Bullfighting & Fox Hunting Bans

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[/quote]

Some of this seems contradictory to me. For instance, you say:

"“Cruelty” in these instances are truly in the eye of the beholder. From just a cultural perspective, I assure you the latin countries certainly do not feel they are being cruel to the gamecocks. And I can tell you that you cannot “force” two dogs to fight (no matter what nonsense you read about the practice). I hunt wild hog with dogs. It’s legal. But do you think it’s a big leap for someone that abhors dog fighting to see much difference between two dogs doing battle and a dog doing battle with a hog? Slippery slope. "

but then you jump into:

“No matter what side of the bloodsport argument you fall upon, I think we can all agree that there do exist sick bastards that DO TORTURE animals and/or otherwise neglect them. I think there is something truly wrong with those people. I don’t think there is something wrong with the men or women that would pit two gamecocks against each other any more than I think there is something wrong with someone that would sit in a tree all day long for a chance to shoot bambi. :)”

If animals have no inherent rights, what’s wrong with torturing them in any way?[/quote]

You’re equating bloodsport with “torture” when in fact the only two animals I’m aware that are “pitted” against each other with any consistency and by any rules are pitbulls and gamecocks and I can assure you that both animals are willing and eager participants.

There is nothing contradictory about what I said. I also qualified that “cruelty is in the eye of the beholder” and further qualified that such is often based on one’s culture or personal sensibilities.

182

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
@push

I disagree. That’s an absolutist position. You’ll never convince me that watching dogs tear each other apart is a good thing.

Bulldogs and Staffies are not ‘noble’ or sound breeds. And bull terriers and mongrel ‘pig dogs’ are killing machines that should only be used for hunting.[/quote]

You’re certainly not acquainted with a true to temperament american pitbull terrier or you would never say that. But I’ll tell you this; you don’t have to take my word for it (or my VAST and LONG experience with dogs) - you need look no further than those that have “rescued” the pitbull repeatedly and look at their opinion of the dogs.

And a dog is only as "sound’ as he is bred and is as only as sound as his lineage. I can make a fucking lab unsound.

Anyway, you have not yet set forth any intelligible basis for your hierarchy of value belief system. Why is the dog more “valuable” or precious than the dog but for one example. Spare us the fallacious one-celled organism comparisons please.

183

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

You’ll never convince me that watching dogs tear each other apart is a good thing.
[/quote]

but according to your personal sensibilities it’s okay for gamecocks to do it? boy oh boy if you’re not sliding down that slippery slope, on your personal/emotional one man sleigh…

how about: “@ sexmachine. that’s a bullshit hypocritical position.”

184

1600×1200 243 KB

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
@push

I disagree. That’s an absolutist position. You’ll never convince me that watching dogs tear each other apart is a good thing.

Bulldogs and Staffies are not ‘noble’ or sound breeds. And bull terriers and mongrel ‘pig dogs’ are killing machines that should only be used for hunting.[/quote]

These well engineered killing machines, doing what they do best. (Oh I meant the dog and my son)

See this is the great part of what america used to be. You had the right to be offended, but did not have the right to interfere in someone’s life or with their private property.

No longer though. Big government and cry babies are turning this country into a trash can full of panty wastes.

185

1600×1200 210 KB

This is the only rescue dog we have, a friend of mine told me about her, they got her from a crack house in scranton, with about 5 other pits they already put down, I don’t think I would call her a pit, looks like a bulldog cross to me, but my daughters wanted her. And she fits right in with the rest of them, She is the intruder alert.

186

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
@push

I disagree. That’s an absolutist position. You’ll never convince me that watching dogs tear each other apart is a good thing.

Bulldogs and Staffies are not ‘noble’ or sound breeds. And bull terriers and mongrel ‘pig dogs’ are killing machines that should only be used for hunting.[/quote]

You’re certainly not acquainted with a true to temperament american pitbull terrier or you would never say that. But I’ll tell you this; you don’t have to take my word for it (or my VAST and LONG experience with dogs) - you need look no further than those that have “rescued” the pitbull repeatedly and look at their opinion of the dogs.

And a dog is only as "sound’ as he is bred and is as only as sound as his lineage. I can make a fucking lab unsound.

Anyway, you have not yet set forth any intelligible basis for your hierarchy of value belief system. Why is the dog more “valuable” or precious than the dog but for one example. Spare us the fallacious one-celled organism comparisons please. [/quote]

I have never met a “sound” chiauha, Shitzu, poodle, etc…

I have seen my pits get kicked, punched, teased, tormented by other peoples children and not had an issue.

