The Big Picture: Maddening

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NEXT
 

I dont disagree with the fact, not all life is equal, in fact I am under the belief that humans are number one and that animals are just part of the food chain we comfortably sit atop of. That said, its not the act of the dogs dying that really gets me, its the mentality of a person who trains and fights the dogs themselves. These are very disturbed people that obviously struggle with some sort of mental issue (wether learned or inherited). Just as children torturing a household pet is a early sign that your kid maybe a serial killer, some way this has to fit in their somewhere. For me its not the end result that bugs me its the utter disregard for life in general, be it a human or animal regardless of there position in the world as we see it. He did serve time and for that i agree with you, but my problem is that he will never live this down in a lot of peoples eyes and it will always come up in conversations about him, so for the youth it sets a president that if your good at a sport and moderately successful (not like he has any superbowl rings) you can be held to a different standard regardless of what you may do in your private life, just like you said about this being the land of second chances, all of your examples are of celebs and politicians, so for everyone of those examples theirs a hundred John and Jane Smiths rotting in jail for the same offenses that did have the social or economical means to get their way out of it. But that is life and to me you seem like the kind of guy i could sit an have a beer with so i kindly respect your opinion although i don't fully agree.
Cheers
And sorry about the quote thing my bad...

I learned in Sociology 101 that one of the ways to guage the quality of a country's people and government is how it treats it's most vulnerable; Among these are the young, the old, the infirm, and animals. In other words animal cruelty doesn't just reflect poorly upon the character of the purpotrator, but poorly on the character of his or her society and culture as a whole.

This, above any sentiment of forgiveness towards the guilty party or indefference twoards the victim is why crimes against animals should be punitive, and deserve harsh sancions. To compare, consider when suicide was a crime; it was anit-capitolistic; the person who just attempted to kill him or herself would have intentionally squandered the investment of time, money, and effort that had society invested into that person up until that point.

In short, just as suicide was once a crime becuase it was considered extremely deviant economically, so too is animal cruelty currently a crime because it is extremely deviant socially.

II2none:

AvauntVanguard:

II2none:

Dogs are not humans, the only reason why they are "loyal" is because they have pack mentalities and have been bred to be domesticated would be loyal to anyone who took care of them. They dont cure diseases, they dont build houses, they dont pay taxes and they DONT HAVE SOULS!

I agreed with everything here except the no souls part.
I'm still an atheist but I've seen intelligence in some pet's eyes. They're not empty in there.

Yeah this isn't my post i messed up trying to quote someone else.

I'm a christian, I do think dogs have souls but dogs will never be of higher importance compared to humans.

Don't care what anyone says, I'll say it loud and proud even in the face of animal activist.

Oops xP

lizards:

what does religion have to do with any of this? first off even if that was a valid arguement most people on this site are athiests (smartly) so your not even going to pull any heartstrings with that eiter so really, what was the point of even bringing religion into this?

and if you do want to start bringing the value of life arguements into this and i can do that: so if life has different assigned values then who decides these values? a god? well if your going to say a god then i dont know how you could know that, a god could easily value an animal that doesnt fuck eachother for fun, pick on eachother to make the other animals feel bad, destroy the earth because the animals need new apartment complexes, kill for fun, or engage in wars because they dont like what the other animals are saying, hell if i was a god humanity would be one of the things that i would immediately destroy, and if their isnt a god and these values are just magically assigned then what about humans? its mark zuckerbergs life worth more than that girl who works at the diner uptown? while yes she is a nice person an all and mark zuckerberg has doen some dickish things he did move us forward technology and start connecting people across the globe with facebook, what about your life and an peace corp worker? yes you may be a teacher but this guy is devoting his life to making the world a better place

you cant just decide what life is valued more than other life(espcially without a ruling figure either a king or god and we have no global king and as stated earlier god is nonexistent in my mind and most other peoples mind on this site

Im the orriginal poster who brought up religion.

My point for bringing up religion was that an earlier poster brought up something about spirituality or souls or something, and even compared a small dog to a small child. Im not a zealot but i was just pointing out general religious doctrine that says taht an animals life does not equate to a mans.

To clarify my point-

1- People>dogs+any other animal. This is not to say that nature is not important or anything of the like, but im not going to equate the life of a dog to the life a man.

2- Vick did a horrible thing, served his time, paid a huuuuuge debt, turned his life around, etc. You dont have to forgive or forget what he did, but to wish for his downfall and deny him the essentially human right to redemption is stupid and wrong and probably has little to do with his crime and more to do with who he is and what he represents.

