EPTAs has been said, people take precedence over animals.
[NSFW?] Beautiful bull-fighting fail. - Page 14
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Dystisis
Norway713 Posts
As has been said, people take precedence over animals. | ||
|
johnlee
United States242 Posts
On June 10 2010 07:52 neohero9 wrote: If a man with a baseball bat were chasing a child, and the child turned and stabbed the man, would you not feel that the man deserved it? That justice was brought onto the man? Besides the species, what is the difference? The matador and the man with the bat are both aggressors; the bull and the child are both innocent and acting out of defense (and some would argue defensive instinct). ... There's a shit ton of difference. And your analogy shouldn't even be called an analogy because it's not covering what I'm arguing. But okay let's continue with your child that killed the man. Again, it doesn't matter to me whether the child killing the man was justified or not. What I would find distasteful is if a bystander saw the child killing the man with the baseball bat and started laughing, saying shit like: "LMFAO. LOOK AT THAT MAN BEING KILLED BY THE CHILD [bull]. HE DESERVED IT. LOL YES." (Which is essentially what the lot of you are doing.) Well I'm done. This is all pointless. | ||
|
Kwidowmaker
Canada978 Posts
| ||
|
neohero9
United States595 Posts
I'm trying to show people why torturing and killing an animal for FUN is wrong because it harms the ANIMAL. EVEN IF we accept that humans take precedence over animals, does that mean animals should have to suffer for the PLEASURE of mankind? If you came upon a child with a squirrel wrapped in barbed wire who was dousing it in petrol, would you say that this child is justified in what he is doing because he ENJOYS it? Yes, I can stand here and judge the practices of other cultures because I have a logical baseline from which to work. No, people have no right to host bullfights, even with their own hard work and sweat and tears and blood poured into it, because in the end they are gleefully killing an animal so they can ENJOY it. Yes, it's a macho, badass thing to do-- get into a closed space with a pissed off animal that weighs ten times your weight and can pierce you with horns attached to its body-- you're talking about facing a Zergling almost. But doing it simply BECAUSE YOU CAN and because it's FUN, at the cost of the life of another living thing, is cruel. | ||
|
Kezzer
United States1268 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:37 johnlee wrote: ... There's a shit ton of difference. And your analogy shouldn't even be called an analogy because it's not covering what I'm arguing. But okay let's continue with your child that killed the man. Again, it doesn't matter to me whether the child killing the man was justified or not. What I would find distasteful is if a bystander saw the child killing the man with the baseball bat and started laughing, saying shit like: "LMFAO. LOOK AT THAT MAN BEING KILLED BY THE CHILD [bull]. HE DESERVED IT. LOL YES." (Which is essentially what the lot of you are doing.) Well I'm done. This is all pointless. First of all none of us are laughing at him, we are just approving that he was served justice. Secondly, the guy didn't die. Dieing and being wounded is are in completely different worlds. When the man is wounded, he will (hopefully) learn from his mistakes, and because of this it justifies bystander criticism. If the man had died, it would be more sympathetic. | ||
|
agen
Barbados111 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:38 Kwidowmaker wrote: Bull fighting is awesome, stop hating. If you're going to get all righteous and indignant over something how about the grossly high infant mortality rate across the developing world, the widespread epidemic of AIDS in Africa, the slavery of the North Korean people or the children turned into soldiers and prostitutes. These are all good and noble causes to take up. Bullfighting is not, especially when your pampered first world life rests on the shoulders of environmental destruction. Those who do take up the cause against bullfighting (among whom I don't count myself) tend also to be the people who take up causes against environmental destruction, eating meat, the AIDS epidemic, and anything else you've listed. There may be some activists who support animal rights and put the blinders on for all else, but most people who support causes don't artificially limit themselves to just one. So I don't think anyone will argue that the causes you have listed are illegitimate, but they aren't the only worthwhile causes out there. Whether bullfighting should be opposed just happens to be the current topic of debate. | ||
|
neohero9
United States595 Posts
And thanks, sc4k. ~.^ | ||
|
[NyC]HoBbes
