S
spencelo
Guest
How “tough” an animal is doesn’t mean it’s not immune from brutal and cruel treatment.
- Status
C
Crescentinus
Guest
Oh, and it seems that I forgot to mention this.
The differences in opinions regarding bullfighting has more to do with cultural differences.
C
Crescentinus
Guest
Oh, and I’m serious when I told you that they are tough. Hence me not using quotations for that word. Just saying.
Also, my main point for this response is best left unsaid seeing as others had said that point oh so many times in your other threads that saying it here would make said point redundant.
S
spencelo
Guest
Not really. Like I said, people in bullfighting countries are against the practices well (e.g., the CRAC in France). I suggest you take the time to read my post and the various links I referenced.
Moreover, even if there was a sharp cultural divide, that wouldn’t matter – cruelty is cruelty, no matter where it’s practiced. I didn’t think Catholics were moral relativists.
C
cornbread_r2
Guest
Another reason people opposed traditional Spanish bullfighting wasn’t just because of the pain inflicted on the bulls by humans but also because of the pain the bulls inflicted on the horses of the picadores.
Re: comparisons to American football: American football players can choose not to participate.
Re: comparisons to American football: American football players can choose not to participate.
T
triumphguy
Guest
One of the 3 pro answers might just have been sarcasm, since he thought it was just another set-up to show how uncivilized Catholics are.
:dts:
C
Crescentinus
Guest
I did read your links, and I’ve learned that it’s more to do with cultural differences.
Also, thanks for trying to insinuate that Catholics are uncivilized. You had proven my point that you are more of a militant vegan short of going Ingrid Newkirk.
Triumphguy had said it best about what you’re trying to do.
S
spencelo
Guest
What? Where did I do that? The most I “insinuated” was that Catholics who support bullfighting – like yourself – are morally bind to the issue. I’m actually glad to see that bullfighting doesn’t have wide Catholic support.
A baseless and false accusation, one that requires no refutation or further comment.
C
Crescentinus
Guest
Now, there’s a reason why I tend to respect the non-militant vegans over their militant counterparts. The reason is because at least the former know how to respect other people’s views and still have a strong love of veganism. The latter never really does that. In fact, they have been known to equate meat-eating with various crimes against humanity.
Back to the topic at hand.
Yes, there are people who oppose bullfighting on ethical grounds. I disagree with that position but I respect that nonetheless. The reason why I disagree stems from the idea that many people today value animals way more than their fellow human beings.
Back to the topic at hand.
Yes, there are people who oppose bullfighting on ethical grounds. I disagree with that position but I respect that nonetheless. The reason why I disagree stems from the idea that many people today value animals way more than their fellow human beings.
S
spencelo
Guest
I apologize from not picking up on the sarcasm. Vote changed: 6 - 2 (against/for).One of the 3 pro answers might just have been sarcasm, since he thought it was just another set-up to show how uncivilized Catholics are.
C
Crescentinus
Guest
As I’ve been saying earlier, I do not even support it. I’ve been giving my neutral views about it and I back it up with my observations.
I think the reason why bullfighting doesn’t have much support is due to again, cultural grounds. Something tells me that most members here do not have much of an idea about it. Correct me if i am wrong about this observation.
Baseless? Ask triumphguy about it.
C
Crescentinus
Guest
And I don’t even support it in the first place. Hence, please put a score for the neutral side as well.
S
spencelo
Guest
The “for” side simply is the view that bullfighting isn’t wrong. Since you don’t think it’s wrong, you’re “for” it in the sense I’m using.
C
Corki
Guest
Why are you even keeping count if you are just going to put everyone in categories yourself regardless of what is actually expressed?
T
triumphguy
Guest
My actual opinion: I think bullfighting had a cultural validity that is now fading.
My real question is: What are you trying to get from this forum? Evidence that Catholics (or theists in general) are stupid?
That is the sense I get from your questions - a lack of respect for the intellects of believers.
S
spencelo
Guest
What are you talking about? There are two mutually exclusive and exhaustive categories: those who think bullfighting is wrong, and those who think it’s morally permissible. The agnostic group isn’t part of my count.
S
spencelo
Guest
Do you think the practice is morally permissible or not?
T
tafan
Guest
Bull fighting is part of some people’s cultural heritage. Let them be with. Here we are in the USA and our most popular sport takes 20 years of life away from the average professional player. Not only does this typical player die 20 years early, the last 10 years of his life is spent battling dementia.
And we are critical of the Spanish for enjoying bullfighting?
And we are critical of the Spanish for enjoying bullfighting?
T
triumphguy
Guest
What do you mean by practice? Which practice - there are many forms of bullfighting.
What do you mean by permissible? Allowable if morally wrong? Not allowable even if morally OK?
Permissible by me? Do I have the right to an opinion? It is not my culture.
Bullfighting IS.
And as it IS now is not the same as it WAS previously.
C
Corki
Guest
That’s what I meant. The “agnostic” group shouldn’t be part of your count but you decided to put them into one of the categories to try to make a point. Having two mutually exclusive groups does not mean that there are not some people that fall into neither group.
- Status