TheoSqua wrote:Even the dog fighting doesn't really bother me that much. If one of our mainstream forms of entertainment is watching two trained guys beat the living crap out of each other, then I don't see how people can be offended when people do the same thing with dogs..
here's the problem with that.. the dogs have no choice but to fight..
it'd be one thing if the dogs all got together and put on dog fights themselves..
but people are doing this to them.. that's what's wrong with dog fighting..
the dogs are "forced" to try to kill eachother.. that doesn't bother you?
you mention you don't like how the dogs are treated.. but the actual dog fighting
doesn't bother you.. that doesn't make any sense..
I think it's a thin line at times with how humans treat animals. I don't condone dog fighting, but I don't have a huge problem with [expletive] fighting (especially when it's tied so tightly into certain cultures). I eat veal and fois gras, but I don't think I'd ever eat dog or horse. I think rodeos are for wanna-be cowboys, but I don't have much of a problem with them hauling horses around for hours on end in these cramped little trailers.
Obviously, the level of treatment the dogs were subject to was appalling on many levels, but I wouldn't go as far as saying that it's appalling because they were forced to do it - we force animals to do a lot of things I'm sure they have little to no interest in (like being our pets). I think it's ok to force animals to do things they don't want, as long as it falls under a (sometimes gray) level of humane and non-cruel treatment.
I don't know why, but I'm not outraged by this like a lot of people are. It's not that I don't think it's wrong, just that it doesn't surprise me that people do this.
I also think it's a little hypocritical for people to be so outraged about cruel treatment of dogs because they are animals we have deemed companions, whereas animals we have deemed food are treated cruelly all the time. If you eat pork, odds are good that that the pig you are eating lived its entire life in a hog factory, with another hog in front of it, and another so close behind it that the animals all have to be given antibiotics to fight the infections they get from chewing each other's tails off. That is their entire existence until they got killed for food. Where's the outrage about this?
i'm disappointed in you.
I'm not trying to defend Vick. If what he and his buddies are accused of is true, the man is a monster and should rot in jail. I can see that. For whatever reasons I'm not reacting emotionally to this story like a lot of people are.
I think that's because there is so much animal cruelty out there that I'm jaded. Also because I've assumed these dogs were pit bulls, which I have no feelings for. It's not like he took my dogs and made them fight. These are dogs that were bred specifically for fighting, and as fighting dogs go, they tend to be pit bulls. I know that's not the dogs' fault, they're just not a breed I associate with pet status because of their use as fighting dogs.
maddash wrote:
Still, I think those limits are important. Even if a pig feels as much pain as a dog, there's something to be said about humans picking out at least a few animal to care for and hold above others - it keeps us all a little more humane (IMO) yet still allows us to eat meat.
I eat meat, so I'm a hypocrite for saying this, but we understand very little about how animals work, what they may or may not feel, what life is like from their perspective. It's wrong for us to play God and decide which ones get to live, and which ones have to die for our pleasure.
I'm not saying it's morally or ethically right, but we are at the top of the food chain and can make calls like that.
Magneto2.0 wrote:If you eat any food that contains animals , you hunt, or anything that involves the killing of animals and you're trying to condemn Michael Vick, you're a hypocrite.
[expletive] quote of the day.
Not to mention completely obsurd.
it borders on being dumber than what deion sanders said..
Animal cruelty is animal cruelty. Either you're for it or against it. Trying to seperate from killing animals is ridiculous. If I kill a deer how is that any worse then killing a dog? WTF? That makes no sense.
You're trying to make yourself or the people who hunt, above what Vick did, when it's not. You're killing/harming a defenseless animals for your own entertainment. It's pathetic.
Magneto2.0 wrote:If you eat any food that contains animals , you hunt, or anything that involves the killing of animals and you're trying to condemn Michael Vick, you're a hypocrite.
[expletive] quote of the day.
Not to mention completely obsurd.
it borders on being dumber than what deion sanders said..
Animal cruelty is animal cruelty. Either you're for it or against it. Trying to seperate from killing animals is ridiculous. If I kill a deer how is that any worse then killing a dog? WTF? That makes no sense.
You're trying to make yourself or the people who hunt, above what Vick did, when it's not. You're killing/harming a defenseless animals for your own entertainment. It's pathetic.
I think they're trying to say that there's a different amount of physical suffering involved for the animal.
We execute prisoners in this country. Isn't it different to give them a fast acting injection, than to torture them to death?
They're both wrong, imo, but one is less wrong than the other.
Magneto2.0 wrote:If you eat any food that contains animals , you hunt, or anything that involves the killing of animals and you're trying to condemn Michael Vick, you're a hypocrite.
[expletive] quote of the day.
Not to mention completely obsurd.
it borders on being dumber than what deion sanders said..
Animal cruelty is animal cruelty. Either you're for it or against it. Trying to seperate from killing animals is ridiculous. If I kill a deer how is that any worse then killing a dog? WTF? That makes no sense.
You're trying to make yourself or the people who hunt, above what Vick did, when it's not. You're killing/harming a defenseless animals for your own entertainment. It's pathetic.
I think they're trying to say that there's a different amount of physical suffering involved for the animal.
We execute prisoners in this country. Isn't it different to give them a fast acting injection, than to torture them to death?
They're both wrong, imo, but one is less wrong than the other.
If you shoot me in the head and kill me with one bullet, or if you gradually stab me to death with a knife, I would hate you equally either way.
The deer that gets shot isn't thinking "Hey well at least he didn't electrocute me", he's thinking "WTF, you shot me you sonofabitch"
Magneto2.0 wrote:If you shoot me in the head and kill me with one bullet, or if you gradually stab me to death with a knife, I would hate you equally either way.
The deer that gets shot isn't thinking "Hey well at least he didn't electrocute me", he's thinking "WTF, you shot me you sonofabitch"
Wrong is wrong.
There are definitely degrees of wrong. That's why we have first degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, etc. It doesn't pay to be blind to such distinctions.
Edit: And I should add, on that scale, there are a lot of things worse than dog fighting.
Magneto2.0 wrote:If you eat any food that contains animals , you hunt, or anything that involves the killing of animals and you're trying to condemn Michael Vick, you're a hypocrite.
[expletive] quote of the day.
Not to mention completely obsurd.
it borders on being dumber than what deion sanders said..
Animal cruelty is animal cruelty. Either you're for it or against it. Trying to seperate from killing animals is ridiculous. If I kill a deer how is that any worse then killing a dog? WTF? That makes no sense.
You're trying to make yourself or the people who hunt, above what Vick did, when it's not. You're killing/harming a defenseless animals for your own entertainment. It's pathetic.
I think they're trying to say that there's a different amount of physical suffering involved for the animal.
We execute prisoners in this country. Isn't it different to give them a fast acting injection, than to torture them to death?
They're both wrong, imo, but one is less wrong than the other.
If you shoot me in the head and kill me with one bullet, or if you gradually stab me to death with a knife, I would hate you equally either way.
The deer that gets shot isn't thinking "Hey well at least he didn't electrocute me", he's thinking "WTF, you shot me you sonofabitch"
Wrong is wrong.
You must be a PETA member? Just asking because you seem to think that killing animals for any reason is wrong.
If hurting "any" animal is wrong...where do you draw the line? What if your house has rats or mice? What if a mole is destroying your yard? What do you do?
And where do you draw the line at animals?
Reptiles? What about living things? Do you object to all living things being killed? Insects?
