Is bullfighting the sickest spectacle on earth?

The EU and the UN are working to establish a monocultural world government. Its malign culture is one of population control, secularism, relativist morality, materialism, self-conscious modernity, equality of all under the benign rule of the totally unequal governing elite. It promotes the New Man: cellophane-wrapped, emasculated by health and safety, dedicated to extending his meaningless and despiritualised existence by medical improvements, inhabiting cities rendered anonymous by globalised architecture and the ubiquity of international corporations.

The intolerable antithesis of that Utopian future is any society that values tradition, that clings to custom, that engages in virile activities such as hunting or bullfighting, that serves God rather than Mammon. The free spirit who owns a gun, cherishes wildernesses not yet tamed into heavily sign-posted heritage parks, practises Christianity in the manner of his forefathers, respects animals as part of creation but would never equate their status with human beings – such men are a hostile spectre haunting the social engineers charting our global future. They must be eliminated, and useful idiots in politically correct parliamentary assemblies are the instruments of that purge.

Well I don't know that it does speak volumes about me? I like to consider myself as a morally serious person, I just happen to disagree? I find mass abortion a moral travesty, many disagree. And you have to concede that the idea that animals are equal to persons is the novel idea here? And I think any society that is fine with the abortion of seven million babies since 1967 (eat your heart of Himmler) but can't bare to see a fluffy fox hurt, has things rather mixed up.

I don't know that they are considered equal to persons? Most people in the UK eat meat, but aren't cannibals?

Why does something have to be 'equal' to us for us to treat it right? I don't like to cause a thing suffering, matters such as what species the thing is are surely irrelevant to that maxim.

It doesn't have to be, but some people on here have said that animals are equal to persons, I was merely pointing out that this is not at all obvious.

You don't have to regard animals as equal to us to take the view that factory farming methods are not in keeping with our place in nature.

Whats the difference between me burning a dog for fun and me killing a fox or a bull?
Why is the one species regarded higher than the other? They all feel pain dont they?
No animal should be harmed like that for enjoyment.

torture –noun
1. the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.
2. a method of inflicting such pain.
3. Often, tortures. the pain or suffering caused or undergone.
4. extreme anguish of body or mind; agony.
5. a cause of severe pain or anguish.

Now tell me how that isnt torture?

Why is that a stupid thing to say?

It really isn't obvious that animals are equal to humans, and if they are it's an extremely recent moral discovery....

and which animals are 'equal' to humans? The fluffy cute ones? I should imagine that you have no hesitation to kill the wasp or spider irritating you, but they are animals, and you don't kill people irritating you, nor do you consider them in the same way.

and it's too simplistic to say that animals suffer or experience pain. I'm pretty sure if you had rats you'd not hesitate to get rid of them, but they pretty obviously can experience pain and suffer.

What would it even mean for an animal to be 'equal' to a human; for it to be subject to British law? Or the universal decleration of...... human rights?

Good post; the amount of brazen stupidity in this thread is nauseating.

"This doesn't belong in 21st century society"
"They should be ashamed to be human"
"The bull feels pain"

blah blah blah. It's all philosophically so weak that its quite enraging that most modernistas think along these lines, the media and Government included.

The EU and the UN are working to establish a monocultural world government. Its malign culture is one of population control, secularism, relativist morality, materialism, self-conscious modernity, equality of all under the benign rule of the totally unequal governing elite. It promotes the New Man: cellophane-wrapped, emasculated by health and safety, dedicated to extending his meaningless and despiritualised existence by medical improvements, inhabiting cities rendered anonymous by globalised architecture and the ubiquity of international corporations.

The intolerable antithesis of that Utopian future is any society that values tradition, that clings to custom, that engages in virile activities such as hunting or bullfighting, that serves God rather than Mammon. The free spirit who owns a gun, cherishes wildernesses not yet tamed into heavily sign-posted heritage parks, practises Christianity in the manner of his forefathers, respects animals as part of creation but would never equate their status with human beings – such men are a hostile spectre haunting the social engineers charting our global future. They must be eliminated, and useful idiots in politically correct parliamentary assemblies are the instruments of that purge.

The argument comes down to whether the moral codes that govern actions between humans should apply to animals. I don't believe it to be so because animals do not have the necessary moral faculties to merit moral behavior towards. e.g. a dog cannot feel guilt, so it would have no problem with biting me and could not regret it. I see no reason to extend human morality towards things that cannot reciprocate it.