I wouldn’t. He’s served his sentence for his crimes, and he deserves a fair shot at making the best of the rest of his life.
I feel this way about any convicted criminal. I think it is horrible that society insists that a criminal continues to pay for his or her crime even after his or her sentence is complete.
If it makes you feel any better, I’m fairly certain the Filipinos were conserving electricity to watch the fight so they could root for Mayweather to lose. 
What on earth are you on about? It doesn’t matter if I would ban him or not; if people want to see him box, then some venue somewhere will host him, because there doesn’t exist any authority that can prevent someone from boxing anywhere in the world.
I don’t think anyone is saying that legislation is needed to stop him working.
However, anyone who commits a crime also commits to being judged by those actions for the rest of their lives, The worse the crime, the less repentant, the less reparations made, the less I’m willing to cut them slack. Sure his official sentence may be complete but the judgement of the public, quite rightly, continues. He has the right to not be formally punished any further but he has no right to expect to continue on as if it never happened.
You’ve dodged the moral question here. Would you be happy to line his pockets? Are you happy that others continue to line his pockets? Are you comfortable with the degree of hero-worship he gets?
You are allowed to condemn him and still stick to your statement above. In fact I agree with that statement as a concrete fact but I also state that I wished it weren’t so.
I didn’t watch the fight and probably never will. I do kinda enjoy the concept of putting a domestic abuser and a bigot in the ring and letting them punch each other in the face. Mayweather and Pacquiao should both be punched in the face, I just don’t think they should get paid for it.
Free people are allowed to spend their money as they see fit.
And how is it different from spending money on for instance artist of a dubious personal character. Picasso, Charlie Chaplin, Roman Polanski, etc. Perhaps because boxing is seen as less fine than Guernica. Elon Musk, Steven Jobs, and pretty much all other top notch business men are also rather dubious. Still seen as a lot more as role models than a boxer.
How much do you think they would charge for the pay-per-view of Mayweather rapes Tyson?
And how big a purse would Money require?
Whereas McDonalds ran this ad in the Philippines.
On the one hand I have a hard time being surprised that a man who hits people for a living also hits people in his spare time, but on the other I recognize (or at least hope) that most boxers don’t do this.
I didn’t watch the fight and obviously don’t condone beating women, but he did his time so I can’t really make a compelling argument for banning him from boxing.
Again, a dodge. That wasn’t what I asked.
I’m curious as to how much hero worship you think Floyd Mayweather gets.
Mayweather is regarded as one of the most technically proficient boxers of all time, which, to my observation, indisputably true. He is a marvelous boxer, and saying so is hardly a controversial stance, just as it is simply stating facts to say that Ty Cobb was a wonderful baseball player and O.J. Simpson was a hell of a running back.
But is Mayweather really deified as a PERSON? The undercurrent of almost every story about him is “great boxer, horrible human being.” I’m sure there are Floyd Mayweather fans out there but there isn’t much hero worship than I can see. I know many people who were interested in the fight and precisely zero who look up to Floyd Mayweather except to admit he’s incredibly good at boxing.
How is it a dodge? If people want to pay to watch him fight, then a promoter will make it happen, somewhere in the world, under some athletic authority’s sanction. If they don’t, either because they think he’s a horrible person or because they’re just not interested, it won’t happen. There’s absolutely no mechanism that exists in all of Creation that can stop that from happening - it’s the free market in action, plain and simple.
Personally, I don’t really care about boxing, so Mayweather’s moral failings aren’t relevant to my not paying to see him fight. If other people want to, that’s their choice. I don’t understand why people still want to listen to or work with Chris Brown, and I may think that Ted Nugent or Charlie Daniels are hateful assholes, but I don’t think that trying to forcefully prohibit them from working for a living or prohibiting people who want to enjoy their work from doing so is a valid exercise of state power or a productive use of anyone’s time.
Is that answer to your liking?
It’s real simple, I, and I suspect a great many others forked over the money in the hopes of watching Mayweather lose.
Well yes and no.
When he checks into a hotel does the guy grudgingly do the paperwork and throw him a key to room? When he shows up at a restertaunt do they “find some place to seat him” or does he get the best seat in the house? And so on and so on.
I suspect he get red carpet treatment wherever he goes. And/or gets pissed if he doesn’t.
Because I asked the following simple questions.
“Would you be happy to line his pockets? Are you happy that others continue to line his pockets? Are you comfortable with the degree of hero-worship he gets?”
I’m interested in what your moral compass says but you give me a banal spiel on how the boxing world works. I kinda know that already.
I don’t want the state to stop it, I simply never said that nor even implied it.
No, but I suspect a dodge is all I’m going to get so I’ll call a halt to it there.
And I answered that whether it makes me happy or not is irrelevant, because my personal happiness is not the standard the world operates on. Worrying about things that are beyond your ability to control isn’t a productive use of one’s time.
Uhhh, so why are you posting here, giving your opinion, and telling other people their opinions are poorly formulated?
I merely commented that banning Mayweather from boxing wasn’t a practical option since history shows there’s nothing stopping promoters from putting on a top-tier boxing match in a Third World country where the government is hopelessly corrupt. Somehow that lead the other persons in this sub-discussion to begin probing my personal moral character.
No one suggested that the government should ban Mayweather from boxing. Why bother responding to a straw-man?