3- Anyone who spouts on the evils of Vick and compares what he did to hitler while holding a hunting liscence, wearing leather, and supporting the meat packing industry is a hypocrite. Yes there are some humane elements to hunting, and surely there more merrits in hunting and eating meat than in dog fighting, but the gap isnt nearly wide enough for someone to shout from the top of their ivory tower about how horrible Mike Vick is. If you are a person who is a vegan or only eats humane/organic meat, doesnt wear leather, etc. Then at least i can respect that you have a different life perspective and we can agree to disagree. if you are not then you are full of shit.

You say you don't agree with PETA, but you sure sound a lot like them.

I mean, I like dogs and animals in general, I would never hit an animal - unless it was going to hurt me ofc; but you compared an illegal dog-fighter to Hitler ffs. I mean, it's immoral and a very nasty thing to do to an animal, but at the end of the day - it isn't human and it's nowhere, nowhere near as bad as hurting or torturing a human.

You're blowing this way out of proportion tbh. I mean only a subset of North Americans actually buy that game because no-one else plays the sport on the same scale. I, for example, couldn't give less of a shit about American football - I've heard the matches can go on for ~3 hours! Now THAT is torture XD

I think that you just have to keep in perspective that while this is a bad thing to do to a dog - at the end of the day, it is just a dog. I mean that in the sense that if you had to choose who would die out of:

A) A human.

or

B) A dog.

Who would you choose? Every time, right? Exactly.

It's not nice or pleasant, but it's the truth - it's called reality.

Mike Vick can do whatever he wants to dogs under his charge and care.

Now if he were to do it to dogs under someone else's charge, they would (in my eyes) be justified in killing him, his children, or other family members. After all dogs are more valuable than humans, dogs are great companions and have other more practical uses depending on breed while humans just waste oxygen for the most part.

UberaDpmn:
You say you don't agree with PETA, but you sure sound a lot like them.

I mean, I like dogs and animals in general, I would never hit an animal - unless it was going to hurt me ofc; but you compared an illegal dog-fighter to Hitler ffs. I mean, it's immoral and a very nasty thing to do to an animal, but at the end of the day - it isn't human and it's nowhere, nowhere near as bad as hurting or torturing a human.

You're blowing this way out of proportion tbh. I mean only a subset of North Americans actually buy that game because no-one else plays the sport on the same scale. I, for example, couldn't give less of a shit about American football - I've heard the matches can go on for ~3 hours! Now THAT is torture XD

I think that you just have to keep in perspective that while this is a bad thing to do to a dog - at the end of the day, it is just a dog. I mean that in the sense that if you had to choose who would die out of:

A) A human.

or

B) A dog.

Who would you choose? Every time, right? Exactly.

It's not nice or pleasant, but it's the truth - it's called reality.

Not picking on you specifically, just the closest post to illustrate the point. I agree with your post in those exact circumstances but that is not what happened. If he had killed a dog to save himself/another human there would not be the (often hypocritical) rage.

However, a more accurate question would be:

If you had to choose who would die out of:

A) A human
B) A dog
C) Neither because it is unnecessary

Which would you choose? Every time, right? Exactly.

The animal died because he likes dog fighting. That's the rage

UberaDpmn:
You say you don't agree with PETA, but you sure sound a lot like them.

I mean, I like dogs and animals in general, I would never hit an animal - unless it was going to hurt me ofc; but you compared an illegal dog-fighter to Hitler ffs. I mean, it's immoral and a very nasty thing to do to an animal, but at the end of the day - it isn't human and it's nowhere, nowhere near as bad as hurting or torturing a human.

You're blowing this way out of proportion tbh. I mean only a subset of North Americans actually buy that game because no-one else plays the sport on the same scale. I, for example, couldn't give less of a shit about American football - I've heard the matches can go on for ~3 hours! Now THAT is torture XD

I think that you just have to keep in perspective that while this is a bad thing to do to a dog - at the end of the day, it is just a dog. I mean that in the sense that if you had to choose who would die out of:

A) A human.

or

B) A dog.

Who would you choose? Every time, right? Exactly.

It's not nice or pleasant, but it's the truth - it's called reality.

I would choose people like you who don't give a damn about these kind of serious things.

A former friend of mine ran over a cat. I told him to stop the car so we can check on it.
He said it's just a cat get over it. I had a fight with him that day and emmidetly cut
my conenction with him.

If one does not care for animals than that person has some serious issues in his brain.
I wouldn't trust anything of mine to some sort of person.

kara_bulut:

UberaDpmn:
You say you don't agree with PETA, but you sure sound a lot like them.

I mean, I like dogs and animals in general, I would never hit an animal - unless it was going to hurt me ofc; but you compared an illegal dog-fighter to Hitler ffs. I mean, it's immoral and a very nasty thing to do to an animal, but at the end of the day - it isn't human and it's nowhere, nowhere near as bad as hurting or torturing a human.

