Dog fighting (See initial argument)

Welcome to my opponent! First let me say I consider personal experience to be quite valid and relevant, (provided the experience is a feasible one). Let me say that I am also a dog owner and a dog lover. I actually mix my own food for them because I think it is inhumane to feed them processed garbage. I agree it is different when domesticated dogs play with each other (and scare the heck out of our cats), but that is because they have been domesticated. Feral canines and close members of their genus will fight aggressively against pretty much any animal they see as invading their territory. Dog fights are controlled and contrary to common media coverage, many of the dogs have legitimate owners who love and care for them (like a manager cares for their boxer like a friend). "Feral and domestic dogs often differ markedly in their behavior toward people. Scott and Causey (1973) based their classification of these two types by observing the behavior of dogs while confined in cage traps. Domestic dogs usually wagged their tails or exhibited a calm disposition when a human approached, whereas most feral dogs showed highly aggressive behavior, growling, barking, and attempting to bite. Some dogs were intermediate in their behavior and couldn"t be classified as either feral or domestic based solely on their reaction to humans. Since many feral dogs have been pursued, shot at, or trapped by people, their aggressive behavior toward humans is not surprising." - (via http://icwdm.org...) I will numerically categorize my direct responses to correspond to your points. 1. First, I would have to say that morality is a pretty relative concept, that changes based on time, place and society. At one point, human beings were owned as slaves and fought to the death, and while we see this as immoral in retrospect, it was socially acceptable at the time. Today, there are people against Boxing and Football because it is "too violent", but most sports fans disagree with this people. In the case of dogfighting, the majority is reversed, but morality is still relative. Secondly, when evaluating the general morality of a specific behaviour (especially pertaining to social norms), you must also compare it against baseline standards. For instance, we have a for profit prison system that is so overfull in some places that people are sleeping three to a cell on cement floors. We have more homeless people than we do vacant homes, and over a third of them are veterans. Protesting dog fighting as immoral seems arbitrary and hypocritical, if not entirely a waste of resources. Much like prohibition of drugs, if dog fighting were a regular sport, it would not be run by criminals who are sometimes very violent and cruel. That said, you have to understand that the vast majority of dog fights are ended before a death ensues. Even if the owner has no concern for the dog, they have a financial interest in its survival. They call fights much like when Brock Lesnar has someone in a ground pound. 2. We are assuming that many dog who are fought have no other existence outside of a cage and the ring. This is not true. In more rural areas, friends simply "let" their dogs fight and then break up the fight. After that, they know not to fight because both owners are present and have trained their dogs well. I agree with your idealistic view that every animal should have a loving home, but that just isn't the case. Detroit alone has over 18,000 stray and feral dogs running a muck. Many dogs spend their lives in shelters (I volunteer for Humane Society, ironic, huh?), and then die or are euthanized if they aren't adopted within a period of time. In truth, many of these animals being fought would otherwise be adding to the feral population. "About 2.7 million healthy, adoptable cats and dogs"about one every 11 seconds"are put down in U.S. shelters each year. Often these animals are the offspring of cherished family pets. Spay/neuter is a proven way to reduce pet overpopulation, ensuring that every pet has a family to love them." -(via http://www.humanesociety.org...) 3. Boxing, martial arts, thai stick-fighting, football, rugby, wrestling...do you see where I am going? All controlled sports, which prevents excessive injuries or violence, and ensures proper care when injuries are sustained. The animals are treated as athletes in many cases, not as objects, and many of them are fed well and have homes. Legalizing dog fighting would ensure that this is ALWAYS the case., and reduce the amount of deaths. Again, if we are going to evaluate the morality of a particular behavior, we have to compare it to currently accepted standards. "Fights average one to two hours, ending when one of the dogs will not or cannot continue. In addition to these organized dogfights, street dogfights are a problem in many urban areas." -(via http://www.humanesociety.org...) and "John Goodwin, an expert on animal fighting with the Humane Society, says there are an estimated 40,000 professional dogfighters in the United States...But, Goodwin adds, there could be as many as 100,000 additional people involved in "streetfighting" -- informal dogfighting" -(via http://www.cnn.com...) Up to 140,000 people are participating in dog fighting, Meanwhile, World Wrestling Entertainment-- which degrades women, promotes violence and teaches men to be jerks --receives 15 million viewers in the U.S. every week. What is the difference, other than one being called immoral and outlawed, and the other just being called "filth"?