So UCLA rejects 3 million dollar donation from Sterling

[JarHeadJim]

The NBA should take his 2.5 million fine money and give it UCLA for the research.

 

[rrlbees]

The NBA should take his 2.5 million fine money and give it UCLA for the research.

That really wouldn't be a bad idea. They have said however they were going to give it to orgs that fight racism I think.

 

[Jasoncuse]

If Sterling really wants the money to be donated to the cause rather than showing off, he'll donate it "anonymously". And UCLA should 'encourage' that.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

The money was to go to research for kidney disease.

Explain to me how this helps anyone?

People could actually die because of this.

Sterling has you right where he wants you.

 

[Pat Kelly]

this is a tough moral dilemmaRE YOU KIDDING ME

Yeah I mean I've met plenty of old white guys who were to some degrees racist. It was just so much different back then, but I'd still take their money if offered...

 

[Pat Kelly]

And now Sterling essentially recovers the money he lost in the $2.5 million dollar fine

 

[longtimefan]

The money was to go to research for kidney disease.

Explain to me how this helps anyone?

People could actually die because of this.

This all begs a much bigger question:

If you are a charity, do you take a donation from anyone, regardless of their backgrounds or the source of their riches? For example, if the money was "earned" by dealing in blood diamonds, or trafficking human beings?

There are drug lords in Colombia, Mexico and other countries who have become local heroes by providing social and medical services to their destitute neighbors. Monies accumulated by providing death to thousands around the world.

Now, I'm not saying Sterling is the equivalent to any of these criminals. But still, where do you draw the line?

In my opinion, the NBA and its ownership didn't have much use for Sterling (after all, they probably have known who he is for years, if not decades). This incident just gave them an opportunity to get rid of him.

 

[Pat Kelly]

If Sterling really wants the money to be donated to the cause rather than showing off, he'll donate it "anonymously". And UCLA should 'encourage' that.

I think that angle is making Sterling look like the bad guy in this situation (kidney situation obviously). He tried to give money, they rejected it, move on.

 

[Brooky03]

Being racist is not the worst thing you can be. Just saying.

The guy is clearly a scumbag but there are professional athletes who have done worse things. Sterling's worst offense is not letting minorities live in the housing he owned (pretty bad), not paying his black GM a fair wage (bad but not entirely on Sterling), and telling his girlfriend that he doesn't want her to be with black people in public and some other not nice things (barely worth comment).

The housing discrimination part is not good but it's certainly not all that rare and not specific to Sterling - not that it makes it okay. A good portion of the Baylor issue is on Baylor for sticking around with a racist and on his agent for not getting him paid appropriately. If the dude treats you like crap, why not quit? And I would bet Sterling's comments aren't the first or most racist things Magic or other NBA players have heard.

But yes, let's turn down his $3M for kidney disease research because he's a bad human being. I mean this is totally different than charities taking money from athletes who have murdered people, beat their wives, committed robberies, etc.. We all know how looked down upon that is and how quick professional sports association are to ban guys like that from ever playing again.

 

[retro44]

will the other NBA owners make up the difference and then double down on that donation?

 

[OrangeDW]

If they were saved by money from Sterling they have to live their life feeling indebted to a scum bag like him. Kind of like making a deal with the devil.

To add: Would you rather die or have Sterling come to your rescue?[/quote]

Huh?

People are losing their minds.

 

[We Are Syracuse]

anybody who thinks that this isnt completely messed up, is just flat out wrong. To deny a significant donation on a matter where plenty of people die yearly from, just because the person who is donating is a labeled "racist" might be one of the more selfish things I have seen. Shame on UCLA... Lives are at stake