You're blowing this way out of proportion tbh. I mean only a subset of North Americans actually buy that game because no-one else plays the sport on the same scale. I, for example, couldn't give less of a shit about American football - I've heard the matches can go on for ~3 hours! Now THAT is torture XD

I think that you just have to keep in perspective that while this is a bad thing to do to a dog - at the end of the day, it is just a dog. I mean that in the sense that if you had to choose who would die out of:

A) A human.

or

B) A dog.

Who would you choose? Every time, right? Exactly.

It's not nice or pleasant, but it's the truth - it's called reality.

I would choose people like you who don't give a damn about these kind of serious things.

A former friend of mine ran over a cat. I told him to stop the car so we can check on it.
He said it's just a cat get over it. I had a fight with him that day and emmidetly cut
my conenction with him.

If one does not care for animals than that person has some serious issues in his brain.
I wouldn't trust anything of mine to some sort of person.

This. Someone hit my dog with a car a few months ago. Some dude was working on the phone lines near it and saw it happen. I'm not sure whether or not he checked on the dog after, even if he did, he isn't a vet and isn't really authorized to take it to one but that's not fully relevant[The phone worker guy not the driver, he was clearly a scumbag].

My mom got back he informed her what happened, and told her the guy/girl in the car didn't even attempt for a second to slow down, avoid, or check on the dog after it happened.

Furthermore this dog was a fairly large red coon hound. He could stand up and be about 3 to 4 feet.

While it is HIGHLY contemptible to hit a dog you could try to avoid, this case was just plain stupid too as it could seriously damage your vehicle, so even the totally selfish person has cause to at least attempt to avoid said dog.

Nope, they didn't even try, much less check on the dog. Hitting a dog can certainly happen but just leaving is contemptible. Once again for humans that's a serious felony.

To summarize the point again for the lazy.

If you are driving down the road there's a dog, several people behind you so you do not have time to avoid the dog good, and you would be hurt yourself if you did try well to avoid it. That is unfortunate.

If you are completely by yourself on the road, driving too fast for the road, see the dog and not even attempt to avoid the dog you clearly see, then you are a contemptible bastard with little regard for any form of life that is not you.

It's that the humans and dogs are equal in importance of their life. It's that there is NO GOOD REASON WHATSOEVER THAT YOU COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO NOT KILL THAT CREATURE SAVE THE FACT YOU MAY HAVE TO SLOW DOWN AND GET TO SOME PLACE, WHICH PROBABLY ISN'T ALL THAT IMPORTANT ANYWAY, SLIGHTLY LATER.

That is what people would hold you in high contempt for. A lack of respect for life. Putting your own whims over any other creature's life. Pretty much sociopathy but to a small level you can function in society fairly well.

kara_bulut:

UberaDpmn:
You say you don't agree with PETA, but you sure sound a lot like them.

I mean, I like dogs and animals in general, I would never hit an animal - unless it was going to hurt me ofc; but you compared an illegal dog-fighter to Hitler ffs. I mean, it's immoral and a very nasty thing to do to an animal, but at the end of the day - it isn't human and it's nowhere, nowhere near as bad as hurting or torturing a human.

You're blowing this way out of proportion tbh. I mean only a subset of North Americans actually buy that game because no-one else plays the sport on the same scale. I, for example, couldn't give less of a shit about American football - I've heard the matches can go on for ~3 hours! Now THAT is torture XD

I think that you just have to keep in perspective that while this is a bad thing to do to a dog - at the end of the day, it is just a dog. I mean that in the sense that if you had to choose who would die out of:

A) A human.

or

B) A dog.

Who would you choose? Every time, right? Exactly.

It's not nice or pleasant, but it's the truth - it's called reality.

I would choose people like you who don't give a damn about these kind of serious things.

A former friend of mine ran over a cat. I told him to stop the car so we can check on it.
He said it's just a cat get over it. I had a fight with him that day and emmidetly cut
my conenction with him.

If one does not care for animals than that person has some serious issues in his brain.
I wouldn't trust anything of mine to some sort of person.

I'm not saying what Minchael Vick did isn't bad, I'm saying that it's getting blown out of proportion.

Taking your car example - if you try to hit dogs, cats etc... with your car when you get the opportunity, you are obviously an asshole.

If it's an accident - there's not a lot you can do tbh. Even if you go back and check, it's relatively pointless as it's going to be in the same condition whether you check or not. What would you do if it's guts were splattered across the road? Roll it's intestines up and stick it in your glove compartment?

On the scale of importance of animal vs. human, animal is way, way down the chart.

To reiterate / summarise both of my posts, I didn't like the way MovieBob implied that animal life is just as, or even nearly as important as human life and that was what I was arguing against.

I still think that what Michael Vick did was really bad - just not as 'crime against humanity' / 'on par with Hitler' level that MovieBob was pressing on us.

