Quote:
Originally Posted by B O T
i most certaintly dont see them as animals. but at the time they were seen as such, at the time. so im saying the way you look at it, at that time it was ok for whites to do what they wanted because that was the general perception at the time? i know it was wrong as fuck then, and it is equally as such now. it does not change. but society saw it as right then. does that make it right? of course not.
animals are in a sense property because if they were not "owned" by humans they would be wild. but i still dont see where the fun (?, for lack of a better word) is in dog fighting. what compells these people to do this? and as i said before about the serial killers, people who start of killing animals. i just think it puts a demention in the mind thats not supposed to be there. a blood lust if you will, dog fighting, and gladiator fighting of roman times, is there a difference? the gladiators, most of whom were slaves of the roman emporers were made to fight to the death for no good reason other than the benifit of the people watching. that essentially what dog fighting is. it has no real value to people other than satisfaction to the people who are watching it. thats what i feel is wrong.
if two dogs fight to the death in the wild over a kill so one can survive that is life, but if two dogs are made to fight to the death so some people can bet and have a good time, its just a f'ed up situation to me.
