Gored Matador

Off Topic
121

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hmmmm. Scenario:

Aliens land on Earth after leaving their own planet where broccoli is considered a legitimate citizen of society and gets to vote. They are appalled by the fact that we eat broccoli here. Do they have right to stop us?

Is eating broccoli bad?

Push is right. Right and wrong are relative and we do not have the right to stick our noses into EVERYONE ELSE’S business and decide for them what is right and wrong. That is what led to Native Americans losing their land…the belief that “those savages” didn’t know what to do with it…which is WRONG according to our own society.

You don’t have to agree with it. You don’t have to take part in it.

That is THEIR culture and TO THEM it is not wrong. Therefore, why whine about them doing it?[/quote]

Are you serious? Dude you have an opinion on everything so don’t tell me I can’t have an opinion.

Broccoli is not a tradition. Another analogy fail.

The native americans lost. Another analogy fail. Every great nation is founded on the bones of conquered people. Every one. I’m so sick and tired of hearing that dead dog argument. It is broken and doesn’t work.

Should every nation have to give back the land to aboriginal peoples? Modern Japanese are not aboriginals. Australia is not aboriginals. The UK is not aboriginals. And Italy would be chopped up. I can go on and on.

This isn’t about right or wrong.

This is saying you can’t put a pretty spin on it and say it is relative. It is animal torture. I don’t support animal torture.

I look forward to your lack of opinion on other people’s rights when you don’t agree with them now that I know you support silence when you don’t agree.

122

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
LOL

As the resident bull here, I feel the need to weigh in…

I hate when a topic dissolves into this kind of argument.

Abortion vs. Animal Cruelty. C’mon.

I think a better comparison to make is Spanish Bullfighting vs. Horse Racing.

I’ve been to Spain, I’ve seen bullfights, up close and personal in 300+ year old arenas made of limestone… The whole she-bang. The end game is pretty brutal, of course. In one event there were 5 different bulls that were ultimately euthanized in the arena that I recall. Being a matador takes nerve, skill, balls, talent, athleticism, showmanship, grace, and the list can go on and on. The crowd cheers for the Matador, it doesn’t root for the bull. The crowd jeers and boos, though, when the Matador is sloppy and the bull has to be dispatched with the short knife. It’s an extremely intricate dance between man and animal, steeped in tradition and national pride.

That being said, it’s not for me.

I didn’t grow up on it, don’t understand it, and don’t really enjoy watching an animal die like that.

Now, lets look at horse racing. A pursuit that is global, a pursuit that is roundly accepted by the American public, and a pursuit that I’d wager goes through MORE animals, horses at that, than the whole bullfighting circuit in all of Spain.

Here’s an article.

Long story short, there were almost 120 horses euthanized between 2001 and 2008 at one horse track (Del Mar, here in sunny San Diego) all for gambling, all for making money. So that all the ladies can put on their fancy hats and parade around the paddock on opening day. And, Del Mar only races for a portion of the summer, not even the whole year.

Multiply that by busier race tracks all over the nation? We’re killing more thoroughbred horses for the pursuit of fucking Gambling than the Spaniards are killing Bulls for their own pursuits.

And please don’t say that “the horses only got put down because of an injury” as a viable defense, because it’s not. Those horses wouldn’t have been injured had they not been employed for the enjoyment of people, same why bulls are led into arenas to their ultimate slaughter.

There’s also circuses, rodeos, etc, where the numbers can be increased.

So, in my opinion as resident bull around here, I say put down the stones and adsorb the OP story for what it’s worth, and move on. Spend too much energy on Bullfighting and you’ll be forced to look more domestically at what Americans do to animals too.

[/quote]

I would never not state an opinion about torturing animals just because I would be afraid someone might point a finger at me.

I don’t go to horse races. But another analogy fail. The purpose of horse racing isn’t to torture and kill the horses. That is the main purpose, the actual entertainment factor of bull fighting.

123

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hmmmm. Scenario:

Aliens land on Earth after leaving their own planet where broccoli is considered a legitimate citizen of society and gets to vote. They are appalled by the fact that we eat broccoli here. Do they have right to stop us?