Just to note: Organised animal fighting has been going on for tens of thousands of years and is still probably nowhere near as 'inhumane' as the process industrially battery farming pigs and cows then essentially blending their flesh, threshing and pumping it with water and slicing it into unnatural squares before sticking it on a chilled supermarket shelf. Just a personal opinion though.

Also - knowing the above doesn't stop me from buying minced meat XD

Also, also: These two skits come to mind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmXyf2eOZyY&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKTsWjbjQ8E

OK, I looked into this Michael Vick thing and Bob seems to imply he was snatching cute little innocent puppies off the streets, tying them up and going Silence of the Lambs

It was dog-fighting.

I mean that's pretty bad but torture at a stretch. Many dog breeds are inherently violent, bred even to ENJOY fighting, it's horrible but is not the same as something like skinning them alive or something. I mean these dogs are no babies, most of them had to be removed to separate kennels because they continued to be so violent to other dogs even after being removed from any dogfighters influence.

Also surprising how outraged all the (mostly white) commentators are and the only people to defend him are black. Hmm. I'm not saying anything but this sure is cause to step back and look at this objectively.

[sarc]Then again Bob has his expensive hunting licence and registered gun to go on his acceptable blood-sport. I guess the black man is just plain wrong with his blood sport of dog-fighting. Why can't they see which blood-sports are acceptable?[/sarc]

Dog fighting may be cruel and callous but it's not torture and it's not murder.

Bob is trying to paint a pretty nasty picture of this black sportsman, especially showing a load of high domesticated pedigree puppies and implying none of them could possibly ever deserve anything but kindness and happiness.

google search: "pit bull maul"

Look at how many results are of little children with torn up faces.

These breeds of dogs are not little angles, they are killing machines.

Thedek:

If you are completely by yourself on the road, driving too fast for the road, see the dog and not even attempt to avoid the dog you clearly see, then you are a contemptible bastard with little regard for any form of life that is not you.

It's that the humans and dogs are equal in importance of their life. It's that there is NO GOOD REASON WHATSOEVER THAT YOU COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO NOT KILL THAT CREATURE SAVE THE FACT YOU MAY HAVE TO SLOW DOWN AND GET TO SOME PLACE, WHICH PROBABLY ISN'T ALL THAT IMPORTANT ANYWAY, SLIGHTLY LATER.

That is what people would hold you in high contempt for. A lack of respect for life. Putting your own whims over any other creature's life. Pretty much sociopathy but to a small level you can function in society fairly well.

I got a few questions for you:

What the hell were you doing letting your dog on the streets off a leash and out of your sight? That's incredibly irresponsible and careless.

How do you know this driver did "not even attempt to avoid the dog he clearly sees" when you were not in the car with him?

Why would he stay if he couldn't do anything anyway (how many know dog CPR)?

How can you expect him to loiter around considering how angry you are?
He has every reason to fear for his own safety as you may try rearranging his teeth with a tyre iron.

"NO GOOD REASON WHATSOEVER THAT YOU COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO NOT KILL THAT CREATURE"

Wow, a TRIPLE negative.

"Putting your own whims over any other creature's life."

Are you vegan? If now where do you think beef and pork come from.

Serioli:

Not picking on you specifically, just the closest post to illustrate the point. I agree with your post in those exact circumstances but that is not what happened. If he had killed a dog to save himself/another human there would not be the (often hypocritical) rage.

However, a more accurate question would be:

If you had to choose who would die out of:

A) A human
B) A dog
C) Neither because it is unnecessary

Which would you choose? Every time, right? Exactly.

The animal died because he likes dog fighting. That's the rage

Well you are missing the point. He clearly said dog-killing is not as bad as human-murder (though this Big Picture sure seemed to imply they were as bad)

now you are going off on a tangent saying basically:

"Both are bad, should do neither, lets ignore the distinction between the two"

Which is kind of a conceit that they are EQUALLY bad, in response to bob's video. Which is kind of trivialising of actual murder and hyperbolic of this case.

"The animal died because he likes dog fighting."

Consider this: dog-fighting is a blood sport that used to be widely popular and is now acceptable in the impoverished black communities that Vick has come from.

Why do you think 'mid-air-plane-combat' was called "dogfighting" back in the early 20th century, because back then the practice was common enough in society.

Maybe all those poor black folk should pay $10'000 per hunting licence for the "socially accepted" blood sport of deer hunt as practised predominantly by white people.

Or maybe we all need to step back and realise that it is a bunch of white people (who had very sheltered upbringing) demonizing a black man who lived a life of poverty until comparatively recent success, and the only people who are defending him are other black people.

Treblaine:
OK, I looked into this Michael Vick thing and Bob seems to imply he was snatching cute little innocent puppies off the streets, tying them up and going Silence of the Lambs

That's actually an integral part of the type of dogfighting he was involved with; they're called "bait animals," and are typically abducted pets and/or strays. You can look that up, though I'm not responsible for some of the things you'll see.

