Should Cockfighting Be Legal?

[agitator]

Vegetarians can produce a shitload of sperm, let me tell you.

Yeah, but who wants a gay son?

 

[jtstellar]

I personally think any human participating in cockfighting or any other animal cruelty whether through raising the animals for that "sport", organizing the events, or being a spectator should either be mulled to death themselves with knives and spears and whatever else these sick, perverted, depraved, pathetic bastards use, or they should be put away for life.

No animal should be used for "entertainment" or suffer needlessly. For people who eat meat, animals raised for food should be put down without suffering. Factory farms need to become a thing of the past. Animals have a right not to suffer at the hands of humans.

A society that looks the other way because of some idealistic vision of what government "should" be, is just as sick, perverted, depraved, and pathetic as those who participate in the activity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlBgCh3Of90&feature=player_embedded

http://www.texastribune.org/texas-issues/gaminggambling/loopholes-allow-cockfighting-to-thrive/

you realize there's a HUGE difference between what you think and you using the law to coerce what you think ON A FEDERAL LEVEL?

if not, it begs the question of what lured you into the liberty camp. identity crisis much? someone help this stray animal back to a liberal forum

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ing-Be-Legal&p=3044169&viewfull=1#post3044169

READ pls

you can do away locally with what you don't like by convincing people who ACTUALLY SEE YOU in real life in your local NEIGHBORHOOD, CITIES AND TOWNS or even STATES instead of arguing some no-brain commonsensical stupid crap online that most agree with and try to enforce it ON A NATIONAL LEVEL.. how many people here do you think are obsessed with animal fighting, even if there's no such thing as "animal rights"?

the problem is whether the FEDERAL government has anything to do with it.. just wtf are "rights" do you even know? there are no such private activities that violate "rights" as long as you don't touch anybody's life or property.. yes, a human's life, duh. don't tell me you support federally-sanctioned abortion now. that would really be something

where does it mention in the constitution about ANIMALS.. seriously, where the HELL did you guys come from. how many hours have you spent on politics and history? you just graduated high school or something? even some ppl that age aren't that stupid

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

you realize there's a HUGE difference between what you think and you using the law to coerce what you think ON A FEDERAL LEVEL?

The poll question was phrased in such a way as to attempt to avoid the whole "I believe it's a states' rights issue" type predictable responses.

Cockfighting is already a state issue. Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico were the last three states to have it legal. Louisiana I know banned it only a couple of years ago. Not sure of cockfighting's current status in New Mexico and Oklahoma.

 

[dannno]

Yeah, but who wants a gay son?

Do you wanna fight?

 

[dannno]

There is a different between Semen and Sperm.

You too.. ya buddy..

 

[Icymudpuppy]

You too.. ya buddy..

Umm, no cock fighting for me, Danno.

 

[BamaAla]

The poll question was phrased in such a way as to attempt to avoid the whole "I believe it's a states' rights issue" type predictable responses.

Cockfighting is already a state issue. Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico were the last three states to have it legal. Louisiana I know banned it only a couple of years ago. Not sure of cockfighting's current status in New Mexico and Oklahoma.

It is now illegal in all 50 states, but I have no idea how its enforced in those other states.

http://www.agribusinessweek.com/sabongcockfight-the-sport-of-kings/

It is believed to be the world’s oldest spectator sport, dating back about 6000 years in Persia (now Iran). Great men in history have been known to participate in it. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson were all cockers. Alexander the Great staged cockfights on the night before a battle to impress courage and valor upon his soldiers.

 

[charrob]

just wtf are "rights" do you even know? there are no such private activities that violate "rights" as long as you don't touch anybody's life or property.. yes, a human's life, duh. don't tell me you support federally-sanctioned abortion now. that would really be something.

That's what the argument is about. I don't see animals as property but rather as sentient life-forms that have inherent rights. I see no difference in using force against an animal or using force against a human being: they are both equal in my eyes.

btw: What is unequal in my eyes are human fetus': i do not see them as fully functioning life-forms, and as such, in my eyes they have no rights.

 

[low preference guy]

btw: What is unequal in my eyes are human fetus': i do not see them as fully functioning life-forms, and as such, in my eyes they have no rights.

a baby with 8 and a half months doesn't deserve legal protection but animals do? what a psycho!

 

[charrob]

a baby with 8 and half months doesn't deserve legal protection but animals do? what a psycho!

of course, at 8 1/2 months a baby can live outside the woman; that is fully-functioning. At 1 month it cannot. The line should be drawn whether or not the fetus can survive outside the mother all on its own. That's when it's fully functioning imho.

 

[dannno]

Umm, no cock fighting for me, Danno.

 

[low preference guy]

of course, at 8 1/2 months a baby can live outside the woman; that is fully-functioning. At 1 month it cannot. The line should be drawn whether or not the fetus can survive outside the mother all on its own. That's when it's fully functioning imho.

so it's about when they can have feelings? so hypothetically if a human loses his capacity to feel, does he lose his rights and can be cut into little pieces like an aborted fetus?

 

[dannno]

so hypothetically if a human loses his capacity to feel, does he lose his rights and can be cut into little pieces like an aborted fetus?

