Legalize dog fighting in USA.

RebuttalOpponent's argument in bold and italics mine in plain text." Forcing dogs to fight each other to the death is simply immoral and unethical. Pro says that by legalizing it we could have general guidelines to ensure safety, but when it comes to dog fighting, that would be almost impossible. Even in boxing, when it's just two humans with padded gloves, accidents still abound (not that I want to ban boxing, I'm simply making a point); imagine what the carnage would be if boxers fought with sharp teeth and claws; insuring safety would take an act of God." stschiffmanYes, we both agree dog fighting is immoral and unethical. Yet, I do not see this is grounds to keep dog fighting illegal. "Pro says that by legalizing it we could have general guidelines to ensure safety, but when it comes to dog fighting, that would be almost impossible." stschiffmanThat is not what I said, this is a straw man argument made by my opponent. Here's what I said instead. "By legalizing dog fighting we can have guidelines on what is going too far and what is tolerable. " StupidapeFor example, we could limit steroids use in dog fighting, use pain killers, and if necessary have a professional vet ready with a lethal injection. Yes, dogs are injected with steroids when forced to fight. No, dog fighting by its very nature is not supposed to safe for the dogs. [2]"Pro compares this to prohibition, and to the drug war, but this is not a very good equivalency. Men like Al Capone and Pablo Escobar became rich off drugs/alcohol, and created huge crime waves. I do not think that keeping dog fighting illegal has created the massive gang violence and mass incarcerations that the war on drugs and prohibition did." stschiffman I think comparing dog fighting to prohibition and the drug wars is an excellent example. Dog fighting is considered organized crime. [3][4] "There is no real justification for why this should be legal; it's one thing to kill an animal to eat, but a whole different matter to force animals to fight to the death for your amusement." stschiffmanNo, there really is not much of a difference. We do not need to eat meat to survive there are countless scientific studies showing this fact. Not only that but a vegetarian diet is healthier than an omnivore diet. [5][6][7] As seen in these links, there is amble scientific evidence to show that eating meat is not only unnecessary but healthy. "It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes." [7]There are differences between raising an animal for meat in factory farmed conditions and dog fighting, but the differences are minimal. The suffering and pain involved in factory farming is similar, maybe even worse, and both are luxuries. We do not need to eat meat from factory farms nor participate in dog fighting to survive. There is no survival benefit from eating meat nor dog fighting. Of course they are extraordinary circumstances, trapped on a desert island. Impact, I've negated my opponent's claim that dog fighting is vastly different than eating meat. Thanks for debating, I look forward to your response.Sources2. http://www.dailymail.co.uk...3. https://www.change.org...4. http://www.wdel.com...5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...6. http://ajcn.nutrition.org...7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...