The rest of your post is so full of assumptions it's actually difficult to know where to start...

MovieBob:

Treblaine:
OK, I looked into this Michael Vick thing and Bob seems to imply he was snatching cute little innocent puppies off the streets, tying them up and going Silence of the Lambs

That's actually an integral part of the type of dogfighting he was involved with; they're called "bait animals," and are typically abducted pets and/or strays. You can look that up, though I'm not responsible for some of the things you'll see.

The rest of your post is so full of assumptions it's actually difficult to know where to start...

The assumption that pit bulls were bred for dog fighting (they were) and that you eat meat and support industries which cause much more suffering to animals (albeit different animals, but pigs are at least as smart as dogs, they just taste better)?

You really do seem to be playing the part of a knee-jerk PETA reactionary type, only you're something like several years too late for this issue to even be relevant. I'm very much against dog fighting (hey, I'm against dog BREEDING, because there are already so many homeless/suffering dogs out there, and it's pretty selfish to pay bunches of money for a specific breed of puppy when you could rescue a dog from the shelter system), but the guy did the time. Maybe YOU don't think that's worth enough, but when you start threatening people via the Internet, there's little to differentiate you from the average "butthurt" troll.

Dog fighting isn't even comparable to the Holocaust. Don't even go there. Go reread MAUS, Slaughterhouse Five or whatever and rethink how dumb such a comparison would be. You might as well compare the way cows wind up on your plate to the Holocaust, because that's at least as brutal.

MovieBob:

Treblaine:
OK, I looked into this Michael Vick thing and Bob seems to imply he was snatching cute little innocent puppies off the streets, tying them up and going Silence of the Lambs

That's actually an integral part of the type of dogfighting he was involved with; they're called "bait animals," and are typically abducted pets and/or strays. You can look that up, though I'm not responsible for some of the things you'll see.

The rest of your post is so full of assumptions it's actually difficult to know where to start...

Well did Michael Vick actually do that?

He was convicted of simply dog-fighting and what I know of pit-bulls is they don't need much encouragement to fight each other - they certainly don't need encouragement to attack children and even little babies. Why do they go for the face. Anyway, I'm pretty sure if Vick had abducted some family's dog then they'd charge him with that and the family in question would be all over the news.

I mean really, black sports stars going to steal your family dog and torture it to death?

Isn't this a TAD BIT alarmist?

Yeah, it's a cruel blood sport, but it's not so unprecedented, America didn't completely ban it till 1976 and haven't enforced it well as evident by how popular the pit-bull breed remains.

MovieBob:

The rest of your post is so full of assumptions it's actually difficult to know where to start...

You have to realise, till recently I had ONLY heard about Michael Vick from video game commentators like yourself and Markus Beer and others. I don't think you realise what a picture you have painted, you really have made him out worse than the most prolific serial killers, I mean this is as bad as you have ever described anyone. And you've made some references to some pretty horrific characters in your time.

And I'm sorry but the race issue does have to come up, the only public figures that I can find who have stood up for him have been fellow black sportsman.

Think about this, this is more about the crime, more than the punishment, it is the person.

Racism is a subtle and powerful force, it can cloud the best judgement.

[edit: I AM NOT saying "movie bomb is a racist" no. I'm simply stating the scientific truth that everyone has an inherent racial bias at some level and the only way to truly combat this evil instinct is to admit our weaknesses. Now "racists" I'd call people who recognise this emotion but EMBRACE it. I do not think Bob has been doing that, not. at. all. Just that he's let his emotions get away with him here.]

I mean you have resorted to such hyperbole here, showing pictures of the most benign and fragile dog breeds. At no point did you mention dog-fighting. None of the white commentators did, it wasn't till I read the quote of someone who turned out to be black did I find someone to frankly say what he had done.

Surely when you say he "tortured" the animal and showed a picture of a little poodle dog you KNOW what people are going to think.

They are not going to think dog-fighting, they are going to think someone secretly doing evil things in some basement. Something out of Law & order SVU but with a puppy. Why do you keep doing this Bob?

You're a smart guy, but why do you treat us like idiots?

I do NOT like being bullshitted to. No one does. I had enough of that from Michael Moore back when I was younger and more naive, you bullshit people and you push them away.

Just be frank for goodness snake.

I love you Bob! Can't see why people still support the overpaied ball thrower myself

I quote: "It's just a dog."

There are worse things you can do. Bob is overreacting like a whiny schizz.

With the US often promoting A holes I can't get too worked up over this. I mean look at all reality stars like Sheen who are train wrecks. We can't even hold our public servants to any real standards of being a role model in many cases why should are entertainers? Athletes aren't role models they re just people are good at sports. I guess Michael Vick is the hero we deserve, not the hero we need?

