Conflicted about MA state Question 3: Banning dog racing

[feoh]

Originally published at Blind, Not Dumb. You can comment here or there.

As others have pointed out, both sides on this issue are jumping up and down shrilly screaming the facts as they claim to see them at the top of their lungs…

Comments

[tfarrell]

Dogs are not horses. Dogs do not naturally want to race in the manner in which they are made to do for gambling purposes. Therefore, they must be being treated in some manner which goes against their nature to make them do it. It is my understanding that the way they are taught is that they are partly starved and taught to follow some rapidly moving food

[feoh]

Dogs may not naturally want to race, but they *DO* very much want to run.

I'm asking this only to enhance my understanding of the issue, not to argue - what is it about the way they're made to race at the track that is incompatible with their essential dog nature?

[tfarrell]

Dogs don't necessarily want to run down a track. They'll run to hunt, or they'll run to play, or they'll run to get somewhere. If they're playing, they don't do it in a straight line, they run in circles and curves and loops and zigzags in no particular direction. If they're running to get somewhere, they'll do so in a line, but it's always to a person they love or another dog, and they don't have that incentive at a track. That leaves hunting. Racing dogs are trained by their hunting instinct, and that means keeping them hungry, because a well fed dog is often (usually?) uninterested in hunting... at least, not enough to go to much of any effort for it.

What the humane society has to say about it

[dougo]

This is an extremely politically incorrect question, but here goes: even if it is inherently cruel to dogs, why should it be illegal?

[feoh]

Because it's already illegal to be cruel to animals:

http://www.mspca.org/site/PageServer?pagename=lawenforce_Animal_Cruelty_Laws

[dougo]

If it's already illegal, then why should there be a specific ban? If the legal definition of cruelty needs to be changed for dog racing to become illegal, or if that law is somehow not being enforced with respect to dog racing, then that should be the goal of a ballot initiative, not singling out one industry.

But really, my question was, why should animal cruelty be illegal? I'm not saying it shouldn't, I just think it's an interesting question to ask.

[feoh]

As to your first paragraph - don't ask me, I'm conflicted, that's why I wrote this to begin with!

As to why cruelty to animals should be illegal, I do think it's an interesting question, but one which leads to a conversational maze with many twisty passages, all alike.

My personal belief is that cruelty to animals should be illegal because we, as higher animals capable of understanding complexities like right and wrong, good and evil. We have a responsibility to not abuse that 'power' and to treat animals that are lower on the food chain and intelligence curve in ways consistent with how we ourselves would want to be treated should some alien race land tomorrow who viewed us in a similarly primitive way.

[dougo]

Doesn't that argument extend to slaughter of animals for food? Or even the use of pesticides to kill insects? What if the alien race views us as pests?

[feoh]

I am not skilled in debate, and will lose this battle in the end, but from my stand point there is such a thing as a 'food animal'. Below a certain point on the food chain / intelligence curve, the argument falls down.

Again, I've been down this road before, the superior debater won, so, you win :)

[dougo]

Sorry, I wasn't intending to debate you-- I replied to tfarrell originally. But yeah, I should probably look elsewhere for an answer that makes sense to me.

[feoh]

Ah, sorry about that. I have been in something very much resembling this conversation with people who are very highly principled and are trying to convince me that eating meat is immoral, so that's where I was coming from here.

Although, I do suspect I won't be able to help you in sorting out this moral quandry, because for me it's fairly clear cut.

I recognize that my stance is in some respects intellectually flawed, but I feel pretty good about it anyway.

[dougo]

I guess I'm coming from the other side: I'm wondering if there's a principled way to argue that eating meat (and by extension, other forms of animal cruelty) is not immoral (or at least shouldn't be illegal). But it's taboo to even raise the issue.