Is eating broccoli bad?

[/quote]

By your example, if broccoli can vote, that implies an ability to understand and interact with the world beyond our puny Earth-broccoli. Bulls, nor any other mammal save us, cannot interact with the world in a manner we would understand as fully intelligent (a requirement of your idea since the aliens can understand and empathize with the mighty vegetable). No context in the thread.

Now, in the context of this thread, since the argument is not against the eating of the bull, but of the stressing and stabbing with initially non-lethal intent, we would be more inclined to ask “is it okay to attack and cause pain to the broccoli which has shown an ability to interact with the world on the same level as a human being?”

Of course, you were going over the top to make your point.

Perhaps, if we’re going to use examples, we should keep things realistic and at the same level of biological complexity.

Deer hunting.

Since there are many from rural settings here, I’m going to make the dangerous presumption many of us have hunted deer in the past.

SCENARIO:

You’re out hunting. You see a deer, take your shot, and foul it up. Deer is still hit, but is mobile. You track and find deer dying. Do you coup de grace, or stab it in the stomach and haunches for a few minutes before putting it out?

Right and wrong are relative? Certainly. I would argue it’s more repugnant to kill a man by sawing his head off than to make an image of Mohammed.

The first example involves the suffering of a living thing.
The second example involves the insult to a religion and the people who practice it.
Therefore, the point would be “right and wrong are relative when ideas and concepts are involved, not things which can experience pain.”

124

Like my dad always told me, “Mess with the bull, you get the horns”.

125

Oh, and as far as powerful displays of manhood go, I’d rather watch a large man in a small singlet hoisting 600+ lbs of iron over his head, than a swarthy skinny little ugly dude in shiny pants “outsmarting” a stupid angry bovine to death.

126

[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
A. Does he have a cigar in his mouth?
B. That’s exactly what you should expect when you tease a powerful beast[/quote]

that would be the horn, lol

127

people are really defending bull fighting because it is accepted in some cultures?

yes, we kill animals for food. That’s is not the same as torturing animals for sport.

128

The majority of Spaniards are against bullfighting so there goes the whole moral relativism and judging cultures argument.

129

[quote]PDJD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

That is THEIR culture and TO THEM it is not wrong. Therefore, why whine about them doing it?[/quote]

Prof, I have to disagree. Under your analysis slavery, ethnic “cleansing”, genocide, FGM, are all OK because they entrenched in certain cultures. [/quote]

We are talking about COWS here…another animal that only due to our culture is seen in some alternative light. We view puppies as cute life-long friends, therefore, to us, killing a puppy is HORRIBLE. In some countries, that same puppy could be food and no one would think anything about it.

Why would you or anyone else relate a COW’S LIFE to that of a human being?

130

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hmmmm. Scenario:

Aliens land on Earth after leaving their own planet where broccoli is considered a legitimate citizen of society and gets to vote. They are appalled by the fact that we eat broccoli here. Do they have right to stop us?

Is eating broccoli bad?

Push is right. Right and wrong are relative and we do not have the right to stick our noses into EVERYONE ELSE’S business and decide for them what is right and wrong. That is what led to Native Americans losing their land…the belief that “those savages” didn’t know what to do with it…which is WRONG according to our own society.

You don’t have to agree with it. You don’t have to take part in it.

That is THEIR culture and TO THEM it is not wrong. Therefore, why whine about them doing it?[/quote]

Let’s discuss child brides, like the kind you see in India or Pakistan.

Let’s discuss how their husbands effectively rape them at age 9.

Culture? I think not.[/quote]

Oooh, let’s also discuss how the age of consent is 14 in some European countries. Is it WRONG in those countries to have sex with a 17 year old?

Is it WRONG period?

You chose age 9 because most people consider that to be a child and would therefore automatically be against it. Does the same hold true for grayer areas?

131

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hmmmm. Scenario:

Aliens land on Earth after leaving their own planet where broccoli is considered a legitimate citizen of society and gets to vote. They are appalled by the fact that we eat broccoli here. Do they have right to stop us?

