Michael Vick's 'dog fighting'

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Timinator

lol, you are taking a simple concept, and making it complex. Eye for an eye. That's all.

Wow, do you not understand the implication if you allow animals to partake in this? Anybody who ever ate meat, by this standard, needs to be eaten by an animal.

[John Scott]

You say my logic is insane?

Yes.

[Timinator]

I suppose you think it's ok for some street punk to kick some poor old man's *** also. After all those punks (oops sorry I can't insult them) er upstanding kids have rights. Let's forget about the old man, he's just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Yes we eat meat, so what, so do the dogs, we eatto sustain life. So what! making them fight for the sport of it is what's insane, to gain pleasure watching them kill each other. My point is that maybe we should let the dogs get some revenge. What has that to do with eating animals, or them eating us? lol! The only thing I don't understand is why you are trying to make some intellectual argument out of this.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Timinator

I suppose you think it's ok for some street punk to kick some poor old man's *** also.

I am curious to see what you base this statement on? Where did I say that old people are not human? I do recall saying that animals should not enjoy the same rights as humans, but I fail to find the post where I state that ald
[QUOTE=Timinator;697810]people are not human.

Please respond immediately with the post number where I state that old people are not human and should not enjoy the rights afforded to humanity.

Originally Posted by Timinator

After all those punks (oops sorry I can't insult them) er upstanding kids have rights. Let's forget about the old man, he's just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Smoking crack? Where did I ever say anything that could be construed by an insane crack addict to be sympathetic to what you just said?

Originally Posted by Timinator

Yes we eat meat, so what, so do the dogs, we eatto sustain life.

Who eats to sustain life? Humans? What friggin planet are you on?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity

Originally Posted by Timinator

My point is that maybe we should let the dogs get some revenge.

You think we should let dogs get revenge. You think this is an intelligent thing to do?

Originally Posted by Timinator

What has that to do with eating animals, or them eating us? lol! The only thing I don't understand is why you are trying to make some intellectual argument out of this.

If animals are given rights, any intelligent human being should be able to see the obvious conflict presented by humans eating animals.

[krahmaan]

Great discussion guys!

I have something to say about this as well. Let's say that in our respective countries (which ever we may live) all of the above were legal, and people were able to place side bets as well. Like boxing, mixed martial art fighting etc. I feel that if it were legal to participate in these things, many would not see it as such a bad event.

It's only when it comes to things that we love or identify with (like dogs, pets or animals in general -for animal activists) that it then makes these bouts abhorring. Otherwise, it wouldn't be much of a problem and most would see it as a sport. Rooting for the best contender. Even having more fun when our player wins, and we win the money!

But I do respect everyone else's views on the subject.

[chicgeek]

Shall this be moved into politics? It shall.

Which should be named "Politics, Morals, and lack thereof".

[Timinator]

You lost the argument so I am now a crack head LOL! Those who tend to lose arguments have to resort to personal insults because they have nothing else to go on. First of all I don't know you, you're intellectual abilities, or your accomplishments in life therefore I will hold back on the insults because I have no basis other then your comments in this discussion.

I make one comment: Maybe they ought to put him in an arena with some pissed off dogs!
You turn this into an argument of me being a liberal (way off base on that one lol) then I'm an idiot, now I'm a crack head. You took this thing so far out of context!

First of all the statement about the old man is a comparison I said nothing about him not being human. I ask you a question, which you failed to answer.
So I will ask again since YOU say "In the real world, people are putting people in prison for perceived animal abuse, on the basis of the mentality you express here today." So is the old man getting beat up perceived abuse also?
My intent by these statements is to compare between humans, and animals.

are you saying it's ok to dog fight?

To answer your question. Who eats to sustain life? Humans? What friggin planet are you on?

by we I mean humans duh! I'm countering your statement about the animal eating me because I eat meat. as far as the Wiki article are you stating people who eat meat are fat? what does that have to do with this argument? Dogs Lions Humans all eat animals to sustain life. That is entirely different from watching animals kill each other for the simple reason of “entertainment” It's flat out sick! You want to compare the two, please!

If animals are given rights, any intelligent human being should be able to see the obvious conflict presented by humans eating animals.
again with the insults, which make you look unintelligent btw. Reread the previous paragraph in addition to the next 2.

While your statement about animal rights compared with human rights is true, the statement about animals having the right to eat anyone who eats them is ridiculous. Again thanks for taking a simple statement and taking it way out of context. Should we really sick the dogs on him, No. Just like we shouldn't beat up the street thugs. If we do this it makes us no better then them. the key word in my statement was "Maybe" and it was a description of a feeling. When I was in the USCG I arrested a guy that raped, a 14 year girl, and held her captive. Did I feel like kicking that guys ass. You bet I did! Did I do it? Of course not. If I did I would be at his level. According to Mr. Scott, I guess that's considered immoral thinking that way. fine you're entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Timinator

You lost the argument so I am now a crack head LOL! Those who tend to lose arguments have to resort to personal insults because they have nothing else to go on. First of all I don't know you, you're intellectual abilities, or your accomplishments in life therefore I will hold back on the insults because I have no basis other then your comments in this discussion.

I make one comment: Maybe they ought to put him in an arena with some pissed off dogs!
You turn this into an argument of me being a liberal (way off base on that one lol) then I'm an idiot, now I'm a crack head. You took this thing so far out of context!

