[quote]ironcross wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[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.
[/quote]
My point wasn’t that bloodsport was torture, but that you have a clear idea of what torture toward animals is and you strongly are convinced that your idea of torture should never be allowed. You said that the people who do it are clearly sick and should be treated to overcome their sickeness. If they don’t want this treatment because they don’t feel that animals have rights and are not convinced that what they’re doing is wrong, you are in effect going to have to convince them otherwise.
I can beat a tree all day and no one is going to get mad if it’s my own tree. I’m sure you wouldn’t bat an eye if I trapped a spider and let it die on the sticky film. What makes dogs deserving of anything better? [/quote]
I’m not sure we’re understanding each other. I did not set forth an argument that dogs do deserve better. I took the position from the beginning that there is no moral or logical position for animal rights that is not slippery slope, hypocritical or contrary to biology.
Where we may have gotten off track is my passing mention of people that are truly ill that torture animals out of mental illness or instability. I don’t think that can be ignored any more than you can ignore someone walking around ranting and raving with his clothes off; both need help - not jail.