Ultimately Vick will make mountains of money and already has been on the cover of the game. What are we really denying him in all this?( I mean how much of an honor is it really be on the cover of madden..especially with the whole Curse factor?) It's not like they were going omit him from it like they used to do with old school basketball games with Shaq and MJ( since they'd be often prevented from appearing due to selling their rights out. I remember laughing at #23 with no picture, name and nearly maxed stats) because he's going not be on the cover. Michael Vick wins either way as this only draw more attention to him.

The legal system has done whatever it was going to do with him already so rest is out of my hands. What he did was wrong (I don't care for dogs for most part. Especially after one attacked my little brother when he was 11, but I'd never torture one for kicks.), but you cant take an eye for an eye attitude on it. Justice was served , and he gets his chance to go forward. May be he screws up again and winds up a broken poor old man with no marketable skills and criminal record that keeps him from ever working again. May be he geniunely redeems himself, and his actions ultimately draw more attention to dog fighting, preventing more loss of life than his crimes caused. I'm not going loose any sleep either way. Karma will dole out whatever he needs. Stopping him from being on Madden will make hardly any difference in his life.

Zeetchmen:
I love you Bob! Can't see why people still support the overpaied ball thrower myself

This statement is party the essence of why some "support" Vick. He is being unfairly attacked not for the crime of dogfighting, but moresoe the crime of being an overpaid young black athlete.

Even in bob's post there is more criticism of the sport and the culture that supports it (ie jock culture who had to reaaaaly hurt bob for all of the veiled and direct attacks he makes on them) than it is about dogfighting.

I dont think Bob is a racist, but most people arent OVERTLY racist. Things just come out based on cultural norms and familiarity. More than anything i think bob is biased against jock culture which deserves no bigger of a beatdown than nerd culture half the time, but Bob doesnt see it this way.

Treblaine:
[quote="MovieBob" post="6.276774.10822635"]

Stuff

I think you might get a ban from that post (I skimmed through it though so I unno) but I agree that Bob this year and a bit of last year is kind of losing his touch and is a bit desperate to get his opinions and ideas across, I'd much prefer it if he left it up to the viewer to decide their opinions instead of just giving his opinion even if he needs to exaggerate it.

I'm still gonna watch the Big Picture though because it gives me something to think about when I'm bored lol.

Treblaine:

"The animal died because he likes dog fighting."

Consider this: dog-fighting is a blood sport that used to be widely popular and is now acceptable in the impoverished black communities that Vick has come from.

Why do you think 'mid-air-plane-combat' was called "dogfighting" back in the early 20th century, because back then the practice was common enough in society.

Maybe all those poor black folk should pay $10'000 per hunting licence for the "socially accepted" blood sport of deer hunt as practised predominantly by white people.

Or maybe we all need to step back and realise that it is a bunch of white people (who had very sheltered upbringing) demonizing a black man who lived a life of poverty until comparatively recent success, and the only people who are defending him are other black people.

Or maybe we could not kill animals 'for a laugh'. To mix our examples:

Which would you choose to kill.

A) a human
b) a deer
C) Neither because it is unnecessary.

Additionally, I clearly understand and acknowledge there is a difference between human and [insert animal here] death, I made a point of bolding, that in the exact circumstances (2 choices) I would choose human survival every time.

feeqmatic:
[This statement is party the essence of why some "support" Vick. He is being unfairly attacked not for the crime of dogfighting, but moresoe the crime of being an overpaid young black athlete.

Even in bob's post there is more criticism of the sport and the culture that supports it (ie jock culture who had to reaaaaly hurt bob for all of the veiled and direct attacks he makes on them) than it is about dogfighting.

I dont think Bob is a racist, but most people arent OVERTLY racist. Things just come out based on cultural norms and familiarity. More than anything i think bob is biased against jock culture which deserves no bigger of a beatdown than nerd culture half the time, but Bob doesnt see it this way.

All althletes are highly overpaied for what they do, regardless what color they happen to be

Serioli:

Or maybe we could not kill animals 'for a laugh'. To mix our examples:

Which would you choose to kill.

A) a human
b) a deer
C) Neither because it is unnecessary.

Additionally, I clearly understand and acknowledge there is a difference between human and [insert animal here] death, I made a point of bolding, that in the exact circumstances (2 choices) I would choose human survival every time.

That is a straw-man argument again. Again you are saying both are bad and ignoring the distinction between the two bad options.

And yes, I get it that you would do neither and neither should anybody do either, but that is not what has happened here.

The issue is Vick is being vilified as committing some unprecedented evil, when the world is not so black and white (though to SOME they sure do seem to see the world in Black or White).

Just take a step back and think, if a white sportsman had been partaking in an illegal sport practised predominantly by white people, like say illegally trapping animals on his estate. Would there be the same outrage? I don't think there would.