187

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

I have never met a “sound” chiauha, Shitzu, poodle, etc…

[/quote]

Poodles can have a sound temperament and some are suited as working dogs. French police have used poodles as working dogs. Chiauhas and shitzus are just trash domestic breeds.

[quote]
I have seen my pits get kicked, punched, teased, tormented by other peoples children and not had an issue. [/quote]

Your dog looks nice. It’s the ones with strong terrier lines that need to be watched with children.

188

I have only ever had one pit that was not direct from game lines, primarily old school patrick /boyle bloodlines. So with all of them except that one, I knew the temperament and personality of the lineage of the dog usually 4 generations, I knew the person breeding them and qualities they would and wouldn’t include in their breeding.

The problem with working dogs is when you get people who see them as more than what they are and continue to breed or in some cases allow to live dogs that do not fit the standard they are breeding to, whatever it may be, for example if you have a strong well bred pit, that starts to show inappropriate human aggression and domination. That dog needs to be culled, my preference would be to put the dog down immediately, leave no chance for an incident , or passing on of that trait. I do the same with my chickens, pigs, and cattle; if they are not of good temperament they become dinner sooner, no chance of becoming breeders.

Breed the best and eat the rest, well not the dogs.

189

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

but guess what happens under the law if you violate that? here’s the biggest hypocrisy of all; they will seize your animals and kill them. and the biggest irony is that these “humane” organizations are probably responsible for the killing of more animals than all the bloodsports, “abusers” and “neglecters” combined.

[/quote]

I don’t want to derail the thread too much, but what do you see as a solution to this?

Do you think placing heavy fines on those who raise animals to participate in bloodsports would be better? What should be done with the animals?

I really don’t know enough about this to offer an answer myself, which is why I’m curious about your take on the matter.[/quote]

If so called “bloodsport” is conducted according to rules and veterinary care is available, I don’t see a problem with it notwithstanding mine or anyone else personal sensibilities. It’s a matter of logic, not my anyone’s personal sensibilities or tastes. I believe animals are property and I do not believe they have rights. If I believed otherwise, I firmly feel that the only logical conclusion from such a position would be to refrain from consuming meet, using animal products and be anti-hunting. Since I am not of the foregoing, we have to accept with that position some things that may insult our sensibilities. From this foundation, I cannot go on the the slippery slope and irreconcilable differences inherent in “banning” or making the practice illegal.

“Cruelty” in these instances are truly in the eye of the beholder. From just a cultural perspective, I assure you the latin countries certainly do not feel they are being cruel to the gamecocks. And I can tell you that you cannot “force” two dogs to fight (no matter what nonsense you read about the practice). I hunt wild hog with dogs. It’s legal. But do you think it’s a big leap for someone that abhors dog fighting to see much difference between two dogs doing battle and a dog doing battle with a hog? Slippery slope.

No matter what side of the bloodsport argument you fall upon, I think we can all agree that there do exist sick bastards that DO TORTURE animals and/or otherwise neglect them. I think there is something truly wrong with those people. I don’t think there is something wrong with the men or women that would pit two gamecocks against each other any more than I think there is something wrong with someone that would sit in a tree all day long for a chance to shoot bambi. :slight_smile:

If you’re getting your jollies committing bonafide torture, you need fucking therapy, not jail. If you’re neglecting, there needs to be education or some support and/or some effort and remediation rather than a rush to seizure and euthanasia. Animals are property. Period. If they are not property, and they have rights, from what logical or moral position do we commit wholesale euthanasia and slaughter?

And to take the logic or morality necessary for them to truly have “rights” to its ridiculous (but necessary to illustrate the point) extreme, when do we start investigating these accidents between car and stray or wild animal? You strike a person, there’s a fucking investigation and a pound of legal flesh due. You strike an animal, and it lies on the side of the road until the carrion birds pick it clean.

Obviously, we need some guidelines. But no man should be imprisoned over an animal. That is inherently flawed thinking given our society and the earth’s natural biology. [/quote]

So, you believe the whales in our oceans are man’s property? or the lion in africa is our property? If you feel that way, i honestly feel bad for you for having such a terrible mindset. Let me ask you, why do you believe humans are better and more deserving to live? Dont animals raise families like humans do?

I know you will most likely insult me and ramble on, using complicated words, as if your writing some sort of contract. You will attack my love for animals and my belief that animals deserve the same respect as any human.