United States803 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:40 BDF92 wrote: First of all none of us are laughing at him, we are just approving that he was served justice. Secondly, the guy didn't die. Dieing and being wounded is are in completely different worlds. When the man is wounded, he will (hopefully) learn from his mistakes, and because of this it justifies bystander criticism. If the man had died, it would be more sympathetic. This is more of the kind of paternalism I was talking about. To assume that because Aparicio was wounded, he will "learn from his mistakes" is incredibly arrogant and moralistic. The only thing he will learn from his "mistake" is to be a better bullfighter. Assuming that your viewpoint is the ultimate goal, and that those who see the world differently than you deserve to be pushed towards that goal by being gored in the neck by a bull is arrogant and patently ridiculous | ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:36 Dystisis wrote: You are a cold bastard if you think this guy had it coming to him. We should consider human suffering before animal suffering, ALWAYS. That being said, I think bullfighting is stupid -- most of all because it is dangerous. That doesn't mean we can say that this guy "had it coming". As has been said, people take precedence over animals. Really? Why? Im not an animal activist in the least, I honestly don't care one way or another. However, our ability of self awareness and critical thinking is a blessing and a curse. A blessing in that we are able to create some of spectacular things through our ability to think. A curse in that we commit some horrible freaking atrocities the likes of which an "animal" couldn't even begin to fathom. He definitely had it coming to him, primarily because he's in a fighting ring...with a fully grown bull...with sharp horns....and a frilly suit on. | ||
|
The_Pacifist
United States540 Posts
Guy stabs bull! There's a cheering side and a booing side. Bull stabs guy! The rolls switch, but there's still a cheering side and a booing side! Down with bullfighting! No more! It's high time for the sport to (d)evolve! We shall have MANFIGHTING instead, where our honorable, brave bulls shall go head to head with the deadly beast that is man! Except instead of bulls, we'll have lions! But it'll still be done in arenas, though preferably ones in Rome! Ancient Rome! And we'll all cheer our hearts out when the lion rips apart the man! YEAH! | ||
|
mint_julep
United States254 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:36 Dystisis wrote: You are a cold bastard if you think this guy had it coming to him. We should consider human suffering before animal suffering, ALWAYS. That being said, I think bullfighting is stupid -- most of all because it is dangerous. That doesn't mean we can say that this guy "had it coming". As has been said, people take precedence over animals. I disagree personally that people take precedence over animals. I don't see any reason to think this way other than that, being people ourselves, we want this to be true. However notice that this is irrelevant since this is not a situation where we have to chose. Tell the guy to stop stabbing the bull, and the bull will stop stabbing the guy. End of story. The guy walked into the ring. His decision. | ||
|
WeSt
Portugal918 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:04 neohero9 wrote: I'm pointing out holes in your logic. You said "they're going to eat the bull in the end," in an attempt to justify the way in which they kill it. I responded with examples of animals we wouldn't want to see this done to. Now you're adding the cultural factor. Let's consider this. Why is something "ok" just because it's what's been done forever? In some cultures it's customary for women to have their genitals mutilated, in order to reduce their sexual pleasure and stem the temptation of cheating. Does this make it "ok"? Many women lose all sensation in the region; some die. Is this a cost justified by culture? In some cultures, the practice of "exposing" was normal. Exposing is when a newborn child is left in an area outside of town and exposed to the elements, to die. This may have been done because the child was unwanted due to defect, or perhaps questionable lineage. Does the longevity of its practice make it ok? In some cultures it was once alright for a husband to beat his wife if she refused him or disagreed with him. This was the norm, and had been for a long time. Does this make it alright? In my country's history, it was once the cultural norm that black people were considered less than human-- something akin to animals who can talk. Women were afforded only slightly better stance in society. This wasn't unique to America-- it was common in many nations, for a very long time. Should we have simply accepted and supported it because it had been? Also thank you for being the first person to directly answer my posts. I've refuted many points in this thread without any response. Fingers in ears and screaming 'lalalala' is