Why do we use definitions to excuse the cruelty we inflict and why do we become offended by words that label our ways?
I understand the question like this:Why do we use semantics to excuse our own [potentially unappreciated] behavior, yet object when the same is applied to us, whether or not it’s justified?Does this sound better?This is human nature. No one really believes their own actions to be truly evil; they have some form of justification for why their actions fulfill their moral obligations, or do not amount to a socially defined transgression. This also explains the second part of the question: we don’t like having our justifications challenged or even exposed as hypocritical or not based on “all of the facts at hand”, so to speak.From a certain perspective, this may address certain factions discussed in current events. While they claim to be pious and loving, their actions are perceived by many to be quite the opposite. Perhaps their own values and moral platitudes are quoted back to them as a rebuttal.Having one’s words and actions judged by those we view as diametrically opposed to us tends to create knee-jerk defensive posturing. We all have to constantly reevaluate whether our values are as solidly founded as we hope or assert them to be.
Is it really about cruelty or culture?
Very good question and excellent point. I've been saying this all along. SPORT hunting is just as cruel when you consider the fact that it is SO MUCH more widespread and the animals don't always die right away, a lot of them suffer and bleed out first. The hypocrisy is amazing. Animals are animals, just because dogs are more domestic, doesn't make it less despicable. I DO believe a large part of it is race. Of course most white people won't admit this or don't even realize it. Thousands of White people(including our president and vice president) are advit hunters, think of all the DEFENSELESS (at least fighting dogs have a chance) animals Bush alone has probably slaughtered in his lifetime, while Michael Vick is treated like a serial killer. Don't miss understand, I hate what Vick did because I love dogs and I think it was cruel and heartless, but there is no way he'd be vilified the way he has if this were largely accepted among white people. He's rich, famous and black That's the reason for the "public" out cry.
What are some pros of animal cruelty?
Of course, there are no pros to animal cruelty, it is illegal for a reason. However, for the purposes of debate, I will help you with some of the excuses and questions that I have had in the animal training and care field that honestly make little sense to me. I find these unjustified, but should help you in your research, as painful as they may be to learn about. Your first and probably best point of view are people who train their dogs for fighting. If you look up information under pitbull bans in cities or look up web information on how to train your dog to to fight, you will find there is quite a lot of defense for it from the people who do it. They tend to claim that there is nothing wrong with 'improving their property', that it is as trivial as painting their house. You can find much the same thing for rooster fighting. In the area of food industry, often the excuse for cruelty to animals that are processed for meat is that the animal is going to die anyway and it increeses the production. Often, they draw a defensive line between a pet, a working animal, and a food animal. They will argue a small cost for the sake of efficancy. Another touchy subject you may or may not want to look into depending on the grade and maturity standing for your paper is sexual abuse of animals. Often, the excuse the defenders of this will use is that the animal is enjoying it too. You may find a better debate in picking a specific defnition of animal cruelty that lingers more in the gray zone. Then you can find an easier time finding topics to debate on. A much more neutral grounded argument in this area is the use of shock collars and choak chains in pet training. Some people consider it to be cruelty, while some see it as a simple tried and true method of training. There is a devision between younger generations and older generations as well. In this kind of argument, you can use the example of outdoor vs indoor dogs. Some people think it is absurd to have an unclean dog in your clean home while others think it is cruel to keep an animal outside for all of it's life. I hope I was able to help you in your speech. To me, one of the best ways to prove an argument is to search on the other side and find no legitiment excuse. Good luck in school.
Why is animal cruelty wrong?
because they have feelings like everyone else.
Why does Maurice provide an excuse for his cruel behavior?
Maurice provides an excuse for his cruel behaviour to silence his conscience by seeming rational because of the justification he provides.
Does being depressed excuse abusive, cruel or mean behaviour?