Luckily, people that have your mindset are a dying breed. With each passing generation, they become more and more enlightened. They realize all living beings are special and are all deserving to be treated with respect. You simply have not evolved to that point. Thats ashame.

190

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

but guess what happens under the law if you violate that? here’s the biggest hypocrisy of all; they will seize your animals and kill them. and the biggest irony is that these “humane” organizations are probably responsible for the killing of more animals than all the bloodsports, “abusers” and “neglecters” combined.

[/quote]

I don’t want to derail the thread too much, but what do you see as a solution to this?

Do you think placing heavy fines on those who raise animals to participate in bloodsports would be better? What should be done with the animals?

I really don’t know enough about this to offer an answer myself, which is why I’m curious about your take on the matter.[/quote]

If so called “bloodsport” is conducted according to rules and veterinary care is available, I don’t see a problem with it notwithstanding mine or anyone else personal sensibilities. It’s a matter of logic, not my anyone’s personal sensibilities or tastes. I believe animals are property and I do not believe they have rights. If I believed otherwise, I firmly feel that the only logical conclusion from such a position would be to refrain from consuming meet, using animal products and be anti-hunting. Since I am not of the foregoing, we have to accept with that position some things that may insult our sensibilities. From this foundation, I cannot go on the the slippery slope and irreconcilable differences inherent in “banning” or making the practice illegal.

“Cruelty” in these instances are truly in the eye of the beholder. From just a cultural perspective, I assure you the latin countries certainly do not feel they are being cruel to the gamecocks. And I can tell you that you cannot “force” two dogs to fight (no matter what nonsense you read about the practice). I hunt wild hog with dogs. It’s legal. But do you think it’s a big leap for someone that abhors dog fighting to see much difference between two dogs doing battle and a dog doing battle with a hog? Slippery slope.

No matter what side of the bloodsport argument you fall upon, I think we can all agree that there do exist sick bastards that DO TORTURE animals and/or otherwise neglect them. I think there is something truly wrong with those people. I don’t think there is something wrong with the men or women that would pit two gamecocks against each other any more than I think there is something wrong with someone that would sit in a tree all day long for a chance to shoot bambi. :slight_smile:

If you’re getting your jollies committing bonafide torture, you need fucking therapy, not jail. If you’re neglecting, there needs to be education or some support and/or some effort and remediation rather than a rush to seizure and euthanasia. Animals are property. Period. If they are not property, and they have rights, from what logical or moral position do we commit wholesale euthanasia and slaughter?

And to take the logic or morality necessary for them to truly have “rights” to its ridiculous (but necessary to illustrate the point) extreme, when do we start investigating these accidents between car and stray or wild animal? You strike a person, there’s a fucking investigation and a pound of legal flesh due. You strike an animal, and it lies on the side of the road until the carrion birds pick it clean.

Obviously, we need some guidelines. But no man should be imprisoned over an animal. That is inherently flawed thinking given our society and the earth’s natural biology. [/quote]

So, you believe the whales in our oceans are man’s property? or the lion in africa is our property? If you feel that way, i honestly feel bad for you for having such a terrible mindset. Let me ask you, why do you believe humans are better and more deserving to live? Dont animals raise families like humans do?

I know you will most likely insult me and ramble on, using complicated words, as if your writing some sort of contract. You will attack my love for animals and my belief that animals deserve the same respect as any human.

Luckily, people that have your mindset are a dying breed. With each passing generation, they become more and more enlightened. They realize all living beings are special and are all deserving to be treated with respect. You simply have not evolved to that point. Thats ashame. [/quote]

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.

191

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

So, you believe the whales in our oceans are man’s property? or the lion in africa is our property? If you feel that way, i honestly feel bad for you for having such a terrible mindset. Let me ask you, why do you believe humans are better and more deserving to live? Dont animals raise families like humans do?

I know you will most likely insult me and ramble on, using complicated words, as if your writing some sort of contract. You will attack my love for animals and my belief that animals deserve the same respect as any human.

Luckily, people that have your mindset are a dying breed. With each passing generation, they become more and more enlightened. They realize all living beings are special and are all deserving to be treated with respect. You simply have not evolved to that point. Thats ashame. [/quote]

You mean little pansy bitches like you are getting your cry baby ways in big cities, where ball-less cunt’s like you are put in your place by the effeminate of our societies.

When you can survive without consuming or using any product produced by some other form of life you can make those statements, but for now every second you live, you in fact murder other innocent life.

