Bullfighting: Justify Cruelty with Tradition

  • Thread starter Thread starter spencelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rence, what I meant was he thinks that dogs and mentally disabled humans are equals; depending on the level of mental disability, dogs can possibly be superior.
I extend the principle of equal consideration of interests to animals, which means that equivalent interests – e.g., interests in not suffering – are given equal consideration, whether human or animal. This is what I mean by the equality of humans and animals – their like interests are equal and thus should be weighed equally.
 
abidewithme:

If you take take the time to do a search you will find actual pictures of horses being gored by the bulls. It is a known fact that the horses vocal chords are slit so the crowd is not turned off by their screams in pain as they are gored.

Below is only one of many articles written against the abuses of bullfighting. It is unreasonable to think I should have to reprint every article to satisfy you. However, you can take the time and research this to educate yourself. Fortunately, the graphic pictures of horses being gored have not followed this article but please do a search on you tube if you must see all the gorey details of the cruelity the horses are subjected to.

Furthermore, I do not fox hunt. I rode jumpers in the 60’s and have been riding dressage since the early 70’s when it was brought to this country Since then I have been traied to the Grand Prix level and have brought many horses along to different levels. While there are Nuno lovers out there I am trained in the Spanish riding school methods (German).

I do hope you are not trying to equate actual Dressage with what one will see in the bull ring of terrified horses frantically twisting themselves into pretzels trying desperately to escape from a raging terrified bull as one has zero to do with the other no matter what one uneducated eye may think it sees.

I suppose you feel dog fighting is ok too since some people feel it is a tradition.
Holy cow, horselvr. I’m frankly too offended by your post to reply politely tonight, and tomorrow I’m epecting a long day with no free time to reply. But, wow–I do hope I’m reading your attitude wrong.

Re: dog-fighting—How many times do I have to repeat what I said in my first post on this thread? —Bullfighting is unethical. I said that clearly in every post of mine.

I’m just amazed at your post, and I need to get to sleep so I can do what I need to do tomorrow. I want to respond to your points, but I’m not going to let some offensive internet post take a bite out my sleep time.

For what it’s worth to you, I used to ride fourth level dressage-German school–before starting over to learn French/Iberian dressage a little over a decade ago. Knowing there was a good deal of poorly-taught dressage out there, I made a point of getting myself access to good lessons by being a working student at a dressage barn where I had monthly lessons with Olympians, besides my regular working student lessons from a Prix St. George rider. About 25 years ago I got to ride a Lipizzan stallion from Tempel Farms, which, though he was trained by German school methods, began my interest first in Iberian horses then in Iberian dressage. It’s very impressive that you rode Grand Prix, but I’m telling you some of my own background to let you know that I don’t have an “uneducated eye” when I’m looking at bullfighting Lusitanos.

You seem to have completely missed the point of my previous posts.
 
His passion is protecting the animals. We all have our passions and callings. He’s not fighting for them any less than any of us fight for that which we believe in.
But he has an agenda in it. Other CAFers are suspecting his motives.
 
But he has an agenda in it. Other CAFers are suspecting his motives.
I haven’t read all, or even most, of Spencer’s posts, but he seems pretty honest in the limited posts I have seen. As much as I am against animal abuse, I also
sharply disagree with Peter Singer’s philosophy of bioethics, which at the worst, condones bestiality and infanticide. But Spencer has been open in speaking of Singer’s influence, and I respect him for that openness although I thoroughly disagree with the philosophy.
 
abidewithme:

Bullfighters claim that bulls bred for bullfights are aggressive and fearsome animals. This is also untrue. They fight because they are fighting for their lives.

Take a look at the International Movement Against Bullfights website.
We suggest you read the “ongoing campaigns” section.
Your post is well expressed. Sorry I had to shorten it to fit this in.

I would, however, very much disagree with the following part of it:

“Bullfighters claim that bulls bred for bullfights are aggressive and fearsome animals. This is also untrue. They fight because they are fighting for their lives.”