Can they survive on their own or are you talking about vegetables? Should people be forced to be enslaved to vegetables who will never really live again?

 

[charrob]

so it's about when can it have feelings? so hypothetically if a human loses his capacity to feel, does he lose his rights and can be cut into little pieces like an aborted fetus?

If a baby can survive outside the mother, it should not be aborted.
If the baby cannot survive outside the mother, i believe it is up to the woman.

I do not believe i have the right to force my choice on the woman carrying the fetus.

 

[dannno]

If a baby can survive outside the mother, it should not be aborted.
If the baby cannot survive outside the mother, i believe it is up to the woman.

I do not believe i have the right to force my choice on the woman carrying the fetus.

What if the baby is old enough to feel, has more feeling than most animals, but isn't old enough to survive on it's own? Slice it up still?

As you probably know I'm a bigger fan of very early term natural abortive remedies.

But ya if you're gonna go there I'd also consider if you let the chickens out into the wild they would probably have a more excruciating death via coyote or something. I think in cock fights they just end up bleeding to death which isn't that bad as far as deaths go, better than being chomped up.

 

[low preference guy]

If a baby can survive outside the mother, it should not be aborted.
If the baby cannot survive outside the mother, i believe it is up to the woman.

I do not believe i have the right to force my choice on the woman carrying the fetus.

so the criteria is not pain anymore? do you realize how messed up and contradictory are your positions? you first say that rights come from beings ability to feel, so you include animals. but a baby of many months can feel. yet you say you can't force the woman to carry the baby. but he can feel! so by what argument now should killing the baby, a feeling being, be legal?

 

[charrob]

so the criteria is not pain anymore? do you realize how messed up and contradictory are your positions? you first say that rights come from beings ability to feel, so you include animals. but a baby of many months can feel. yet you say you can't force the woman to carry the baby. but he can feel! so by what argument now should killing the baby, a feeling being, be legal?

What are you talking about? Fully-functioning life-forms walking around on the earth or swimming in the seas like whales (ie. human or not) that are surviving outside of a womb should be protected against torture. They are life-forms in my eyes- not property- and as such they have rights.

Human fetus' that can survive outside the mother should be protected because they are capable of fully functioning outside the mother. If the mother didn't want it, she could get a caesarean and the fetus would still live.

However, a blob of cells at one month is not a fully functioning being. If it can feel any pain at one month, I doubt the pain at this stage is much different than the pain felt by some lower life-form like an insect or a slug. Ya, maybe it twitches if it is poked- but that is far different than a fully-functioning life-form walking around the earth.

 

[BamaAla]

if animals are not property anymore, we would then be forced to be vegetarians because animals have rights and those rights can not be taken away.

Would this be a bad thing?

For meat lovers, I'd bet it wouldn't be long before stem cells were growing chicken legs, etc....

The food thing will take time, but it provides hope to see society move in the direction to find alternatives to killing animals for meat.

Factory farms should be eliminated imho.

Hunting deer with a gun can cause immediate death w/o alot of pain; however bow-and-arrow hunting should be outlawed. etc. etc.

this cockfighting is done for "entertainment" and "betting". This is sick and pathetic and immoral. And it should be outlawed.

But you can eat animal products (ie. milk, eggs, etc.) without killing a live animal. In addition to many other plant foods, those animal products can give you the protein required. There are many who are vegan and perfectly healthy. Meat is a choice, not a requirement.

it's done for the purpose of "entertainment" for a very sick, perverted, depraved, pathetic sub-population in our country.

yes, we are able to eat both. But is it required?

Cockfighting is not being done for human food or survival: it's being done for entertainment. And that is sick, perverted, pathetic and unnecessary.

btw: What is unequal in my eyes are human fetus': i do not see them as fully functioning life-forms, and as such, in my eyes they have no rights.

I'm not going to partake in the name calling that you directed at me, but all of this is a WTF.

On one hand, you have no problem with all manner of hunting, livestock farming, and chicken fights being outlawed because, according to you, animals have natural rights; meanwhile, on the other, you declare that a fetus has nothing. You even take it a step further by asserting that even if a month old fetus had only a small possession of neurological feeling it wouldn't matter as they would only amount to those found in slugs.

Have these things ever caused even a hint of cognitive dissonance on your part?

 

[low preference guy]

Have these things ever caused even a hint of cognitive dissonance on your part?

she hates humans. it's obvious. trying to put animals above humans is just how she acts on her hatred. she probably hates herself as well.

 

[dannno]

I'm not going to partake in the name calling that you directed at me, but all of this is a WTF.

On one hand, you have no problem with all manner of hunting, livestock farming, and chicken fights being outlawed because, according to you, animals have natural rights; meanwhile, on the other, you declare that a fetus has nothing. You even take it a step further by asserting that even if a month old fetus had only a small possession of neurological feeling it wouldn't matter as they would only amount to those found in slugs.

Have these things ever caused even a hint of cognitive dissonance on your part?

I dunno, what's your opinion on using violence against someone who kills what can feel maybe the equivalent of a slug, but would not advocate violence against those torturing animals which feel many times more pain than a 2-4 week fetus?