192

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.
[/quote]
I can’t ignore these people anymore, they are getting more bold and out of place trying to push their views on others and force them to do as they think they should.

If it was just that they had an opinion, no big deal, but the second you start to think I have to live by your opinion and you can force it on my children. It becomes an issue.

193

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

but guess what happens under the law if you violate that? here’s the biggest hypocrisy of all; they will seize your animals and kill them. and the biggest irony is that these “humane” organizations are probably responsible for the killing of more animals than all the bloodsports, “abusers” and “neglecters” combined.

[/quote]

I don’t want to derail the thread too much, but what do you see as a solution to this?

Do you think placing heavy fines on those who raise animals to participate in bloodsports would be better? What should be done with the animals?

I really don’t know enough about this to offer an answer myself, which is why I’m curious about your take on the matter.[/quote]

If so called “bloodsport” is conducted according to rules and veterinary care is available, I don’t see a problem with it notwithstanding mine or anyone else personal sensibilities. It’s a matter of logic, not my anyone’s personal sensibilities or tastes. I believe animals are property and I do not believe they have rights. If I believed otherwise, I firmly feel that the only logical conclusion from such a position would be to refrain from consuming meet, using animal products and be anti-hunting. Since I am not of the foregoing, we have to accept with that position some things that may insult our sensibilities. From this foundation, I cannot go on the the slippery slope and irreconcilable differences inherent in “banning” or making the practice illegal.

“Cruelty” in these instances are truly in the eye of the beholder. From just a cultural perspective, I assure you the latin countries certainly do not feel they are being cruel to the gamecocks. And I can tell you that you cannot “force” two dogs to fight (no matter what nonsense you read about the practice). I hunt wild hog with dogs. It’s legal. But do you think it’s a big leap for someone that abhors dog fighting to see much difference between two dogs doing battle and a dog doing battle with a hog? Slippery slope.

No matter what side of the bloodsport argument you fall upon, I think we can all agree that there do exist sick bastards that DO TORTURE animals and/or otherwise neglect them. I think there is something truly wrong with those people. I don’t think there is something wrong with the men or women that would pit two gamecocks against each other any more than I think there is something wrong with someone that would sit in a tree all day long for a chance to shoot bambi. :slight_smile:

If you’re getting your jollies committing bonafide torture, you need fucking therapy, not jail. If you’re neglecting, there needs to be education or some support and/or some effort and remediation rather than a rush to seizure and euthanasia. Animals are property. Period. If they are not property, and they have rights, from what logical or moral position do we commit wholesale euthanasia and slaughter?

And to take the logic or morality necessary for them to truly have “rights” to its ridiculous (but necessary to illustrate the point) extreme, when do we start investigating these accidents between car and stray or wild animal? You strike a person, there’s a fucking investigation and a pound of legal flesh due. You strike an animal, and it lies on the side of the road until the carrion birds pick it clean.

Obviously, we need some guidelines. But no man should be imprisoned over an animal. That is inherently flawed thinking given our society and the earth’s natural biology. [/quote]

So, you believe the whales in our oceans are man’s property? or the lion in africa is our property? If you feel that way, i honestly feel bad for you for having such a terrible mindset. Let me ask you, why do you believe humans are better and more deserving to live? Dont animals raise families like humans do?

I know you will most likely insult me and ramble on, using complicated words, as if your writing some sort of contract. You will attack my love for animals and my belief that animals deserve the same respect as any human.

Luckily, people that have your mindset are a dying breed. With each passing generation, they become more and more enlightened. They realize all living beings are special and are all deserving to be treated with respect. You simply have not evolved to that point. Thats ashame. [/quote]

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.
[/quote]

Wow, the never quiet always has something to respond is silent. I have silenced him. For once he can not argue pure logic. And what I said is pure logic. Those that place a higher value on humans over animals, and there are many that do, are simply not evolved to the point of believing that all beings are equal.

194

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.
[/quote]
I can’t ignore these people anymore, they are getting more bold and out of place trying to push their views on others and force them to do as they think they should.

If it was just that they had an opinion, no big deal, but the second you start to think I have to live by your opinion and you can force it on my children. It becomes an issue.
[/quote]

You can think however you like. But as I said previously, your mindset and that of bodyguards of a dying breed. No matter what I say here will change how you feel. Luckily, the people that replace you on this earth will not share your view.

195

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.
[/quote]
I can’t ignore these people anymore, they are getting more bold and out of place trying to push their views on others and force them to do as they think they should.