As a cattleman of many years, I can say for absolute certain that some animals, male or female, some young, some in their prime, some old, can attack, whether threatened or not. Some are primed to attack pretty much all the time. Those, one eliminates from the herd lest their tendencies be passed on to their offspring or imitated by others, thus ruining a herd. I have seen groups of cattle that have been so ruined by this that nobody could possibly work with them. I even saw one aspiring but inexperienced would-be cattleman forced to shoot his smallish herd because they were so ferocious nobody could approach them. He did try to sell them in the field, but nobody would buy them. They were like that because he was injudicious in purchasing them and because he didn’t work them intensively from the very beginning. Left to themselves, they get as wild as any wild animal. Any cattleman in open brush country will readily tell you that an animal that has lived out in the wild very long becomes dangerous and may attack, unprovoked, out of nowhere. And when cattle are specifically bred and raised to enhance those tendencies???

We see in circuses, “lion tamers” who, by patient effort, train a wild animal to do certain things and not to do certain other things. Even so, now and then one of the “tamers” gets mauled or killed. Cattle are really not entirely different, just less ferocious than lions or tigers and, being herd animals, can be more easily handled if kept in groups.

Just about any of them will attack given the right circumstance, and the “right circumstance” is not only fear. It can be a movement, including a movement of another herd member, or something in the corner of its eye. It can be something the animal has not encountered before. I once saw a cow attack a woman who was simply picking up bale net, perhaps 40 yards away. And this was a cow of a breed known for gentleness that had never before made a hostile move toward a person. Some attacks are for dominance, which is why they’re much more likely to attack a child than an adult. Some attacks are more in the nature of simply getting someone out of the chosen pathway; an ever-present danger while working with cattle in a corral. The only real “defense” to this is rigorous selection and working with them in close quarters very frequently so they get used to it and trained to it.

To know what they can and will do, all one has to do is notice what they do to each other in a field. There is daily “pecking-order” fighting; not every one, of course, but perhaps several times/day in any given herd. Even a perfunctory attack would kill a human.

I say all of that, having worked with cattle all my life, and as a person who truly likes them. I am very careful about removing violent animals from the herd at the first sign of that inclination (usually when about half grown). In fact, my veterinarian sometimes complains that they’re “too gentle” and are therefore difficult to move around in the chutes, which slows the work down. It’s easier to move them if they’re a bit more wild.

And even so, I never trust them. I have had to dodge many a charge, as every cattleman does. Fortunately, they are usually just perfunctory and they give it up if they miss once and one “trains them otherwise” by (usually) cracking a whip in front of their eyes, then making them move in a particular way they were not otherwise inclined to do. On the other hand, I once saw a Santa Gertrudis cow attack a man on horseback in an open field and knock down man, horse and all. (Some breeds I would never own, and Santa Gertrudis are at the top of that list.) And it wasn’t a small horse, either. Why it did that, I don’t know. I only know that it did.

I was once challenged by a neighbor’s bull while I was operating a large bobcat with a grapple on the front. The bull threatened a charge several times, though it would have been torn to pieces on the grapple had it actually done it. (I held the grapple open, just in case it did attack) I was no threat to it at all. Likely it saw this strange piece of equipment and decided it needed to “dominate” it physically.

One may say what one will about bullfighting. From the viewpoint of some, it’s the glorification of an animal that would never otherwise exist. From the viewpoint of others, it’s needless cruelty. But whichever view one has, cattle are what they are by their nature, and we should be very slow to attribute human motivations to them.
 
Because the person was a complete moron, that’s why. That’s why I said: people who abuse animals get what they deserve, and I have no sympathy for this girl. At all. I don’t CARE what happens to her. And I don’t care who is offended by that. Whoever cares can put their money where their mouth is and pay for her to go to a hospital because she doesn’t even care enough about herself to do so and is ‘riding it out’. Good luck to her, I hope it turns out well. But that horse, on the other hand, has smashed teeth, a gashed up hock and several chucks of meat missing from this accident. She may not even be rideable again and that’s being optimistic. She may have to be put down over this. This was serious and it was because a human being was not being humane.
And yet in the eyes of God there is an infinite difference between horses and humans.

