Sorry if I understand that no dog fighting is better than dog fighting. I don't know why you would defend such a thing.
um, I don't really get your whole attitude or reasoning in this thread...very simply and plainly, do you or do you not support dog fighting in general?
i agree with rm95, its hard for me to criticize someone fighting dogs when i eat meat every damn day of the year. um, at least the dogs have a chance.
It pertains to the safety of other human beings that may inadvertently provoke these dogs into combat. Fact is dogs that are trained to fight go through abuse to make them such dangerous killers. Assume one of those abused dogs were to get out on the street and were somehow provoked by a mom taking her baby infant for a walk in the stroller in the same neighborhood Michael Vick was in. Assume the dog attacked the baby and ended up killing it. These sorts of incidents are a lot more common than you think. It's not so much about whether dog fighting is inhumane. It's when you twist a dog to be a killer from consistent abuse that it runs the risks of hurting other human beings.
all the animals we eat die in a vicious manner, you don't have to support dog fighting. I'm not a card carrying member of the fighting dogs breeders union, but I'm not gonna be so critical of someone for it either. as if I have some moral high ground when it comes to animals
You are right. Everything is connected. It's about awareness of the suffering caused by the destruction of life being animal, human, born, unborn etc.
Wow, so you're fine defending the training and abusing of animals so that they will fight each other to their deaths for your personal amusement/entertainment?
what's the difference between your appetite and their entertainment. animals arent' essential to your diet.
you think cows are killed humanely, maybe you should visit a slaughter house. there's a reason their called "slaughter" houses
I don't know, but I basically came to the conclusion that he's a vegetarian that is ok with dogfighting
I'm not defending either one. I am not criticizing either one. I'm critical of people taking a moral stance against these guys when over 90% of americans condone killing animals everyday.
Being half right is better than not being right at all. Would you rather have a absolute no respect for life? I think a lot of people want to eat animals, but they don't want the animal to suffer. (so mostly they ignore it). But dog fighting celebrates the violence. That's what most people don't get. I see what you are saying though. I don't understand all the anti-abortionists that go out for steak after their big pro-life rally. But killing for food is a little more understandable to me because it is part of the past and sometimes present human experience. Some humans choose not to kill and eat animals for food. But we are omnivores, capable of doing both. It is a part of our past to kill the need for food, not just the flavor (desire). Yet I think when your are able to choose, it is better choose the way of less suffering.