If it was just that they had an opinion, no big deal, but the second you start to think I have to live by your opinion and you can force it on my children. It becomes an issue.
[/quote]

You can think however you like. But as I said previously, your mindset and that of bodyguards of a dying breed. No matter what I say here will change how you feel. Luckily, the people that replace you on this earth will not share your view. [/quote]

Really, I am looking around this forum, also where I work, and where I live; that is definitely not the case. Maybe when you get in highly populated areas and get like 100 people out of 3 million who agree with you, you think you are the majority.

Your whole philosophy is flawed. Life feeds on life, there is no other way.

What you eat is over processed or fruit or vegetable. Talk about freaking scum bag. At least the animals have a chance, you feed on poor defenseless vegetables, that cannot even move.

Gasp the horror you probably eat them fresh, without even processing them, the pain they must go through, not to mention the bugs and other animals you are depriving of food. Really the only logical step for someone like you is to purge the world of all humanity, including yourself.

You are scientifically an inferior being to everyone you are condemning because of your choices, You do not get all of the proper micro or macro nutrients in the optimal amount or ratios. You are so conflicted inside from your inconsistencies in value and thought you cannot even bring yourself to realization of who you are, you hide behind the bloated wanna be avatar, I feel bad for you and your never will amount to anything life.

bye.

196

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.
[/quote]
I can’t ignore these people anymore, they are getting more bold and out of place trying to push their views on others and force them to do as they think they should.

If it was just that they had an opinion, no big deal, but the second you start to think I have to live by your opinion and you can force it on my children. It becomes an issue.
[/quote]

You can think however you like. But as I said previously, your mindset and that of bodyguards of a dying breed. No matter what I say here will change how you feel. Luckily, the people that replace you on this earth will not share your view. [/quote]

Really, I am looking around this forum, also where I work, and where I live; that is definitely not the case. Maybe when you get in highly populated areas and get like 100 people out of 3 million who agree with you, you think you are the majority.

Your whole philosophy is flawed. Life feeds on life, there is no other way.

What you eat is over processed or fruit or vegetable. Talk about freaking scum bag. At least the animals have a chance, you feed on poor defenseless vegetables, that cannot even move.

Gasp the horror you probably eat them fresh, without even processing them, the pain they must go through, not to mention the bugs and other animals you are depriving of food. Really the only logical step for someone like you is to purge the world of all humanity, including yourself.

You are scientifically an inferior being to everyone you are condemning because of your choices, You do not get all of the proper micro or macro nutrients in the optimal amount or ratios. You are so conflicted inside from your inconsistencies in value and thought you cannot even bring yourself to realization of who you are, you hide behind the bloated wanna be avatar, I feel bad for you and your never will amount to anything life.

bye.
[/quote]

vegetables are not alive. they don’t have souls. they don’t feel pain or love or anger. Therefore you argument is invalid. Trees may be techically alive, but they also do not have souls. they do not feel pain or anger or love.

198

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.
[/quote]
I can’t ignore these people anymore, they are getting more bold and out of place trying to push their views on others and force them to do as they think they should.

If it was just that they had an opinion, no big deal, but the second you start to think I have to live by your opinion and you can force it on my children. It becomes an issue.
[/quote]

You can think however you like. But as I said previously, your mindset and that of bodyguards of a dying breed. No matter what I say here will change how you feel. Luckily, the people that replace you on this earth will not share your view. [/quote]

Really, I am looking around this forum, also where I work, and where I live; that is definitely not the case. Maybe when you get in highly populated areas and get like 100 people out of 3 million who agree with you, you think you are the majority.

Your whole philosophy is flawed. Life feeds on life, there is no other way.

What you eat is over processed or fruit or vegetable. Talk about freaking scum bag. At least the animals have a chance, you feed on poor defenseless vegetables, that cannot even move.

Gasp the horror you probably eat them fresh, without even processing them, the pain they must go through, not to mention the bugs and other animals you are depriving of food. Really the only logical step for someone like you is to purge the world of all humanity, including yourself.

You are scientifically an inferior being to everyone you are condemning because of your choices, You do not get all of the proper micro or macro nutrients in the optimal amount or ratios. You are so conflicted inside from your inconsistencies in value and thought you cannot even bring yourself to realization of who you are, you hide behind the bloated wanna be avatar, I feel bad for you and your never will amount to anything life.

bye.
[/quote]

I think there are many shades of how people feel. some, think that we humans own animals and they are here for us to do with as we please. there are people that may love animals, but still feel animals shouldn’t have the same rights as people. and then, there are many people like me, who feel the killing of an animal is just as bad as killing a human and the punishment should be the same. there are many shades of grey here. If you look at how people were 100 hundred years ago, we killed grizzly bears like crazy, we slaughtered almost every last one of them. we killed millions of beautiful highly intelligent whales without mercy.