The lowest, most worthless, depraved, drug addicted prostitute, mass murdering, rapist, death-row inmate, stupid horse driving idiot has infinitely more value to God than the most magestic and awe inspiring horse that ever lived.

I willingly accept that I will be accused of ignorance at a minimum, and of hating horses.

-Tim-
 
I don’t want to offend anyone, but it seems like cruelty to animals is inemic to Latin culture.
Not only bullfighting but cockfighting and dog fighting.

I think that perhaps in many occasions it is projection, based on machismo.
 
And yet in the eyes of God there is an infinite difference between horses and humans.

The lowest, most worthless, depraved, drug addicted prostitute, mass murdering, rapist, death-row inmate, stupid horse driving idiot has infinitely more value to God than the most magestic and awe inspiring horse that ever lived.

I willingly accept that I will be accused of ignorance at a minimum, and of hating horses.

-Tim-
I have to agree with you, TimothyH.

Re: andrewstx, whether that’s true or not doesn’t really seem relevant to the morality of the action, which seems to be what we’re discussing.
 
I don’t want to offend anyone, but it seems like cruelty to animals is inemic to Latin culture.
Not only bullfighting but cockfighting and dog fighting.

I think that perhaps in many occasions it is projection, based on machismo.
Maybe. But one notes that bullfighting in some manner has been prevalent in the Mediterranean world for millenia. It varies, of course. We see the old Minoan paintings of the bull fighting where, apparently, acrobatic athletes engaged bulls in a sort of tumbling act; grabbing the horns and flipping over the animal’s back. If there was more to it, we don’t really know.

There is a milder sort of bull fighting in France, in a swampy area called the Camargue, near the Mediterranean, that seem very longstanding. Then, of course, there’s Spain and Portugal. It appears Spanish forms of bull fighting are spreading into France, notwithstanding Catalonia’s banning of it.

Whatever one says about it, it appears to have been embedded in Mediterranean culture since the time “before which the memory of man runneth not.”

Dog fighting and bull-and-dog fights were a mainstay in Britain until fairly recently, and was very prevalent in the U.S. as well. Fighting dogs like bulldogs and pit bulls were developed in the Anglosphere. And Cock fighting has been a “hillbilly” pastime for as long as there have been hillbillies.

So, I don’t know that it’s a peculiarly Latin thing.
 
I have to agree with you, TimothyH.

Re: andrewstx, whether that’s true or not doesn’t really seem relevant to the morality of the action, which seems to be what we’re discussing.
I think my morality very much comes into play here.

A the “sport” of watching dogs and chickens killing each other I think is immoral.

B the spectators often becoming intoxicated to a high degree.

C the spectators placing wagers over the out come(who kills who) and the spectators are usually very poor and could use the squandered money, sometimes they could use the cash to eat things other than pinto beans and tortillas.
 
Maybe. But one notes that bullfighting in some manner has been prevalent in the Mediterranean world for millenia. It varies, of course. We see the old Minoan paintings of the bull fighting where, apparently, acrobatic athletes engaged bulls in a sort of tumbling act; grabbing the horns and flipping over the animal’s back. If there was more to it, we don’t really know.

There is a milder sort of bull fighting in France, in a swampy area called the Camargue, near the Mediterranean, that seem very longstanding. Then, of course, there’s Spain and Portugal. It appears Spanish forms of bull fighting are spreading into France, notwithstanding Catalonia’s banning of it.

Whatever one says about it, it appears to have been embedded in Mediterranean culture since the time “before which the memory of man runneth not.”

Dog fighting and bull-and-dog fights were a mainstay in Britain until fairly recently, and was very prevalent in the U.S. as well. Fighting dogs like bulldogs and pit bulls were developed in the Anglosphere. And Cock fighting has been a “hillbilly” pastime for as long as there have been hillbillies.

So, I don’t know that it’s a peculiarly Latin thing.
That is true globally, It’s just that Iive on the TX NM border and what I am accustomed to is the latinoes fighting more dogs and cocks than bulls.
 