a fun way to exist, apparently. I would urge to you put away the "PETA hippie scumbag" mentality. It's something I've been exploring, and I've come to the conclusion that language like that is a way of dismissing someone's input. If one is a "PETA hippie scumbag", or a honkey, or a spic, or a retard, or an abo, it's easy to dismiss them. They become less than human, less than you, and so their ideas become immediately not worth consideration. Wait what? You need to start differentiating people from animals. All the history arguments you gave were related with PEOPLE. What has that to do with animal rights? About the "PETA hippie scumbag"... Let me tell you, I happen to know some GreenPeace members and I know what kind of ideals most (not all) of them are following. Hypocrisy is rampant in this kind of organizations. | ||
|
neohero9
United States595 Posts
| ||
|
WeSt
Portugal918 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:56 neohero9 wrote: "What to do today...? Hrm... Oh I know. I'll find an animal... one ten times bigger than me... with HORNS! And I'll put him into a pen and piss him off. Then I'll open the pen and let him escape into a larger area, like a ring... and me and nine of my buddies will taunt him and stab him. Yes, this seems like a completely safe activity, during which nothing bad can possibly happen to me!" My first sentence directed to you was "Are you a troll?". Now I know you are. Wasting time with trolls is over  Bye. | ||
|
[NyC]HoBbes
United States803 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:56 neohero9 wrote: "What to do today...? Hrm... Oh I know. I'll find an animal... one ten times bigger than me... with HORNS! And I'll put him into a pen and piss him off. Then I'll open the pen and let him escape into a larger area, like a ring... and me and nine of my buddies will taunt him and stab him. Yes, this seems like a completely safe activity, during which nothing bad can possibly happen to me!" I don't think anyone is saying nothing bad should ever happen to matadors, what I'm taking issue with is the mentality many people have expressed in this thread of "It's wonderful that he got stabbed, I only wish he had died" | ||
|
neohero9
United States595 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:54 WeSt wrote: Wait what? You need to start differentiating people from animals. All the history arguments you gave were related with PEOPLE. What has that to do with animal rights? About the "PETA hippie scumbag"... Let me tell you, I happen to know some GreenPeace members and I know what kind of ideals most (not all) of them are following. Hypocrisy is rampant in this kind of organizations. Do you know why I use human examples, rather than animal ones? The people with whom I was arguing dismiss animal suffering because it is animals involved. I'm removing that ability, and addressing ONLY the argument from "cultural norm". I'm not a member of GreenPeace, nor PETA, so I can't say I know anything about their ideals. However I'd recommend you not try to draw parallels from one organization to another, nor to be dismissive about the individual ideas that some members may have. I know some crazy ass evangelical Baptists, that doesn't mean I know shit all about Presbyterians. | ||
|
neohero9
United States595 Posts
On June 10 2010 10:59 [NyC]HoBbes wrote: I don't think anyone is saying nothing bad should ever happen to matadors, what I'm taking issue with is the mentality many people have expressed in this thread of "It's wonderful that he got stabbed, I only wish he had died" I see where you're coming from. These people are exhibiting the same knee jerk reaction we have about a Pit Bull who attacks a human-- it deserves to die. While it may be true in some cases (many times dogs will repeat such behavior, especially ones which have been bred to fight to the death, which is part of why Pits get such a bad rap... I have one  ), I personally don't wish death upon the matador. There are very few cases in which death is a warranted punishment, I think, but that's a debate for a different occasion. | ||
|
neohero9
United States595 Posts
| ||
|
[NyC]HoBbes
United States803 Posts
On June 10 2010 11:02 neohero9 wrote: I see where you're coming from. These people are exhibiting the same knee jerk reaction we have about a Pit Bull who attacks a human-- it deserves to die. While it may be true in some cases (many times dogs will repeat such behavior, especially ones which have been bred to fight to the death, which is part of why Pits get such a bad rap... I have one ), I personally don't wish death upon the matador. There are very few cases in which death is a warranted punishment, I think, but that's a debate for a different occasion.Thank you for that, at least. I find it confusing when people think the matador deserves to die but the killing of bulls should be banned | ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
| ||