Would all the commentators put up pictures of Bambi and label this white man with torture and murder? it's cruel and callous but not torture, not murder.

I agree with bob in-so-much as we should have a line of decency, where once you cross that there are unavoidable consequences. But it is wrong to say EVERYTHING beyond that line is as bad as each other, it trivialises the more serious crimes and ultimately deceives.

Wabblefish:

I think you might get a ban from that post (I skimmed through it though so I unno) but I agree that Bob this year and a bit of last year is kind of losing his touch and is a bit desperate to get his opinions and ideas across, I'd much prefer it if he left it up to the viewer to decide their opinions instead of just giving his opinion even if he needs to exaggerate it.

I'm still gonna watch the Big Picture though because it gives me something to think about when I'm bored lol.

I edited the post now to make a small clarification, but otherwise what is the problem.

Looking back at the video bob did mention dog fighting but the way he presented it in "allegedly" quotes it sounded like he was just covering his ass legally and putting the "this is the WORST STUFF you can do" he implied the dog-fighting was jsut a technicality they got him on.

WORST STUFF

I don't know about Bob, I've seen some pretty horrific shit in my time done to fellow human beings. Things that I wish I'd never even heard about, like endemic cases of gang child rape in southern africa. And hyping up dog fighting to be as bad as all the evils in the world... you can see how I and others would assume Vick did way more than let two violent dogs fight each other.

I don't know, maybe Bob has led a very sheltered life and is simply unaware of all the sickeningly horrible things that are done, maybe dog fighting is the worst stuff he knows of.

Treblaine:

Serioli:

My bit

That is a straw-man argument again. Again you are saying both are bad and ignoring the distinction between the two bad options.

And yes, I get it that you would do neither and neither should anybody do either, but that is not what has happened here.

The issue is Vick is being vilified as committing some unprecedented evil, when the world is not so black and white (though to SOME they sure do seem to see the world in Black or White).

Just take a step back and think, if a white sportsman had been partaking in an illegal sport practised predominantly by white people, like say illegally trapping animals on his estate. Would there be the same outrage? I don't think there would.

Would all the commentators put up pictures of Bambi and label this white man with torture and murder? it's cruel and callous but not torture, not murder.

I agree with bob in-so-much as we should have a line of decency, where once you cross that there are unavoidable consequences. But it is wrong to say EVERYTHING beyond that line is as bad as each other, it trivialises the more serious crimes and ultimately deceives.

Ah, I apologise because I didn't/don't see the distinction between the two. Not sure if it means I see the world in black and white or because I don't notice black and white but his race didn't even factor in for me.

If a white sportsman had committed the same (dog-fighting) or a similar act (killing bambi) I can assure you he would get the same response from me (i.e. don't do it because it is unnecessary). I have no idea what other commentators would do and I have no idea if their actions would be founded on skin colour as I am not them.

I approached it simply from the perspective of dog-fighting, if it is in fact a skin colour issue then that is something else entirely, again I can't comment as I simply don't get racism.

EDIT: Just re-read your original quote again and I think you have mis-interpreted that I am equalising two very different acts. I used the A,B & C example as it was an extension of the one used in the post of the person I quoted. I am not trying to state that someone who kills a dog should be put in the same bracket as a guy who goes around punching people for a laugh or one who rapes children (different bracket agin) etc.

yes Vick deserved to go to jail and whatnot but the man has done his time. beyond that, i don't care if his face is gonna be on the next Madden. I've never bought the games and if other want to waste their money on it than go for it.

I can't tell what's worse, the Vick haters that have way too much respect for animals, or the counterarguement that clearly places equally exaggerated worth on human life.

Both animals are overpopulated introduced species.

If you happen to be carrying a firearm and find a human with a knife locked in combat with the bengal tiger, what would you shoot?

I would hope most people would shoot the human, as the tiger is more rare and valuable.

Now of course selfishness is to be expected and even fully permitted, such that if it was a friend or loved one in a struggle with a tiger (or someone that owed you money) killing the tiger would be justified. That's just relativism at work. There is no valid arguement, however, that humans hold more intrinsic worth than any other species. Unrelated humans are more often a competitor for food an resources than any kind of aid to their fellow humans. Would I kill my own property (dog) if it would have stopped the Rawanda Genocide, the Holocaust, or worldwide starvation? Of course not.

As an example, the car arguement; is there any reason that I should stop a car or swerve when hitting a child over a dog? Legal reasons aside, if I'm the type person who would stop and help a child I should equally stop and help a dog. If I'm the type of person who would just keep on rolling after hitting a dog then I should have no moral qualms about doing the same thing to a mancub.

Zeetchmen:

feeqmatic:
[This statement is party the essence of why some "support" Vick. He is being unfairly attacked not for the crime of dogfighting, but moresoe the crime of being an overpaid young black athlete.