Absolutely not. Ever. And anyone who says otherwise is seriously mistaken. Sometimes mental illness can be a reason or an explanation for abusive behaviour - in other words, mental illness can be a cause for someone to lash out on a bad day, but it is never an excuse. Everyone has their bad days. Everyone gets worn down when they are exhausted or feeling depressed. However, when you have been diagnosed with a mental illness it is my opinion that you need to take certain precautions to try to minimize its effect on your life. I am hyper-aware of my moods and when I feel a lot of anxiety or agitation I know not to take that out on the people around me because I know that it comes from within me and not from something they have done. It would be incredibly unfair of me to vent out my frustrations with myself on those I love. If I did that, the number of people who love me would surely dwindle.It sounds like the person you are asking about is in need of therapy and possibly medication and definitely some self reflection. I'm sorry you are going through this. Sometimes the only thing you can do to protect yourself from this type of toxic behaviour is to distance yourself from it. If that isn't possible - if this is an immediate family member that you live with, like a parent or something, then try to talk to them when they are in a good space about how their moods and behaviour make you feel. Try not to be accusatory or judgemental in your conversation and focus only on how you feel. This will help to make the person less defensive about the role they play in your feelings and hopefully consider getting help.If they won't get counselling or any form of help then I would suggest that you yourself seek out a therapist to help cope with their behaviour and find managing strategies. This is not a bad idea either way as it can help you to better understand them and yourself.Good luck.
Why is there so much cruelty towards animals in Asia?
My answer would be that Asia has a vastly different culture from many other parts of the world. Different religions as well. This has a very big impact on how they view the importance of animal life. Some of the customs that they practice are ancient traditions. That of course is not an excuse for animal cruelty, nothing is. However people who continue in the ways of their ancestors are often blind to progress, in this case lacking in knowledge about the sentience of living beings, the creativity they possess, and the human responsibility to protect the creatures that are weaker than themselves. I mean no disrespect to the Asian community as a whole, only to those who harm animals.
What does the cruelty of the gods say about the Greeks’ view of the universe?
The Greek gods were limited in power, which logically makes them a lot more believable. They had personalities and could be angered, hurt, pleased and even killed. You knew where you stood with them, just as most polytheistic societies did. But having gods with limitations, there didn't have to be the paradoxes or excuses. If you lost a battle, it wouldn't necessarily mean your god of war had deserted you. It was quite feasible he was taking the day off to have some romantic fun with a farmer's daughter. I think polytheism made much more sense.Monotheism brought omnipotence and limitless intelligence. You still had the lesser gods, but they were now angels and saints, but the chief honcho now can do anything and knows everything. So when he does nothing, his people have to dream up excuses why, but then tell us he is beyond our feeble imagination. When he punishes us for doing things he knew we would do, while his lackeys preach forgiveness, something is wrong. When we are told he is everywhere, we have to excuse him for doing nothing to help. When we as humans have to make up his shortfalls, you have to wonder if he has any power at all. A god that can do anything, yet does nothing, has to be the cruelest type of God possible. I would ask more of today's society than the ancient Greeks.
So foxhunting is cruel?
If foxhunting is so cruel, please explain to me; why hunt sabatateurs spray mace/pepper spray in the hounds faces - so foxes have feelings but hounds don't? why hunt horses are attacked at meets and sometimes dragged to the ground - foxes need saving and that justifies brutal treatment to the horses? I've even seen them kicked and punched. To save one fox, is it ok then to leave boxes under someone's car and call them and tell them not to take their kids to school as there is a bomb under their car because that's what anti- hunt people did to the master of our hunt? Is it then ok to deface 500 year old buildings with curse words about the local hunt? Words children shouldn't see? Is gassing a fox more humane then for vermin control? When a fox gets into a hen house and kills everything in sight, barely eats what it kills (there goes the arguement that they only kill to survive) it's ok because 20 chickens don't matter when compared to 1 fox? Someone earlier posted a question about what to wear when going hunting and as per usual, got the verbal assault from anti hunt - there is never any kind of purposeful arguement, just a vicious verbal assault which tends to be the hallmark of those people - so ignorant they are always reduced to physical assault and crass words. So with all this in mind, how can you people justify your position when you participate in animal cruelty yourself, weigh the life of one fox more valuable than a fox's prey and make terroristic threats against the lives of children? It would appear to me that most anti hunt followers are more anti-establishment with an axe to grind against those they perceive to have more wealth than themselves as hunting is supposed to be for the rich. Hypocrites!
In history when has men used religion to justify cruelty?
unfortunately most wars are waged based on religion. look at the bible and the battles fought in the name of god. how its ok to sacrifice some for the better good or that they don't believe the same. how christ was sarificed by the romans to show their strength in their own religon. men will use any excuse to make their wars especially religion.