| Author |
Messages |
|
Arbitrator
Posts:220
 |
| 08/21/2007 7:37 PM |
 Alert
|
Not to berate the obvious, one is a crime, a felony, the other matter is simply ones choice of a meal.
Not sure how many lobster dinners in Mike Vicks future,
|
|
|
|
|
Blackshirt
Posts:586
|
| 08/22/2007 12:53 AM |
Alert
|
Setting aside the hypocrisy that you're talking about, vranged, and I'm not saying you're completely off base.
And, setting aside the hypocrisy that PETA wasn't picketing the return of Leonard Little into the league (or even Ray Lewis, although he managed to skate).
Vick broke a law before a newer "get tough" commissioner took over and after, if the allegations are true.
The problem is that he broke a law that was bound to get him the kind of heat (legal and otherwise) that could potentially ruin his career.
It was complete and utter stupidity on his part just for that reasons alone. |
|
"Perhaps the worst thing that can happen is to reach into the refrigerator and come out with something that you cannot identify at all. You literally do not know what it is. Could be meat, could be cake. Usually, at a time like that, I'll bluff. "Honey, is this good?" "Well, what is it?" "I don't know. I've never seen anything like it. It looks like...meatcake!" "Well, smell it." (snort, sniff) "It has absolutely no smell whatsoever!" "It's good! Put it back! Somebody is saving it. It'll turn up in something." Thats what frightens me. That someone will consider it a challenge and use it just because it's in there." -- George Carlin |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 7:13 AM |
Alert
|
The lobster comment was mainly out of sarcasm.  |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 9:06 AM |
Alert
|
Blackshirt, the fact that Vick broke a law is exactly what I'm talking about. THE LAW ITSELF is hypocritcal. That's why I'm critical of society. So, whenever anyone says: "Butchering isn't illegal; dogfighting is", they're basically making my point for me.
Killing dogs is illegal, but killing cattle, pigs, lobsters, deer (hunting), etc. isn't. That's inconsistent.
Beating a dog is illegal, but whipping the hell out of a horse to make it go faster isn't. That's inconsistent.
Vick's obviously a sick puppy (pun intended). To enjoy watching animals suffer like that is deranged. I'm more critical of the overwhelming negative, bloodthirsty reaction of a society that condones the exact same behaviour towards other animals, simply because they taste better. |
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 9:24 AM |
Alert
|
I don't have a problem with boiling lobsters or killing animals for food. I don't have a problem with killing animals for sport so long as it's done in a responsible manner that is sensitive to legitimately protected animals like the Bald Eagle (yes, there are illegitimately protected animals, thanks DNR).
Where I have a problem is when there is deliberate damage done for malicious intentions. Dog fighting definitely crosses this line and other sports with gambling around them dance near it.
When you get into rape stands, throwing dogs violently and the other things Vick was involved with then it's a no-brainer, but honestly when I look at horse racing and dog racing by and large that is similar enough to the treatment of human athletes in sports that I don't put it on the same level.
Just my personal take. |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 9:35 AM |
Alert
|
| I don't think the intent of the person doing the killing/beating matters much to the animals being killed/beaten. It might make you feel better, but at the end of the day, you still have a dead/beaten animal. That's exactly the type of hypocrisy I'm talking about. And don't take that personally, egami. I eat steak. Crab legs are about my favorite food. And I don't condone dogfighting. But I'm also practical enough to realize that the difference between what happens to the "victimized dogs" vs. the "delicious veal" isn't very big. The public outcry is what I'm most critical of. |
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 9:48 AM |
Alert
|
| If intent doesn't matter much then why do find boiled crab acceptable and what Vick did unacceptable? |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 10:02 AM |
Alert
|
It's amazing how I have to type the same God damn thing hundreds of times, because you only read what you want to read. Seriously -- how many different times do I have to type that I don't condone dogfighting?
It's the public outcry that I'm critical of. Since you'll probably read that in a different way then what is stated, clear as day, I'll type it again. IT'S THE PUBLIC OUTCRY THAT I'M CRITICAL OF. It's hypocritical for a guy eating steak, watching a horse race, or hunting a deer to get on a soapbox and blast Michael Vick. |
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 10:30 AM |
Alert
|
Dude, chill...it was a simple, honest question. No need to get all offensive...
I fully comprehend the public outcry aspect.
I still don't see where you, personally, in your mind make the distiction however. It's obvious to me by your words you don't equate the two in practice. What doesn't make sense is how you can hold that position then turn around and say that you don't see why intent doesn't matter much. It was just a minor point I had a question about...no need to blow a testicle.
To me, intent makes a significant difference.
Obviously, from a practical standpoint, we agree on the topic for the most part. My biggest criticism of the animal huggers is their desire to suggest animals are entitled to human rights. |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 10:46 AM |
Alert
|
I'm saying intent doesn't matter TO THE ANIMALS. A dead cow is a dead cow. A dead dog is a dead dog. The intent of why we killed each doesn't matter to the animal. To society, intent is crucial to creating the justification that allows us to sleep at night.