Even in bob's post there is more criticism of the sport and the culture that supports it (ie jock culture who had to reaaaaly hurt bob for all of the veiled and direct attacks he makes on them) than it is about dogfighting.

I dont think Bob is a racist, but most people arent OVERTLY racist. Things just come out based on cultural norms and familiarity. More than anything i think bob is biased against jock culture which deserves no bigger of a beatdown than nerd culture half the time, but Bob doesnt see it this way.

All althletes are highly overpaied for what they do, regardless what color they happen to be

My point is that if a person is mad about the nature of how athletes get paid then fine let that present itself as the issue. In this case people are crying for Vicks head and using his crime as an excuse, but really they mostly are angry at the fact that he is a rich athlete who has gotten into trouble and is getting a second chance at being a rich athlete. People are shitty sometimes and will wish ill will on one another for jealous reasons. The courts punished Vick for his crimes, but now people like bob are trying to punish him for being who he is and are using his crime as a scapegoat

Here here bob!
Completely agree with your stance. It makes me happy that you are so passionate about this. Too many people seem to discount it because it was "just dogs." Vick is a sick, disturbed creep, and no less so than someone who tortures and kills people (that is, after all, the next logical step in that progression). I think he should be denied any possible fame or recognition of any sort for his behavior and shunned by society.

all right bob, this episode had a valid point about animal abuse, but i'm beginning to see you cross the line in some places. i also agree that micheal vick shouldn't be on the front cover, but every year is a new installment because yes, there is a giant roster update and then there are also refinements in the game's mechanics, graphics, and style.

it stimulates the economy because people spend 50$ every year which helps cycle the money, graphics always look nicer even if just by a little bit, gameplay mechanics have taken some changes from what i have seen (one installment made it extremely easy for beginners to learn how to play the game and football in general, which i think is a great way to get kids like me off our asses), and finally, i love to see the cover art on all of the EA sports boxes. as a graphic design artist, i love to see what techniques and style they use.

last year, i loved the FIFA '10 box cover, looked fantastic, and i can't wait to see what '12 is gonna look like. not only that, it's impossible for someone like a career path like mine to get in to a job in art, so thank GOD yearly installments give an opportunity for graphic design artists like me soon to be.

i'm jake eagle
and THAT's the big picture
(because i actually focused on a wide range of topics with their own supporting arguements instead of ripping on a guy with a better job than me, thus making it a big picture)

I'm from England so I dont really get the NFL series but I have a dog and in that respect I don't disagree with a thing that was said in this video.

I'm glad that there are other people out there who feel the same way I do about animal cruelty (bucket of acid and a slow decent as punishment!)

Seamus8:
I can't tell what's worse, the Vick haters that have way too much respect for animals, or the counterarguement that clearly places equally exaggerated worth on human life.

Both animals are overpopulated introduced species.

If you happen to be carrying a firearm and find a human with a knife locked in combat with the bengal tiger, what would you shoot?

I would hope most people would shoot the human, as the tiger is more rare and valuable.

Now of course selfishness is to be expected and even fully permitted, such that if it was a friend or loved one in a struggle with a tiger (or someone that owed you money) killing the tiger would be justified. That's just relativism at work. There is no valid arguement, however, that humans hold more intrinsic worth than any other species. Unrelated humans are more often a competitor for food an resources than any kind of aid to their fellow humans. Would I kill my own property (dog) if it would have stopped the Rawanda Genocide, the Holocaust, or worldwide starvation? Of course not.

I do hope you are joking. The concept of rarity and value are human concept. Until we meet another sentient species we are pretty much the bee's knees. I would gladly shoot my dog to avoid the rwandan gencoide, it's a dog.

Does anyone else feel that people have taken the whole "the only worse thing would be the holocaust" as being a joke on Bob's behalf. At least I hope so.

I'm Irish so I am wholly ignorant on this issue but surely if the lad does something illegal (which most people have no doubt this should be) he should go to jail. Which he did. And to get on the EA thingy all you have to do is to get the most votes. Which he might. I don't see the issue here, they aren't voting for him as a moral person but as a sportsman. He could be a klansman but as long as he played good weird american football and people voted for him then he gets the box.

Seamus8:
Mike Vick can do whatever he wants to dogs under his charge and care.

Oh, hey yeah. That totally justifies the toture and stuff.. /sarcasm

Seamus8:
If you happen to be carrying a firearm and find a human with a knife locked in combat with the bengal tiger, what would you shoot?

I would hope most people would shoot the human, as the tiger is more rare and valuable.

Yeah, except for that that comparison is off the charts unrelated.. It just doesen't make sense, you pass this off as being a test if you're either pro Vick or aginst (y'know PETA/other), even though it makes no sense at all. I mean.. Just.. Really?

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here