| |
|
Welcome to KnowledgeSutra - Dear Guest | |
Horse Racing
#2
Posted 17 May 2008 - 03:42 AM
Horses that are raced before their bones are fully developed and their joints have closed, break down from the stress of racing all too frequently. The sport has allowed for the racing of horses during their second year. In most cases, this is before they have developed strong enough legs to hold up under the pounding on the track.
I try to watch the Breeder's Cup program every year and it becomes a tragedy before the day is over. Young horses break down throughout the day and I find myself shouting at the TV when this happens. "Why do you fools insist on racing such young horses?" Of course then I am watching through tears. The owners are in it for the money and most of them view the horses as a commodity rather than a living, breathing animal. This just sickens me.
I am not a PETA supporter, but maybe they can do something to change the conditions under which these animals are expected to race. The Kentucky Derby has always been a race for 3-year-olds. The long-standing tradition (since 1875) will probably never be changed. But since a young horse must qualify for the derby they are raced as 2-year-olds to establish this qualification. There-in lies the cruelty. Horses that young should not be raced.
Quote
-- Bob Evans, President and CEO, Churchill Downs Incorporated
Edited by Mich, 17 May 2008 - 03:43 AM.
#3
Posted 17 May 2008 - 06:35 AM
I'll never forget a scene I witnessed as a child. We were still naive to the ways of animal exploitation, and our mother took us to the circus for an afternoon's entertainment. Sitting outside on the hot concrete in a lonely cage barely large enough to contain him, sat a large male lion with a full, golden mane (think Narnia's Aslan). This kingly creature, once the king of all he surveyed in the African bush was now enclosed in a cage barely large enough to contain him, dragged from freak show to freak show in miserable, intolerable conditions. His worn body showed the scars of several beatings, no doubt whip marks inflicted by his sadistic "handlers' as they forced him to perform acts unnatural to his proud disposition.
Children possess senses that adults have lost, and I could sense this lion's misery and felt the worse for him as my guilt for attending this freak show overwhelmed me. Never again did we visit a circus other than to protest its' vile presence. Now, this particular circus is banned from the fair city I grew up in, thanks to hard work and protest from humanitarian citizens and groups like PETA. Their tactics may reek of Hollywood, but I do support PETA and others like them who have done so much to help the innocents among us. And no, I do not support the spectacle of horse racing in any of its' dubious presentations anymore than I support greased pig contests or dog fights.
The wicked miscreants who profit from the exploitation of horses should not be surprised when humane organizations like PETA expose their cruelty for all the world to see. These magnificent animals are abused for human entertainment, not unlike the human gladiators of old. A day will come when the masses will recognize the correlation. I envision a day when horse racing, like it's cruel predecessors, will at last be smitten and removed from all progressive societies and left behind in the dark ages where it belongs, nothing more than an embarrassing reminder of our barbaric history. Until then, PETA and their humane ilk will continue to trail blaze a better future for those who cannot speak for themselves.
#4
Posted 20 May 2008 - 05:05 AM
As far as horse racing, it is what the animals are bred for. Accidents happen. They also happen to human atheletes. Training for vigourous atheletic competition is a strain on the body, be it horse or man. I suppose we could all say being athletic is bad for our health and stop all exercise and become a world of fat greasy lumps that sit at computers all day and complain about the world and all those people in it that disagree with us.
#5
Posted 20 May 2008 - 05:27 AM
#6
Posted 20 May 2008 - 08:37 PM
Just remember this next time you watch horses running in a race.
#7
Posted 21 May 2008 - 07:00 PM
We talk about the woman who cyber bullied the teenage girl who ended up commiting sucide,and how she should be punished for her "crime," but are you aware that PETA does very much the same thing? Anyone involved with animals can be a target for PETA and their harrassment campaign. I personally know one woman who I am quite sure her untimely death was due to the severe harrasment she recieved from PETA. Of course, you can't prove that sort of thing, but I am as sure as I am sitting here typing this that it is what caused her ultimate death.
#8
Posted 22 May 2008 - 12:24 AM
With their large marketing budget and Hollywood backing, PETA is successfully able to bring to the fore issues that are often otherwise swept under the carpet and conveniently ignored by the masses. Those who are inherently predisposed toward humane treatment of animals have been aware of these issues for some time, but the general public doesn't realize anything until they see it on the evening news. Your average Joe is not going to go out of his way to research the horrors of horse racing, and most animal welfare groups - as well meaning as they are - do not have the budget to advertise on major media. That's where PETA fills the gap. They are controversial because they challenge preconceived, archaic ideas of man's relationship to other sentient beings we share the planet with. And they are hated because they target huge, industrial agri-businesses that have long profited from the exploitation of innocent creatures. Exploiters will always resist being exposed, and will turn the tables on the messenger to deflect attention from where it belongs. The evils of the horse racing industry need to be made a part of the collective consciousness to affect change, and I thank PETA for helping bring this change about.
#9
Posted 22 May 2008 - 05:05 AM
Quote
And there in lies the problem.
Who defines abuse?
Is making a horse run abuse?
Is chopping off a chickens head so you can have him for dinner abuse?
Is keeping your dog chained in the back yard or in a crate abuse?
