Ethics of Bull Fighting

[Cornelius Plautus]

Bull Fighting has been a Spanish tradition for centuries, yet nowadays, the Spanish government is contemplating banning the fights, in part, I've heard, because of foreign protesters and animal rights groups, like PETA. What do you think of this affair? Personally, I think that bullfighting is a time-honored tradition, and even if it's seen as cruel outside of Spanish culture, it's well-respected in the country, and taking that tradition away from them just seems wrong. I know that killing animals for sport also seems amoral, but when one considers that the best bullfighters are able to kill a bull with one stab of the sword, I think that it is not as bad. I suppose that this question also sparks the argument of tradition versus modern morality.

[Davius]

Bull Fighting has been a Spanish tradition for centuries, yet nowadays, the Spanish government is contemplating banning the fights, in part, I've heard, because of foreign protesters and animal rights groups, like PETA. What do you think of this affair? Personally, I think that bullfighting is a time-honored tradition, and even if it's seen as cruel outside of Spanish culture, it's well-respected in the country, and taking that tradition away from them just seems wrong. I know that killing animals for sport also seems amoral, but when one considers that the best bullfighters are able to kill a bull with one stab of the sword, I think that it is not as bad. I suppose that this question also sparks the argument of tradition versus modern morality.

They torture/weaken the bull for hours before it even starts. Why don't these homos take on a full strength bull?

[Tiberios]

It should be banned. It's barbaric.

I mean, torturing an animal to death, yeah real brave and fun

[Jom]

Bull Fighting has been a Spanish tradition for centuries, yet nowadays, the Spanish government is contemplating banning the fights, in part, I've heard, because of foreign protesters and animal rights groups, like PETA. What do you think of this affair? Personally, I think that bullfighting is a time-honored tradition, and even if it's seen as cruel outside of Spanish culture, it's well-respected in the country, and taking that tradition away from them just seems wrong.

"Tradition" isn't really much of a defence. If it's so well-respected in the country, why did Barcelona declare itself to be anti-bullfighting. Indeed, 72% of people all over Spain have no interest in bullfighting according to a Gallop poll cited by PETA on their website. It doesn't seem terribly well-respected to me.

I know that killing animals for sport also seems amoral, but when one considers that the best bullfighters are able to kill a bull with one stab of the sword, I think that it is not as bad. I suppose that this question also sparks the argument of tradition versus modern morality.

Whether it's done with one stab or a thousand it's still killing for sport so I'm not sure if I understand your point. If you're saying that some can be killed more humanely than others, it still begs the question why should they die in the first place?

[Dr. Croccer]

Because clearly it's more human to put them into small factories and kill millions of them on an industrial scale so you can have your burger.


I ing hate it when people are such big hypocrites whenever animals get slaughtered openly, whether it's Spanish bullfighting or Indian ritual sacrifice of goats. It's not anymore inhumane than the hundreds of millions of animals that get squeezed into little chambers where they spend the rest of their miserable lives till they are executed on an assembly line. That's like denouncing African tribal massacres, whilst being silent about the Holocaust, because it was more ''humane''.

[Jom]

Because clearly it's more human to put them into small factories and kill millions of them on an industrial scale so you can have your burger.


I ing hate it when people are such big hypocrites whenever animals get slaughtered openly, whether it's Spanish bullfighting or Indian ritual sacrifice of goats. It's not anymore inhumane than the hundreds of millions of animals that get squeezed into little chambers where they spend the rest of their miserable lives till they are executed on an assembly line. That's like denouncing African tribal massacres, whilst being silent about the Holocaust, because it was more ''humane''.

Are you addressing me?

At least these animals could be said to be serving a more noble purpose - that is nourishment - rather than entertainment.

[Cornelius Plautus]

Are you addressing me?

At least these animals could be said to be serving a more noble purpose - that is nourishment - rather than entertainment.

The ironic thing is more harmful than nourishing, and I'd say that a very large amount of the cattle slaughtered goes into the fast food industry. Moreover, the sort of chemicals they put into these cows is even worse. If you saw what slaughter-house cows went through before death (like wallowing in their own feces and being fed chemically altered grain), you probably would have less of a qualm about the bullfighting bulls.

On second, thought, I also agree with Raglan here; change is inevitable in everything, and altering the rules of bullfighting may make it a bit more humane. There are ways to fight them without killing the, I'd imagine.

[Jom]

The ironic thing is more harmful than nourishing, and I'd say that a very large amount of the cattle slaughtered goes into the fast food industry. Moreover, the sort of chemicals they put into these cows is even worse. If you saw what slaughter-house cows went through before death (like wallowing in their own feces and being fed chemically altered grain), you probably would have less of a qualm about the bullfighting bulls.