Is eating broccoli bad?

Push is right. Right and wrong are relative and we do not have the right to stick our noses into EVERYONE ELSE’S business and decide for them what is right and wrong. That is what led to Native Americans losing their land…the belief that “those savages” didn’t know what to do with it…which is WRONG according to our own society.

You don’t have to agree with it. You don’t have to take part in it.

That is THEIR culture and TO THEM it is not wrong. Therefore, why whine about them doing it?[/quote]

Are you serious? Dude you have an opinion on everything so don’t tell me I can’t have an opinion.

Broccoli is not a tradition. Another analogy fail.[/quote]

What? How could you miss the point? In that scenario, BROCCOLI has a very deep tradition TO THE ALIENS. How simple do I need to make this shit?

[quote]

The native americans lost. Another analogy fail. Every great nation is founded on the bones of conquered people. Every one. I’m so sick and tired of hearing that dead dog argument. It is broken and doesn’t work. [/quote]

Again, WHAT? Remember MANIFEST DESTINY? There is way more to that story than just “they lost”.

Wow.

[quote]

Should every nation have to give back the land to aboriginal peoples? Modern Japanese are not aboriginals. Australia is not aboriginals. The UK is not aboriginals. And Italy would be chopped up. I can go on and on.

This isn’t about right or wrong. [/quote]

Wait, how is it not about right and wrong? Would it be OK right now to go kick some Native Americans off their land and take it?

Why not?

But…you DO support animal torture. We simply glorify that “torture” by calling it necessity to feed us. Shooting something in the head when it’s life is not hanging by a thread is not exactly “loving” the animal.

132

[quote]Vash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hmmmm. Scenario:

Aliens land on Earth after leaving their own planet where broccoli is considered a legitimate citizen of society and gets to vote. They are appalled by the fact that we eat broccoli here. Do they have right to stop us?

Is eating broccoli bad?

[/quote]

By your example, if broccoli can vote, that implies an ability to understand and interact with the world beyond our puny Earth-broccoli. [/quote]

But…what if we just don’t know how to talk to broccoli yet? Then what?

[quote]

Bulls, nor any other mammal save us, cannot interact with the world in a manner we would understand as fully intelligent (a requirement of your idea since the aliens can understand and empathize with the mighty vegetable). No context in the thread.[/quote]

What? Aren’t we the same society where many believe Dolphins may just be some of the most intelligent creatures in the sea? It is always a possibility that we drastically underestimate the level many animals may be working on.

[quote]

Now, in the context of this thread, since the argument is not against the eating of the bull, but of the stressing and stabbing with initially non-lethal intent, we would be more inclined to ask “is it okay to attack and cause pain to the broccoli which has shown an ability to interact with the world on the same level as a human being?”

Of course, you were going over the top to make your point.

Perhaps, if we’re going to use examples, we should keep things realistic and at the same level of biological complexity.[/quote]

Why? The broccoli example holds up fine.

[quote]

Deer hunting.[/quote]

Deer is more interesting than talking broccoli?

What does Muhammed have to do with this? In the context of that one living thing, it is dead either way whether you decide to play nice with it or not.

133

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
The majority of Spaniards are against bullfighting so there goes the whole moral relativism and judging cultures argument. [/quote]

Wait…so in Spain, according to you, bull fighting is being forced in the people of the country against their will?

134

[quote]Professor X wrote:

We are talking about COWS here…another animal that only due to our culture is seen in some alternative light. We view puppies as cute life-long friends, therefore, to us, killing a puppy is HORRIBLE. In some countries, that same puppy could be food and no one would think anything about it.

[/quote]
In this instance, you are implying two things: ALL destroying of puppies would be seen as bad by ALL members of our culture.

Again, the issue is not the ending of the animal, but the treatment before death. Or, by ignoring this aspect of the issue, are you implying that the treatment of animals premortem is irrelevant?

