Michael Vick says "I'm not a bad person". LOLOLOLOL!

[jonhomeowner]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/14/vick.letters/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

[-tool-]

that letter was bullshit. he's only sorry because his ass is going to jail.

....i cant stand it when people hurt animals.:mad:

[thebigother]

I don't see how it's any different from killing a cow or a chicken.

[EllaINchainS]

I don't see how it's any different from killing a cow or a chicken.

The difference lies in the reasoning...I'm not the type of person to take a life - of an animal, insect, human or otherwise - unless it is completely necessary...killing a cow to feed a family is survival, stabbing someone who is trying to rape you is self-defense...but pitting animals against eachother as Sport for personal pleasure & monetary gain is wrong...and rather disgusting in my opinion...

[jonhomeowner]

I don't see how it's any different from killing a cow or a chicken.
Seriously, Zach?

I thought more of you.

[EllaINchainS]

Seriously, Zach?

I thought more of you.

at least someone agrees with me...

[-tool-]

I don't see how it's any different from killing a cow or a chicken.

how can you compare the two?......

[thebigother]

Seriously, Zach?

I thought more of you.
The only difference is that culturally we place more sentimental importance on dogs and other pets than it does on cows and other live stock. It's no more necessary to eat a cow or wear leather in a developed country than it is to have a pet to keep you company. I'm not saying that one is just as ethical as the other, but that dog fighting and the consumption of livestock for vanity purposes are just as unethical.

[thebigother]

how can you compare the two?......
Technically three, and they're comparable in that they are all instances of humans exploiting and killing other sentient animals for no reasons other than that they want to and they can.

[jonhomeowner]

The only difference is that culturally we place more sentimental importance on dogs and other pets than it does on cows and other live stock. It's no more necessary to eat a cow or wear leather in a developed country than it is to have a pet to keep you company. I'm not saying that one is just as ethical as the other, but that dog fighting and the consumption of livestock for vanity purposes are just as unethical.
No, they're not equally unethical.

One involves training animals to maliciously attack one another. The other involves simply killing an animal to eat it. In one, the animal is punished and injured (possibly many times over) before ever being allowed to die. In the other, animals are simply killed one day.

[EllaINchainS]

No, they're not equally unethical.

One involves training animals to maliciously attack one another. The other involves simply killing an animal to eat it. In one, the animal is punished and injured (possibly many times over) before ever being allowed to die. In the other, animals are simply killed one day.

isn't that what I said? Nobody listens to me...:rolleyes:

[thebigother]

No, they're not equally unethical.

One involves training animals to maliciously attack one another. The other involves simply killing an animal to eat it. In one, the animal is punished and injured (possibly many times over) before ever being allowed to die. In the other, animals are simply killed one day.
It's not as all of a sudden there was an abundance of cattle that we had to get rid of. People bread them specifically to be harvested for consumption, the same way they bread certain types of dogs to be aggressive and fight. The vast majority of animal products available for consumption come from factory farms with absolutely deplorable conditions. Dairy cows are kept constantly pregnant, pumped full of hormones and have their movement restricted. Fighting dogs are kept constantly agitated and come from dog mills with deplorable conditions. Both are constantly in a lot of pain, both were artificially created by humans, and neither seems particularly fun.

[jonhomeowner]

It's not as all of a sudden there was an abundance of cattle that we had to get rid of. People bread them specifically to be harvested for consumption, the same way they bread certain types of dogs to be aggressive and fight.
And that's not the difference I was talking about, at all.

Yes, they were both bred for their purposes. But forcing a dog to injure another dog or die... Over and over again is 1000x more cruel than raising an animal to kill and eat.

[thebigother]

If it was just about raising an animal to kill and eat, then I'd agree. What I take issue with is the way such animals are raised and that they are raised and slaughtered in quantities vastly exceeding what is necessary. Dogs are forced to fight each other over and over again. Cows are forced to be pregnant pumped full of drugs and then have their offspring taken away over and over. Their udders swell far beyond what is considered natural, and causes the animal a great deal of pain, and it's not even as if they're allowed any reasonable amount of movement either. Disease is widespread in factory farms, and I can't imagine cattle prods feeling too pleasant either. It goes far beyond any reasonable level of subsistence, and serves no practical purpose other than to feed humanity's sense of entitlement and vanity. If the amount of pain is the measure of cruelty, then I would think that only meaningfull difference is that cattle aren't forced to fight each other, but even bull fighting is a sanctioned sport in parts of the world generally considered developed and "enlightened", and where dog fighting would never go over. Obviously I don't approve of dog fighting, or any form of animal fighting, and I feel guilty every time I eat hamburger. I just think it's a completely arbitrary distinction between which animals are okay to abuse and which methods of abuse are acceptable, and those which are not okay to abuse and methods that are not acceptable.

[EllaINchainS]

Point taken...now that it's been properly explained, I must say I agree...

[jonhomeowner]

I still don't.

I think growing and abusing animals for food is fine. I disagree with doing it for sport.

[thebigother]

I don't have inherent problem with using animals for food. But I also don't think there is any good reason why anybody should have an endless supply of meet on demand.

[EllaINchainS]

I still don't.

I think growing and abusing animals for food is fine. I disagree with doing it for sport.

My only question is, why can't there be better conditions? Is it really necessary for there to be such abuse? I mean, if you think about it, we're eating those animals...what kind of diseases and such are we getting from them that we don't know about? You'd think that they would want to take better care of the animals that they're feeding to the general public...

Then again, our government is not one to spend precious dollars on taking care of it's masses...so I guess I can see why...

[thebigother]

We do know what diseases we're getting from them. It's just that nobody really cares.

[EllaINchainS]

We do know what diseases we're getting from them. It's just that nobody really cares.

What I meant was, I'm sure there are others that haven't been widespread enough to really notice...but the whole "not caring" thing is what I was getting at...

[jonhomeowner]

My only question is, why can't there be better conditions? Is it really necessary for there to be such abuse? I mean, if you think about it, we're eating those animals...what kind of diseases and such are we getting from them that we don't know about? You'd think that they would want to take better care of the animals that they're feeding to the general public...
If there were better conditions, it would cost more. It's cost-effective this way. It allows everybody to afford meat, which is essential for proper growth, according to the government.

[EllaINchainS]

Money...the Root of all evil...

I tell ya what, I wish we could just go back to the Barter system...

but that's just me...

[jonhomeowner]

Money...the Root of all evil...

I tell ya what, I wish we could just go back to the Barter system...

but that's just me...
That wouldn't help. The barter system still works via supply and demand. If you grew the animals in a non-cost-effective way, you'd still have to "barter" for them at their higher "price".

[EllaINchainS]

That wouldn't help. The barter system still works via supply and demand. If you grew the animals in a non-cost-effective way, you'd still have to "barter" for them at their higher "price".

I was actually being more selfish with that statement...it would just be easier for me...I hate money...

[jonhomeowner]

I was actually being more selfish with that statement...it would just be easier for me...I hate money...
It'd be no easier. You'd have to barter with something. It'd all be the same.

[EllaINchainS]

I have plenty of talents...

[jonhomeowner]

I have plenty of talents...
Well, you DO live in Nevada... You could make plenty of money with them.

[EllaINchainS]

Well, you DO live in Nevada... You could make plenty of money with them.

damn right!