has characterized this debate, I wonder about the identity of the central question we are discussing. From a public policy and sociological perspective, which is more important – Tim Tebow’s personal character or his right to celebrate his faith when and where he chooses? I remain concerned that in focusing so much upon the former, we risk unintentionally imposing “reasonableness” criteria and/or a “sincerity test” upon matters of conscience.
To be clear, I am not implying that anyone has proposed banning or even curtailing individual religious expression at sporting events (though some of the measures that schools have taken to enforce the “separation of church and state” seem to come perilously close).
Nevertheless, the biting and often mocking criticism Tebow has endured in the media seems like it could produce a chilling effect – certainly not upon Tebow himself, but instead upon those who come after him. As other athletes contemplate whether (and how) to express their faith, do we really want them to worry about whether their personal lives can withstand a media probe for hypocrisy?
This debate has sparked so many wonderfully different tangents. (That, or I am just high in the moment of Tom Brady moving up my list of Pretty Boys I Begrudgingly Admire. And no, it wasn’t for leading my beloved Pats to the Super Bowl, but rather for admitting before 40 million Americans that “I sucked today, but our defense saved us.”)
I want to unfurl one of the threads here; and of course, in the spirit of my political recovery mission to grab onto any third rail issue I can, I want to address an subject alluded to by both Michael Steele and Rod Jetton:
Abortion.
Despite my own über-feminism — the product of the extraordinary influences of brilliant women from my mom to my sis to Mrs. RP to the RPettes — I’ve always been quite conflicted on the issue. Yes, ultimately, I believe that the woman should have the right to make the awful decision, but I’ve never viewed it as an expression of empowerment, or even “reproductive freedom.” I’ve simply concluded that if abortion were illegal, women would still have them, and too many girls and poor women would die or suffer serious injury at the hands of illegal abortionists.
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate Tim Tebow: The RP Defends
I’ve always been fascinated by the symmetry between football and faith.
Every great football saga ever told (or at least made for TV) has this underlying storyline about faith: faith in one’s self, faith in God, faith in your team.
So I find it particularly curious and somewhat appealing that Tim Tebow has been able to bring this connection into focus better than any other football player in recent memory.
But of course, folks act like this is something new. Players have been “giving thanks to God” and “taking a knee” in prayer long before Tebow stepped on the field or made a commercial.
So what’s different?
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate Tim Tebow: Michael Steele Rebuts
Blog this!