Now, the only country on earth that still hunts whales is japan. and many animal rights groups go out in the ocean and actively try and stop them. There are bans and rules of when you can hunt and when you can’t. You can no longer kill grizly bears.

In the future, these bans on hunting and the killing of animals will become more and more prevalant till finally all forms of hunting in every way will be outlawed.

200

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

but guess what happens under the law if you violate that? here’s the biggest hypocrisy of all; they will seize your animals and kill them. and the biggest irony is that these “humane” organizations are probably responsible for the killing of more animals than all the bloodsports, “abusers” and “neglecters” combined.

[/quote]

I don’t want to derail the thread too much, but what do you see as a solution to this?

Do you think placing heavy fines on those who raise animals to participate in bloodsports would be better? What should be done with the animals?

I really don’t know enough about this to offer an answer myself, which is why I’m curious about your take on the matter.[/quote]

If so called “bloodsport” is conducted according to rules and veterinary care is available, I don’t see a problem with it notwithstanding mine or anyone else personal sensibilities. It’s a matter of logic, not my anyone’s personal sensibilities or tastes. I believe animals are property and I do not believe they have rights. If I believed otherwise, I firmly feel that the only logical conclusion from such a position would be to refrain from consuming meet, using animal products and be anti-hunting. Since I am not of the foregoing, we have to accept with that position some things that may insult our sensibilities. From this foundation, I cannot go on the the slippery slope and irreconcilable differences inherent in “banning” or making the practice illegal.

“Cruelty” in these instances are truly in the eye of the beholder. From just a cultural perspective, I assure you the latin countries certainly do not feel they are being cruel to the gamecocks. And I can tell you that you cannot “force” two dogs to fight (no matter what nonsense you read about the practice). I hunt wild hog with dogs. It’s legal. But do you think it’s a big leap for someone that abhors dog fighting to see much difference between two dogs doing battle and a dog doing battle with a hog? Slippery slope.

No matter what side of the bloodsport argument you fall upon, I think we can all agree that there do exist sick bastards that DO TORTURE animals and/or otherwise neglect them. I think there is something truly wrong with those people. I don’t think there is something wrong with the men or women that would pit two gamecocks against each other any more than I think there is something wrong with someone that would sit in a tree all day long for a chance to shoot bambi. :slight_smile:

If you’re getting your jollies committing bonafide torture, you need fucking therapy, not jail. If you’re neglecting, there needs to be education or some support and/or some effort and remediation rather than a rush to seizure and euthanasia. Animals are property. Period. If they are not property, and they have rights, from what logical or moral position do we commit wholesale euthanasia and slaughter?

And to take the logic or morality necessary for them to truly have “rights” to its ridiculous (but necessary to illustrate the point) extreme, when do we start investigating these accidents between car and stray or wild animal? You strike a person, there’s a fucking investigation and a pound of legal flesh due. You strike an animal, and it lies on the side of the road until the carrion birds pick it clean.

Obviously, we need some guidelines. But no man should be imprisoned over an animal. That is inherently flawed thinking given our society and the earth’s natural biology. [/quote]

So, you believe the whales in our oceans are man’s property? or the lion in africa is our property? If you feel that way, i honestly feel bad for you for having such a terrible mindset. Let me ask you, why do you believe humans are better and more deserving to live? Dont animals raise families like humans do?

I know you will most likely insult me and ramble on, using complicated words, as if your writing some sort of contract. You will attack my love for animals and my belief that animals deserve the same respect as any human.

Luckily, people that have your mindset are a dying breed. With each passing generation, they become more and more enlightened. They realize all living beings are special and are all deserving to be treated with respect. You simply have not evolved to that point. Thats ashame. [/quote]

I’m not going to insult you, I’m going to do what I should have done a long time ago; ignore you. Your act was amusing at first, but now you’re just a bore.
[/quote]

Wow, the never quiet always has something to respond is silent. I have silenced him. For once he can not argue pure logic. And what I said is pure logic. Those that place a higher value on humans over animals, and there are many that do, are simply not evolved to the point of believing that all beings are equal. [/quote]

you do not even have a passing familiarity with “logic”. there is no “logic” and no evidence that all “beings” are equal. predation is the rule of the planet.

troll.