Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 19 Aug '10 09:44 / 1 edit
    Perhaps that will teach them not to support the barbaric 'sport' of bullfighting
    in future.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7953494/Spain-30-injured-as-bull-leaps-out-of-ring.html
  2. 19 Aug '10 10:54
    How is it any more barbaric than killing and eating animals?
  3. 19 Aug '10 11:01
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    How is it any more barbaric than killing and eating animals?
    Because eating meat does at least sustain life in another form. Killing bulls in the ring extinguishes life totally.
  4. 19 Aug '10 11:08
    Originally posted by Teinosuke
    Because eating meat does at least sustain life in another form. Killing bulls in the ring extinguishes life totally.
    Eating meat is not required to stay alive and is an inefficient way to produce food. Eating meat is entertainment as much as bull fighting is.
  5. 19 Aug '10 11:22
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Eating meat is not required to stay alive and is an inefficient way to produce food. Eating meat is entertainment as much as bull fighting is.
    Of course one can sustain human life on a vegetarian diet, but your point about efficiency is not the case in a blanket sense - for instance, there are areas (eg, the Welsh hills) where the soil is not fertile enough to grow edible cereal crops and where the most efficient land use is farming sheep to provide meat. In other words, if we were going to maximise food production from the available land, that would involve producing mainly vegetables, but also a little meat.
  6. 19 Aug '10 11:25
    Originally posted by Teinosuke
    Of course one can sustain human life on a vegetarian diet, but your point about efficiency is not the case in a blanket sense - for instance, there are areas (eg, the Welsh hills) where the soil is not fertile enough to grow edible cereal crops and where the most efficient land use is farming sheep to provide meat. In other words, if we were going to maxim ...[text shortened]... from the available land, that would involve producing mainly vegetables, but also a little meat.
    That may be true, but obviously the vast majority of meat production comes from soil which could be used to grow crops for human consumption as well.
  7. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    19 Aug '10 11:31
    Originally posted by Teinosuke
    Because eating meat does at least sustain life in another form. Killing bulls in the ring extinguishes life totally.
    Bulls killed in the ring are not eaten?
  8. 19 Aug '10 11:32
    Originally posted by FMF
    Bulls killed in the ring are not eaten?
    I don't think so. The meat is probably not very tender.
  9. 19 Aug '10 12:04
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    That may be true, but obviously the vast majority of meat production comes from soil which could be used to grow crops for human consumption as well.
    I know. But I think from an environmental point of view we ought to be doing our best to reduce meat consumption, but not seeking to eliminate it entirely.
  10. 19 Aug '10 12:06 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    That may be true, but obviously the vast majority of meat production comes from soil which could be used to grow crops for human consumption as well.
    Actually a fairly large proportion of meat is raised on crops - one of the reasons why meat is so much less efficient than vegies.
  11. 19 Aug '10 12:08
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    I don't think so. The meat is probably not very tender.
    They may be used as dog food though, which would make it no worse than other dog meat factories.
  12. 19 Aug '10 12:09
    We've had similar issues in South Africa where there is a whole campaign against the brutal killing of one bull in a tribal ceremony once a year, yet nobody says anything about all the abattoirs etc
  13. 19 Aug '10 12:13
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    How is it any more barbaric than killing and eating animals?
    I am not a meat eater myself so not need to make apologies for killing animals for food but, so far as I am aware, the animals which are killed for that purpose are not first tormented and disabled prior to execution for the enjoyment of sadists.
  14. 19 Aug '10 12:49
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    How is it any more barbaric than killing and eating animals?
    there is one thing to kill swiftly an animal to provide meat.

    another thing to kill it through a prolonged display of cruelty where the animal is being tortured and played with until it becomes so enraged it simply is no danger to an intelligent, calm human. not that the bull was very intelligent in the first place.

    if it were up to me, there would be no picadors or any other people in the corrida whose role is to help the toreador and weaken the bull. there would be only one human armed with a knife no longer than 20 cm. and the bull would be a bear. if you want to enter such a sport, go ahead.
  15. 19 Aug '10 15:00
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    I am not a meat eater myself so not need to make apologies for killing animals for food but, so far as I am aware, the animals which are killed for that purpose are not first tormented and disabled prior to execution for the enjoyment of sadists.
    Well, if you look at the entire lifetime of the animal, I'm not so sure. A bull has to be big, healthy and impressive, so it needs to be taken care of quite well. I don't know what living conditions are like for them prior to their ceremonial killing, but I'd hazard a guess they are better than those of the average livestock.