On second, thought, I also agree with Raglan here; change is inevitable in everything, and altering the rules of bullfighting may make it a bit more humane. There are ways to fight them without killing the, I'd imagine.

I actually have the same number of qualms surrounding both the practises you name here; I just feel that death being used for entertainment is particularly disgusting.

[Fiyenyaa]

Because clearly it's more human to put them into small factories and kill millions of them on an industrial scale so you can have your burger.


I ing hate it when people are such big hypocrites whenever animals get slaughtered openly, whether it's Spanish bullfighting or Indian ritual sacrifice of goats. It's not anymore inhumane than the hundreds of millions of animals that get squeezed into little chambers where they spend the rest of their miserable lives till they are executed on an assembly line. That's like denouncing African tribal massacres, whilst being silent about the Holocaust, because it was more ''humane''.

Your analogy fails because we are on the whole fine about killing animals, whilst we aren't about killing people.
If you are going to kill animals, why not do it with a bolt through the brain instead of tickling it with swords and javelins for a few hours?

[Katsumoto]

Because clearly it's more human to put them into small factories and kill millions of them on an industrial scale so you can have your burger.

This.

A few bulls are killed for sport/entertainment and we call for it to be banned. Thousands and thousands of animals are killed to feed the ever growing hunger of obese men around the globe and we say nothing. It is not 'necessary' for them to stuff a Big Mac down their throats every day. The hypocrisy is unbelievable. If they were so concerned about the humane treatment of animals why don't they all become vegeterians?

[Copperknickers II]

This.

A few bulls are killed for sport/entertainment and we call for it to be banned. Thousands and thousands of animals are killed to feed the ever growing hunger of obese men around the globe and we say nothing. It is not 'necessary' for them to stuff a Big Mac down their throats every day. The hypocrisy is unbelievable. If they were so concerned about the humane treatment of animals why don't they all become vegeterians?

Afaik, most people in the kinds of animal rights groups that want to ban bullfighting are vegetarians. I've never once met an obese american big mac eating man who wanted to ban bullfighting at all, you are attacking 'hypocrites' who i am very doubtful actually exist.

When i think of people who criticise these things, i think about anorexic teenage girls with annoyingly high pitched voices, not fat americans simultaneously stuffing their faces with eggs and bacon, and waving a grease-stained cardboard sign saying 'End the Cow Holocaust'.

[Strelok]

Because clearly it's more human to put them into small factories and kill millions of them on an industrial scale so you can have your burger.

I'd say food is a better purpose than sport.

[Dr. Croccer]

I'd say food is a better purpose than sport.

The bulls that are killed are eaten. Their meat is often donated to the poor. You can eat their meat at local restaurants.

If you are going to kill animals, why not do it with a bolt through the brain instead of tickling it with swords and javelins for a few hours?

Does it matter? The bull is still going to die. It isn't anymore ''humane'' than by killing it by driving a spike through it's head. Again, by this logic the German gassing of Jews was ''humane''. Their Holocaust by bullets was ''humane''. It's not ''humane''. Regardless of how you kill something, you still kill it. Even if you tickle the ing bull to death you still kill it.

Matador bulls often have better lives than cows in bio-industry anyway.

[Copperknickers II]

The bulls that are killed are eaten. Their meat is often donated to the poor. You can eat their meat at local restaurants.

Does it matter? The bull is still going to die. It isn't anymore ''humane'' than by killing it by driving a spike through it's head. Again, by this logic the German gassing of Jews was ''humane''. Their Holocaust by bullets was ''humane''. It's not ''humane''. Regardless of how you kill something, you still kill it. Even if you tickle the ing bull to death you still kill it.

Matador bulls often have better lives than cows in bio-industry anyway.

Ah, of course. So you wouldn't mind at all if you had your limbs chopped off and got marinated in a vat of weak sulphuric acid for a few hours with nothing but a head, torso and a snorkel? That would be effectively the same as being tranquilised then shot point blank in the back of the head?

Yes, if you are going to kill something, then you are going to kill it, but the whole point is that you should only do what is necessary. It is necessary for humans to kill animals to eat, it is not necessary to cause the animal undue suffering such as torturing it with javelins.

The same goes for fishing - fishing is not a sport, its a way of getting a meal, therefore if you catch a fish then you have a moral obligation to kill it quickly and eat it. Fish feel pain too, and frankly even if they didn't it wouldn't matter, it's still unneccesary harm caused to a living entity.

[Dr. Croccer]

Ah, of course. So you wouldn't mind at all if you had your limbs chopped off and got marinated in a vat of weak sulphuric acid for a few hours with nothing but a head, torso and a snorkel? That would be effectively the same as being tranquilised then shot point blank in the back of the head?

