This was originally posted on Len's Top 5 - May 3, 2010 (www.thatssports.com):

If you've been reading your newspapers and listening to various sports talk shows on radio and television, you know one of today's topic du jours is the immigration legislation recently passed in Arizona. What does this have to do with sports? I'm glad you asked.

Several sports writers and commentators have weighed in on Arizona's new law, among them Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News. Just this morning, Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic of ESPN radio's "Mike & Mike in the morning" posed the question: should professional athletes and/or professional sports leagues and/or player unions make political statements regarding American society?

My email response to Greenberg and Golic is exactly what I say to you now --
DUH?! OF COURSE! Jackie Robinson and Arthur Ashe would be turning in their graves if members of the sports community did otherwise. Being a multimillionaire athlete does not exempt you from participating in discourse on the human condition and American society, even though there are plenty of apolitical -- no, make that APATHETIC -- professional athletes who do perfect imitations of an ostrich when real issues in our global society require input of thought, whether we agree or disagree with the issue, problem, or proposed solution.

So, to first address the Greenberg and Golic question, I have no qualms about Major League Baseball, the commissioner's office, the players union, players, managers, coaches, and even fans weighing in on the issue of "immigration reform" in Arizona. Do I have a problem with Major League baseball threatening to suspend the Cactus League or remove the 2011 All-Star game from Arizona if the immigration bill remains as is? NO, I do not, and in fact, I applaud all members of professional baseball for making this political stand, if they choose to do it, regardless of my opinion of the law. If the National Football League could do the same approximately a decade ago with the Super Bowl when Arizona voters refused to make Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday a state holiday, why should we be aghast when Major League Baseball considers the same?

Do I agree with both the NFL pulling the Super Bowl out of Arizona or Major League Baseball pulling an All-Star game or suspending Cactus League operations? That's not for me to decide. As I said in the previous paragraph, I applaud the political stand, for it is an expression of political and moral principle. And THAT'S what's the important issue relative to the Greenberg and Golic question. It takes guts to make a stand in this hyper-billion dollar world of sports and television revenue. For better or worse, the NFL and perhaps MLB are putting principle over money.

Do I think MLB will suffer for their political stand? I certainly hope not. As silly as it would be for fans to stop watching the NFL because they pulled a Super Bowl out of Arizona, I would consider it equally silly for baseball fans to turn their backs on MLB because of "Wetback Backlash", if you'll pardon the term. But also understand this... just as many would've kept watching NFL games if that Super Bowl remained in Arizona without proper recognition of Martin Luther King, Jr., the same can likely be said for fans of baseball. I personally wouldn't have stopped watching NFL games on the basis of one Super Bowl site, and I won't stop watching baseball games if MLB decides to back down and not follow through on actions against Arizona. Sports is big business, and I understand that not everyone has a stomach to pull the trigger when a big decision needs to be made in the face of billions. No one ever said capitalism was synonymous with courage.

Keep in mind that I, as a kid, remember and admired the American Football League players who voted to boycott the 1965 All-Star game in New Orleans, when Jim Crow laws ruled Dixie. It took courage for those players, Black and white, Christian and Jew, to take a united stand against racial inequality, no matter the ramifications and consequences afterwards. After all, stars like Kansas City's Abner Haynes and Buffalo's Cookie Gilchrist were soon labeled trouble-makers and dealt elsewhere before eventually being pushed out of the AFL and professional football before the dawn of a merger. But they took their stand, showed their courage, whether everyone agreed with them or not. This is what so many of our sports heroes of yesterday and yesteryear were as men, humans, Americans, and global citizens. You just don't see this much anymore, just like we don't think Tommy Smith and John Carlos anymore when we think of gloved hands. We shake our heads and think O.J. and Michael Jackson.

So, to fans who think their sports heroes should be apolitical, I respond with this... who are you to demand your sports heroes remove themselves from everything else of American society?

Lastly, allow me to say a few thoughts about the Arizona immigration law. As someone who considers myself a hybrid of intellectual skepticism and relativism (I can't be a full relativist, since I don't always walk a mile in others' shoes. Then again, I don't walk a mile so well in my own shoes! Sorry, just a little disability humor), I try to see most issues from both sides of the coin. I do appreciate the pros and cons of this Arizona law. Our federal government has continued to drag its feet on immigration reform that makes sense for all citizens and immigrants, legal or not. I understand Arizona felt compelled to do "something" to address civic, fiscal, and law enforcement issues exacerbated by the influx of illegal immigrants to their state. Even California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger lamented on Jay Leno's show last week that he's constantly lobbied for federal immigration reform, only to be told "now's not a good time. We're in an election year". Well, guess what? Every other year is an election year in Washington, so when is it a good time to work on difficult legislation?!

That being said, what Arizona has put into law is seriously flawed, foolish, myopic, and another example of right-wing politicians trying to pacify another mob of angry white folks. Disagree with me? how about going on YouTube and watching that little episode between British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the "Bigoted woman" he had to discuss social services for Eastern European immigrants with. Was the woman bigoted? Perhaps she was, and maybe she was just a well-meaning nitwit who fails to understand what an ecumenical society means. But she personified the feelings of a LOT of the angry white mobs, tea party members, and every other similar group... I WANT TO KEEP WHAT'S MINE, AND I'M TIRED OF SHARING WITH ALL OF THOSE OTHERS!

I don't know if this is bigotry on the same level as the Jim Crow days, or the Nuremberg laws, but I do know something is not quite right with people who subscribe to Daniel Day-Lewis' character's philosophy in "There will be blood" -- I WANT TO WIN SO BAD THAT I NEED TO MAKE EVERYONE ELSE LOSE. This is NOT what America should be, and in fact, views like this bring out the worst in our citizens. We've forgotten that we ARE our brothers' and sisters' keepers, and the goal of a strong society is not to make sure you get all you can get before anyone else can get anything. We're not supposed to be a piggish society, trampling over as many as possible in the name of our own needs. Trust me, this is not part of Maslow's hierarchy.

Lastly, for those who disagree and are offended by Arizona's immigration law, please don't fly off the other end of the spectrum and equate it with Nazism or ethnic cleansing. Take a look at the faces from Darfur and ask yourself to make a serious comparison before you spout off. Take a good look at Holocaust survivors with numbers tattooed on their forearms and ask yourself to think carefully before you spout off. And finally, ask yourself why you're so upset about racial profiling of Latinos. Did you feel the same way about African-Americans for the past century? Did you feel the same moral outrage when we started taking anti-terrorist approaches with Muslims after 9-11?

I'm not here to say your outrage is wrong, but I do feel an obligation to ask you keep things in proper perspective when you start taking your outrage to hyperbole. In fact, I DO want you to be outraged, but INTELLIGENTLY outraged.