As for blowing a testicle -- sorry. Got frustrated, b/c it seemed like you were saying I condone dogfighting, when I've said repeatedly I don't. I'm not that upset about it either. |
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 11:01 AM |
Alert
|
Ok, that was my mistake, when you said 'to the animal' I didn't really think you were personifying animals.
I wouldn't consider animals 'feelings' to be relevant to the topic. |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 1:08 PM |
Alert
|
| You're not tracking, egami. The reason Vick's behavior is illegal is because it's cruel, right? What I'm saying is, from the animal's perspective (don't take that so literally), getting beaten/killed for sport vs. for food is just as cruel. |
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 1:27 PM |
Alert
|
Sure, because it's "animal cruelty" by law, I suppose...it'd be interesting to see the actual law.
Now we venture back to my previous point...
cru·el /ˈkruəl/
–adjective, -er, -est.
1. willfully or knowingly causing pain or distress to others.
2. enjoying the pain or distress of others: the cruel spectators of the gladiatorial contests.
3. causing or marked by great pain or distress: a cruel remark; a cruel affliction.
4. rigid; stern; strict; unrelentingly severe.
I do not view killing animals for food as "cruel". Animal cruelty is by and large defined by the intent of the act. Can killing animals for food be "cruel"? Absolutely, but not by the mere fact that they are being killed.
You seem to be dumbing down the killing of an animal to be cruel no matter what the intent. |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 2:24 PM |
Alert
|
When we decapitate a chicken so we can eat it, aren't we "willfully causing pain to chickens". When we brand a cow, and then slaughter it, for the end result of ENJOYING a nice steak, aren't we "enjoying the pain of a cow". When we whip/kick a horse as hard as possible so it runs faster, aren't we "causing great pain or distress to Barbaro".
Society has made it okay to do certain things to some animals, because the end result is something satisfying to us. Is that really how our moral compass should be directed? A steak, the Kentuck Derby, and the stuffed moose on your den wall, all resulted from one act -- abusing and/or killing an animal. My point is this: by eating a steak, you engage in, tolerate, and perpetuate behavior that is similar to Michael Vick's -- only towards a cow, instead of a dog. Thus, if you passionately condemn him, it's hypocritical.
Vick's dogs were killed/abused for his enjoyment. Much like cows/chickens/pigs are killed/abused for our enjoyment. How horses are whipped/branded for our enjoyment. Etc.
Do you at least see where I'm coming from? |
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 2:43 PM |
Alert
|
I see where you are coming from, but I disagree that it's that simple.
When you properly kill animals for food consumption there isn't pain involved. And you are ignoring one of the more critical aspects of the definition in the legal arena which is enjoyment of the pain. When you kills animals for food you aren't doing it out of mere pleasure of killing an animal.
By and large most individuals make a distinction between these types of deaths. I am not insinuating that cruelty can't slip into the arena of food processing, but I am saying the nature of it is not cruel. We know this because the legal system does not view it that way either.
You have a very unique view for someone that is a carnivore.
By definition, it's enjoyment of the pain. Not such broad enjoyment that it stretches into the result of food product. |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 3:01 PM |
Alert
|
Do you think Vick was in dogfighting for the mere enjoyment of the pain? I don't. It was a sport to him (a sick sport). It's viewed by them as canine MMA (Kung Fu Scooby Doo?) or boxing (Muhammad Lassie?).
I see the distinction you've referenced, but I don't think it alters the point I'm trying to make. Ironically, I'm going to a steakhouse for dinner tonight. I hope they abused the hell of that cow, and maybe slapped around its calf, before butchering it....
|
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 3:10 PM |
Alert
|
No, I don't think he was just in it for the pain in such a simplistic, twisted way that he got off on torturing animals. He could have simply tortured animals quietly in his basement a la Jeffrey Dahmer.
But he obviously enjoyed watching the fights and a large part of the fights is the deliberate pain and suffering of the animals. Pain and suffering is what defines those fights. The very act of a fight in and of itself is considered cruelty.
I think it's a rather clear distinction versus slaughtering animals for dinner. Enjoy your steak...medium rare. |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 3:27 PM |
Alert
|
| You comparing his actions to those of Jeffrey Dahmer is exactly the type of response I'm saying is ridiculous. |
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
egami
Posts:5397
|
| 08/22/2007 3:48 PM |
Alert
|
Posted By vranged on 08/22/2007 3:27 PM
You comparing his actions to those of Jeffrey Dahmer is exactly the type of response I'm saying is ridiculous.
And if you read what I said it clearly states that is not at all what I am implying he is guilty of. |
|
Posted By Omahan on 11/04/2008 2:24 PM
I've worked very hard to become your friend egami. |
|
|
vranged
Posts:2813
|
| 08/22/2007 3:59 PM |
Alert
|
Your words: "He could have simply tortured animals quietly in his basement a la Jeffrey Dahmer."
Then what was the purpose of bringing him up, if not for some sort of comparison?
|
|
After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up! |
|
|
|