Because that's totally comparable to an animal getting a few spears into it's body a few minutes before receiving the coup de grace.

Yes, if you are going to kill something, then you are going to kill it, but the whole point is that you should only do what is necessary. It is necessary for humans to kill animals to eat, it is not necessary to cause the animal undue suffering such as torturing it with javelins.
.

Another point: why do people only care about the humaneness of the animals' death, and not the way it lived? Again, those bulls lived a far more pleasant, longer and free life than any animal in the meat industry.

They experience much less pain.

No, they live their entire life in tiny, dark, overcrowded pens, wallowing in their own filth, receiving no treatment for any wounds or disease they might get, which they are very likely to get, being fattened, untill they are executed at the moment when they are at their fattest.

Those bulls should be jealous.

Would you rather live your miserable life as a slave, living in the poorest and most deplorable conditions, plagued by chronic disease and poorly treated, so you can have a relatively painless death, or a longer, pleasant life as a free man with a more violent death?

[Strelok]

No, they live their entire life in tiny, dark, overcrowded pens, wallowing in their own filth, receiving no treatment for any wounds or disease they might get, which they are very likely to get, being fattened, untill they are executed at the moment when they are at their fattest.

Though that is not the context in which I was speaking. Killing them with something like a bullet in the head, instead of torturing them with like multiple spear strikes is for the purpose of them experience less pain and hence that is why we consider that more humane.

Would you rather live your miserable life as a slave, living in the poorest and most deplorable conditions, plagued by chronic disease and poorly treated, so you can have a relatively painless death, or a longer, pleasant life as a free man with a more violent death?

I don't know, are bulls sentient? I don't agree with giving them high standards of living but I don't agree with giving them that utterly low standards of living. However it would be relative to the specific factory/farm/whatever they are in, would it not? Secondary, I wouldn't be used to feed a race of sentient beings in that case, now would I? Unless I'm a slave to cannibals?

[Copperknickers II]

Because that's totally comparable to an animal getting a few spears into it's body a few minutes before receiving the coup de grace.

Another point: why do people only care about the humaneness of the animals' death, and not the way it lived? Again, those bulls lived a far more pleasant, longer and free life than any animal in the meat industry.

No, they live their entire life in tiny, dark, overcrowded pens, wallowing in their own filth, receiving no treatment for any wounds or disease they might get, which they are very likely to get, being fattened, untill they are executed at the moment when they are at their fattest?

In my view, what happens to an animal in the wild is of no concern of ours, unless we have done something to affect it such as pollution, litter, introduction of alien species, or whatever.

However, every domesticated animal (ie animal under the care of humans) has the right to be treated without undue suffering, and be given as quick as is reasonable a death if such is necessary for our purposes.

The reason for this is that humans have overcome many of nature's boundaries, and therefore we are effectively 'nature' inasmuch as we control the fates of beef cattle, chickens, pigs, etc and exploit them for our own purposes. It is really experience in life that tells me that you should treat anything that you use for your own advantage with respect, in return for the services you garner from it. It's just a good way of living that gives the most rewards.

[Strelok]

Does it matter? The bull is still going to die. It isn't anymore ''humane'' than by killing it by driving a spike through it's head. Again, by this logic the German gassing of Jews was ''humane''. Their Holocaust by bullets was ''humane''. It's not ''humane''. Regardless of how you kill something, you still kill it. Even if you tickle the ing bull to death you still kill it.

Matador bulls often have better lives than cows in bio-industry anyway.

The point is to have them experience much less pain. Also, the jews bodies weren't used for food, the analogy you used still has an imbalance. That and I doubt bulls are sentient, either, though I'm unsure if that can even be measured.

[Copperknickers II]

Cannibalism and headhunting is an Amazonian tradition, same logic would require that we preserve it for its heritage value.

[Raglan]

personally i think the sport should be reformed. There must surely be a way of keeping it going without having to kill the animal in the process. Perhaps run it until the bull is simply tired? I don't know the sport well enought to be able to say. Until i made friends with a Spanish person thats what i thought it was. I never realised that they killed the bull. Now that said, we have plenty of sports that may well seem inhumane. Yet we still do them. Many Americans like hunting, and although there is a lobby to stop that its not very strong. I could also point out horse racing, many people i know think its especially harsh, because if the horses fall and injure themselves they usually get put down. And one person i know has a real moral crusade against fishing. Sticking a large metal spike though its lips, then pulling it out of the water (and effectively stopping it from breathing) before tugging the barb out again and sticking the rather shell shocked fish back into the water. Now i can see her point, despite the fact i fish myself. So i guess that some people enjoy such sports, and that really a line should be drawn, either stop all such things, or let them be. Personally i think a few rules to keep the trauma to a minumum is good, but that the sport itself is okay.