First of all the statement about the old man is a comparison I said nothing about him not being human. I ask you a question, which you failed to answer.
So I will ask again since YOU say "In the real world, people are putting people in prison for perceived animal abuse, on the basis of the mentality you express here today." So is the old man getting beat up perceived abuse also?
My intent by these statements is to compare between humans, and animals.

are you saying it's ok to dog fight?

To answer your question. Who eats to sustain life? Humans? What friggin planet are you on?

by we I mean humans duh! I'm countering your statement about the animal eating me because I eat meat. as far as the Wiki article are you stating people who eat meat are fat? what does that have to do with this argument? Dogs Lions Humans all eat animals to sustain life. That is entirely different from watching animals kill each other for the simple reason of “entertainment” It's flat out sick! You want to compare the two, please!

If animals are given rights, any intelligent human being should be able to see the obvious conflict presented by humans eating animals.
again with the insults, which make you look unintelligent btw. Reread the previous paragraph in addition to the next 2.

While your statement about animal rights compared with human rights is true, the statement about animals having the right to eat anyone who eats them is ridiculous. Again thanks for taking a simple statement and taking it way out of context. Should we really sick the dogs on him, No. Just like we shouldn't beat up the street thugs. If we do this it makes us no better then them. the key word in my statement was "Maybe" and it was a description of a feeling. When I was in the USCG I arrested a guy that raped, a 14 year girl, and held her captive. Did I feel like kicking that guys ass. You bet I did! Did I do it? Of course not. If I did I would be at his level. According to Mr. Scott, I guess that's considered immoral thinking that way. fine you're entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine.

This post in a textbook example of nonsense. You have many several words, seemingly intending to make a point, but without one.

From the point that you stated that I was in favor of "punks" beating up old people, you lost all credibility, and the privilege to post on the political forum.

Unless you can post in intelligible English and with logical points, please refrain from posting. Thanks

[backgammonnn123]

We have no right at all to gain enjoyment from the pain of any living creature.
I would like to think we have or are starting to evolve past this caveman ritual. I had a dog and i could probably trust that little dude more than most humans.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by backgammonnn123

We have no right at all to gain enjoyment from the pain of any living creature.

So boxing, karate matches and other sports that involve violence and serve the singular purpose of entertainment - we have no right to do these?

[robert s.]

Originally Posted by John Scott

So boxing, karate matches and other sports that involve violence and serve the singular purpose of entertainment - we have no right to do these?

besides the fact that i do not understand what makes two normal intelligent human beings, to step in a ring and beat the living crap out of each other....it is their personal choice. they chose to become a boxer, a karateka, a free-fighter or whatever.

now, it would be a different story, if

a. some criminal character would force one or both of these humans, to fight against each other. even if one (or both) would be mentally handicapped and easily "convinced" it would be the best thing to do. just because somebody is intellectually or physically superior, does not give him the right, to "use" the inferior person. or

b. some criminal would breed humans just for the purpose to let them fight each other. physically strong - mentally weak and teach them enough cruelty to kill each other, whilst other "humans" bet on the outcome....

so, just because we are superior to animals (which might even be debatable in some cases), does not give us the right, to use them for cruel "amusement". there are even laws against it.....

but even if these laws would not be existent, it still would be morally wrong...

and finally:
somebody who finds pleasure and exitment in watching, when two creatures kill each other is sick. heavily mentally sick! where is the pleasure-where the "exitement"???? i just do not get it!

and where do these people draw the line?? how about men against animal? how about men against men until death? and the final step - snuff-movies?

just look at the history of mankind: all this existed already! and it does again... here in "our civilized" part of the world its dogfights, rooster-fighting or bull-fighting.

but if you search long an intensive enough you find already underground fights, organized by "not-so-friendly"-people, where you can watch humans against dogs, where humans fight each other and the end is death...

anyhow, to cut a long story short:
in my opinion:
dog-fighting is wrong! it IS against the law and it should be!
cruelty in general is wrong! no matter where or against whom


and on this i can get "red-repped" until next year!

[krahmaan]

just look at the history of mankind: all this existed already! and it does again... here in "our civilized" part of the world its dogfights, rooster-fighting or bull-fighting.

I see your location is Spain. Have you yourself ever been to a bullfight?

[robert s.]

Originally Posted by krahmaan

I see your location is Spain. Have you yourself ever been to a bullfight?

yes i have been to several - always with a delegation of "robin wood" or "WWF". got pretty scary sometimes....anyhow,
i cannot understand how somebody can find a bullfight entertaining or exiting. when you heard once how a bull cries when he is mortally wounded, you will not forget it for the rest of your life!

oh and one thing, do not believe all this crap about "tradition" and "deeper meaning".... today bullfights are business! nothing else! the bulls get prepared, the horns are shortened and all the ballihoo before the actual fight is only a method to weaken the animal, before the "great hero" steps into the arena!

the good news is: even amongst the spanish, the opponents of bull-fighting get more and more!

[backgammonnn123]

John good point but u must also consider that in boxing both opponents consent to the matches and most of the they arent killed. Huge difference from when someone goes hunting and kills some defensless animal.
Id gladly support the end of boxing and ufc if we can ban hunting lol

[John Scott]

John good point but u must also consider that in boxing both opponents consent to the matches and most of the they arent killed. Huge difference from when someone goes hunting and kills some defensless animal.

So you are against hunting, too? At least you are consistent.

But you do know, all those cows that died to provide us with beef - they didn't exactly commit suicide.

[John Scott]

To me fighting was originally invented by human beings to train and to test the skill of the warriors in a tribe.

I'm guessing that fighting was invented as a way of dissuading others from attacking. Self defense. All animals fight, including humans.

Just a thought.