It all depends on who is defineing cruelity. Granted, we know the general public may not be the brightest, but I believe that they can at least comprehend that if you are going to have fried chicken for dinner, the bird is going to have to be killed and dressed. What is PETA's purpose in comparing the holocost to the slaughter of chickens? And really, why should the general public even care about chicken slaughter and how it is acomplished? Is there a nice way to die? Do you suppose the lion concerns himself with the pain the zebra feels as he tears out his throat? And do you really think that McDonalds chickens die a less painfull death than Kentucky Fried chickens? Wonder why PETA thinks so? Talk about big business and Exploiters, just what exactly do you think PETA is? They too have caused pain and suffering to animals to prove their own agenda, what makes them any better than agri-businesses?
I do believe that most people are inherently predisposed toward humane treatment of animals. But here again, we must define abuse. The pet owner who leaves his dog tied up in the back yard or in a crate during the day when they are gone to work, and then comes home and plays with his dog and interacts with it and feeds it and takes it to the vet will not be convinced that he is abusing his dog because he confines it for it's own safty when he cannot be present to watch over it. However, PETA will asure us that this is horrible abuse to confine this animal and not allow it to run free and live out it's life as nature intended it to. You know, like wolves who freeze and starve in the harsh winters are so much happier than our couch potato puppies sleeping by the fire place with their bellies full of kibble.
PETA, much like the mainstream media, is inclined to make issues out of non issues to further their own agenda. And pad their own pockets. Every time they can whip the general population into a frenzy over some supposed abuse, the revenue rolls in. Talk about a cash cow, lol! Half truths and wild exagerations presented to your average Joe who is not going to go out of his way to research the truth behind the story, just simply get out the old check book and send in that donation.
#10
Posted 22 May 2008 - 06:14 AM
Let's look at the practice of slaughter. Is there a humane way to kill an animal? Yep. There is also an inhumane way to do it. Same as if you were going to be killed. Would you like to have your neck slowly sawed off, or would you rather fall to the quick, painless guillotine? The point is, if you don't want to feel pain because it would be inhumane, how is it any different for the animal? Why should it be? I think you think an animal is incapable of feeling pain, or you just don't care. Either way, that's just sad and someone, in my opinion, who is as indifferent as that toward another mammal or other living thing is a cold, cold, callous, frightening individual.
Did you know that mass murderers started, nearly every last one of them, with the horrendous abuse of dogs and cats? There are some real gems working in the slaughter industry, too. I've seen the same sort in American Uniform in Iraq /Afghanistan. Today they're giggling like little girls when they throw a dog off a cliff, tomorrow they'll do it to an innocent Iraqi child, and in a month they'll be patrolling the streets of America as law enforcement officers, looking for the next old lady to test out their tazers on. What goes around, comes around, we reap what we sow. All because there aren't reasonable restrictions on the amount of abuse you can dish out to your dogs. This society in America is barbaric and it's not getting better. (I know there are much worse societies or cultures, if you will, but I live in the U.S.A., so it's all I'm going to comment on for now because it's the place where I can make some impact.) Why would anyone argue over something like this? Could it be you run an illegal puppy mill that's been investigated for animal abuse? Just curious...
You've cited the incident where some PETA employees rescued some animals from a lab, then threw them in the trash dumpster on the way home (if memory serves) twice now as a reason to stain the entire organization's reputation. Granted, it didn't do them any good PR, but that's the extreme exception, not the rule by any means. You keep going on about PETA and how they define abuse as a chained up dog, and you're using the intellectually dishonest reasoning this can't be so is because the entire organization likes to rescue puppies and throw them in the trash. Forget about PETA for a second. Think about the animal's welfare. Let's go back to the confined dog for a minute. I'm sure you're aware that there is a special device known as a FENCE that any responsible dog owner needs to have when they've got a dog or three. When you adopt a dog from the humane society they'll often actually come out to where you live to check that there's a proper fence in good order to ensure you don't intend to tie the animal up and to make sure you're who you say you are and you're not going to use the animal to fight other dogs. (As an anecdote, true story: A neighbor of mine ties their dog, "Tupper", up whenever they leave and it barks non-stop the entire time. About six months ago, the dog was attacked while it was outside tied up (they were home, but it was still tied up outside, go figure) by a marauding pack of dogs belonging to another neighbor who's apparently running an illegal mill as well. I passed by there a couple months ago and counted no less than 23 dogs that all looked to be from the same genetic lineage. Tupper recovered from his wounds which cost in the thousands of dollars and the owners didn't learn their lesson -they still leave it tied up when they're gone and never built a fence for it to be confined to when it's out.) The point is it's irresponsible and creates a psychotic animal (often this technique is used to make a mean dog to fight in backyard dog fighting games.) that barks at nothing all the time which completely goes against its natural instinct. Now contrast that to a simple fence which allows your dogs to have room to run and play, and an added benefit is they're able to protect your property from human invaders! See how easy that was? Now you're not being cruel, and your neighbors aren't complaining about the incessant barking day and night (also illegal in the more civilized places). It's really just common sense here. Like killing a head of bovine. Is it really necessary for the animal to be alive throughout the first minutes of the slaughter so that it's being stripped of its skin when it's still screaming? I think not. It's just wrong. It's a reason I won't eat factory farmed meat.
Edited by Watermonkey, 22 May 2008 - 06:45 AM.
#11
Posted 11 July 2008 - 02:38 PM
#12
Posted 09 October 2008 - 04:53 PM
If you beat and starve a racehorse he'll slow down on the course.
#13
Posted 05 November 2008 - 01:27 AM
they like getting active and racing.
the only way we can find out if it is cruel is if we ask them and we can't do that so we are going to have to use our own judgement.
Reply to this topic

1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users