That is true globally, It’s just that Iive on the TX NM border and what I am accustomed to is the latinoes fighting more dogs and cocks than bulls.
Oh, I don’t much doubt it. Fighting dogs and cocks is incomparably cheaper than bullfighting and, since all are probably illegal where you are, a whole lot easier to hide.
 
I think my morality very much comes into play here.

A the “sport” of watching dogs and chickens killing each other I think is immoral.

B the spectators often becoming intoxicated to a high degree.

C the spectators placing wagers over the out come(who kills who) and the spectators are usually very poor and could use the squandered money, sometimes they could use the cash to eat things other than pinto beans and tortillas.
You’re misunderstanding what I said. I agree with all of that. What I mean is that if Latins traditionally do it is pretty irrelevant to all of this. It’s wrong whether it’s a Latin tradition or not.
 
And yet in the eyes of God there is an infinite difference between horses and humans.

The lowest, most worthless, depraved, drug addicted prostitute, mass murdering, rapist, death-row inmate, stupid horse driving idiot has infinitely more value to God than the most magestic and awe inspiring horse that ever lived.

I willingly accept that I will be accused of ignorance at a minimum, and of hating horses.

-Tim-
Well they may be of more value to someone, just not to me 🤷

In fact, I don’t have any value at all for a lowest, most worthless, depraved, drug addicted prostitute, mass murdering, rapist, death-row inmate. I’m okay with someone who does…I guess someone has to. But it’s okay, the world is big enough for both of us 🙂 I’ll take the horse, and it doesn’t even have to be the most magestic or awe inspiring one either. And you can take the lowest, most worthless, depraved, drug addicted prostitute, mass murdering, rapist, death-row inmate 😃
 
Well they may be of more value to someone, just not to me 🤷

In fact, I don’t have any value at all for a lowest, most worthless, depraved, drug addicted prostitute, mass murdering, rapist, death-row inmate. I’m okay with someone who does…I guess someone has to. But it’s okay, the world is big enough for both of us 🙂 I’ll take the horse, and it doesn’t even have to be the most magestic or awe inspiring one either. And you can take the lowest, most worthless, depraved, drug addicted prostitute, mass murdering, rapist, death-row inmate 😃
While I said that I agree with Timothy, I WILL say that if a person who tortures animals for fun is killed it will be hard for me not to feel some sense of justice.

Gary Paulsen’s “Winterdance”, about his first Iditarod run, is a must read. There is a portion of the boot where Paulsen actually witnesses a man KICK his dog to death with steel-toed boots. In the middle of the Iditarod!

Paulsen, literally, wanted to kill the man. He said he was lucky he didn’t have a gun, or the man would have been shot. He actually seriously considered going at the man with the hatchet in his hand, but decided against it. In the end he reported the man at the next official rest stop and he was banned from all dog racing in every event throughout the country.

Why the extreme reaction? The answer is that on the Iditarod, without the dogs, you would die. It’s that simple. Many times the drivers lose their bearings and they need to rely on the dogs to find the correct path again. They are your lifeline. For somebody to kill somebody who is keeping you alive, who is one of your only companions, in the frozen tundra is a sick thing to do.

Paulsen should not have killed the man. But if he had, it would have been very hard for me to feel any particular sense of moral outrage.
 
Paulsen should not have killed the man. But if he had, it would have been very hard for me to feel any particular sense of moral outrage.
Emotionally, it is understandable that a person would feel that way. But morally, one never kills a human being for the sake of an animal.

People are fond of saying that moral or religious beliefs should not affect the laws. “Don’t impose your morals on me” they say. But the law is full of such things and in this kind of situation, the law would punish the man severely for killing a person, but little for killing a dog in this manner. And the law is right in making the balance this way.
 
You’re misunderstanding what I said. I agree with all of that. What I mean is that if Latins traditionally do it is pretty irrelevant to all of this. It’s wrong whether it’s a Latin tradition or not.
I agree with you there, and apologise to any who are offended. It’s just like I said I am just familiar based on where I live.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top