135

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
The majority of Spaniards are against bullfighting so there goes the whole moral relativism and judging cultures argument. [/quote]

Wait…so in Spain, according to you, bull fighting is being forced on the people of the country against their will?[/quote]

136

Alien broccoli worship, the prophet Muhammad and bull fighting. Only on T-Nation can all three topics be somehow related…

137

[quote]Vash wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

We are talking about COWS here…another animal that only due to our culture is seen in some alternative light. We view puppies as cute life-long friends, therefore, to us, killing a puppy is HORRIBLE. In some countries, that same puppy could be food and no one would think anything about it.

[/quote]
In this instance, you are implying two things: ALL destroying of puppies would be seen as bad by ALL members of our culture.

Again, the issue is not the ending of the animal, but the treatment before death. Or, by ignoring this aspect of the issue, are you implying that the treatment of animals premortem is irrelevant?[/quote]

It sure as hell isn’t that important if they still end up dead and you still end up eating them. In a universal context, the animal is still D E A D.

Why do you think it is right to kill the animal at all?

Because you need it?

Is that right or wrong?

138

[quote]Professor X wrote:

But…what if we just don’t know how to talk to broccoli yet? Then what?

[/quote]

Okay, I’ll play.

What if the aliens, seeing we didn’t have the ability to communicate with broccoli, would teach us to do so. Then, we could ask them what’s up.

[quote]
What? Aren’t we the same society where many believe Dolphins may just be some of the most intelligent creatures in the sea? It is always a possibility that we drastically underestimate the level many animals may be working on.

If the broccoli can talk, I’d be rather keen to talk to Bambi, you know, see if her mom is single still.

[quote]

What does Muhammed have to do with this? In the context of that one living thing, it is dead either way whether you decide to play nice with it or not.[/quote]

Not so much the person, but the concept of him, and the associated religion. I’m implying, and should have said outright, right and wrong can only be relative when applied to systems, not biological entities.

In other words, it’s less “wrong” to chafe against an idea or concept than against a biological entity’s nervous system.

139

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It sure as hell isn’t that important if they still end up dead and you still end up eating them. In a universal context, the animal is still D E A D.[/quote]

I see. I am arguing from the point of view that causing unnecessary pain to an animal, regardless of the impending death, is wrong.

[quote]Why do you think it is right to kill the animal at all?

Because you need it?[/quote]

Certainly. It’s an animal, animals will be eaten. However, I would argue as the “stewards” of the animals, to use a dangerously religious implication, torture is unnecessary to cause the cessation of life.

We understand what both Pain and Death are, on a level beyond other creatures save the much-vaunted Space Broccoli. It seems to have an axiomatic wrongness to cause more suffering than is necessary to get our protein.

Or, in the case of the OP, to get our entertainment.

Answered in the previous quote.

140

[quote]Vash wrote:

Okay, I’ll play.[/quote]

You sure? You don’t exactly have the quote feature on lock yet.

[quote]

What if the aliens, seeing we didn’t have the ability to communicate with broccoli, would teach us to do so. Then, we could ask them what’s up.[/quote]

How does that erase CENTURIES of dead broccoli citizens!!! What if our broccoli isn’t as advanced yet but could be in the future?

Broccoli moral dilemmas for the win.

Many believe there are very hefty “universal” debts to pay for our actions on this planet for the death of all living things.

[quote]

If the broccoli can talk, I’d be rather keen to talk to Bambi, you know, see if her mom is single still.[/quote]

Well, the point is, we could very well one day come to the realization that we can talk to animals on some basic level…maybe to some degree like they speak to apes suing sign language.

The bottom line is that the hierarchy as to the value of one animal’s life over another seems to be only related to the culture you are in and their own traditions…ie, cows being sacred in India yet lunch here in America.

[quote]

Not so much the person, but the concept of him, and the associated religion. I’m implying, and should have said outright, right and wrong can only be relative when applied to systems, not biological entities.

In other words, it’s less “wrong” to chafe against an idea or concept than against a biological entity’s nervous system.[/quote]

Isn’t that what I have been saying? Therefore, if the CONCEPT is that an animal is going to die no matter what by our hands, the guidelines by which that occurs is strictly only relevant depending on the society we live in and that society’s traditions and standards.

Therefore, how WRONG the killing is happens to be RELATIVE.