Bull Fighting Should Be Illegal
Debate Rounds (3)
Round 2: Rebuttals
Round 3: Finishing Statements
Bull fighting is an immoral sport and a complete affront to the progression of animal rights and basic humanity, let alone the danger to the matadors.
I will start by describing the process of bull fighting. In Bull fighting, the bull is kept in horrible conditions with little care for it's health or well-being. The bull is teased constantly by fans and audience members to be put in an aggressive state. When the bull is released, it is relentlessly teased, abused and aggravated. Eventually, when time runs out, the bull is tired, or the matador is caught and injured the bull is constrained, and put down in an extremely immoral manner. The matador uses multiple spears to attempt to sever the artery either in the back of the neck or heart. Due to the matador not being an experienced bull-health specialist, it takes multiple times for the bull to be killed. Even when the artery is severed, the bull experiences severe pain until it bleeds to death . Let it be known, that is the summarized version. My source link has much more detail.
My argument is that any person with any form of empathy should realize how much pain the bull, who doesn't understand why this is being done to him, faces in the last hours of its life, until mercilessly and bloodily killed.
(Source:  http://www.stopbullfighting.org.uk... )
It is not necessary to ban bullfighting because it can be reformed to not cause pain to the bull.
A bull will charge at a moving cape without being previously infuriated, so the pre-fight torment can be removed. During the fight, the matador doesn't have to harm the bull until the end when it should be killed quickly and humanely. It can then be made into beef, sold, and eaten. With restrictions, bullfighting can become acceptable.
The bull will not be motivated to drive towards the cape without being infuriated. You have no source to back up your claim, I'm afraid. The audience shows up to bullfighting for the sense of danger. Since bulls are not instinctively aggressive animals, they would simply walk around the arena unless being hit or provoked. My source in round 1 backs that up.
I'm not vegan, I don't have an opinion or advocate against farming and herding in questionable conditions, although in bull-fighting there is no cause except for the sadistic joy of the audience to see the matador get hurt or the bull being abused.
They try to kill the bull quickly and humanely, but again. Matadors aren't bull health specialists. My source again backs up that it takes multiple tries to just strike the bull in the artery, and then comes over a minute of bleeding to death in agonizing pain. The entire practice of this sadistic 'sport' needs to be abolished.
The matador takes the risk of injury by his own conscious choice, so that is not a reason to ban bullfighting.
The bull will charge without being infuriated, so it doesn't have to be tormented prior to the fight. http://www.livescience.com...
Matadors should have mandatory training to make sure they can kill the bull painlessly.
In conclusion, bullfighting can be reformed to eliminate the harms. It does not need to be banned.
My reasoning to ban bull fighting was not mentioned with regars to the health of the matador, that is just a sub section of my argument. The one being abused in these fights are the bulls who have no choice in participation for their inevitable death.
To give you an example of how abused the bull is in order for it to be infuriated and lessen chances of the matador being seriously injured, I will quote my source: "The bull has wet newspapers stuffed into his ears; vaseline is rubbed into his eyes to blur his vision; cotton is stuffed up his nostrils to cut off his respiration and a needle is stuck into his genitals.".
If bullfighting is reformed to lessen the chances of the bull being hurt, it skyrockets the chances of the death of the matador. Besides that, there are farms dedicated to providing beef, you don't need to kill the bull in the middle of the crowd for their bloody entertainment, it's barbaric. Another quotation I shall use to provide evidence that the final kill is not meant to be merciful, but for entertainment is "Even then, he is not allowed a little dignity to leave this world in peace, his ears and tail are cut off (often when he is fully conscious), and his broken, bleeding body is dragged around the ring by mules, to which he is attached by an apparatus made of wood and chains." . The sport is simply to abuse an animal for the fun of the crowd.
Even other animals come at the expense of bull-fighting. In some more sadistic arenas, horses are maneuvered by the matadors. Since taking charge of a horse is not that challenging when they're tame, the matadors take the liberty to provide an extra challenge by the following. "Horses have their ears stuffed with wet newspaper, they are blindfolded and their vocal chords are cut so they are unable to scream in pain." .
The arteries inside the bull are so deep that trained bull physicians would have trouble attempting to kill the beast in one try.
And finally, as for your source, it is not founded by any other source link. I'm afraid I can't take it's word for it when it provides no other evidence to bulls being infuriated just by a waving cape.
Reforming bull fighting any other way will still leave serious mental and physical scars to all parties involved in the event. It is best if the practice is just abolished.
Good luck to my opponent in the voting.
"If bullfighting is reformed to lessen the chances of the bull being hurt, it skyrockets the chances of the death of the matador."
It's still the matadors choice to participate.
"Besides that, there are farms dedicated to providing beef, you don't need to kill the bull in the middle of the crowd for their bloody entertainment, it's barbaric."
Sure, you don't need to, but there isn't anything wrong with it. It's not barbaric either, we're not publicly sacrificing humans to humiliate them. Bulls can only feel very basic emotions, so they can't be humiliated. To a bull, being killed in front of a crowd is no different than being killed in a slaughterhouse.
"The sport is simply to abuse an animal for the fun of the crowd."
Your source says otherwise: "The vast majority of tourists are appalled by what happens at a bullfight and leave after they see what happens to the first bull." Most of the crowd doesn't think it's fun to watch a bull being tortured to death, that's why reforming the practice to make it painless would actually make it more entertaining.
You also mention horses, but that can also be fixed by reform.
"The arteries inside the bull are so deep that trained bull physicians would have trouble attempting to kill the beast in one try."
There are other ways to kill a bull quickly (such as lethal drugs).
"I'm afraid I can't take it's word for it when it provides no other evidence to bulls being infuriated just by a waving cape. "
Read this quote from my source: "Thus, the bull is likely irritated not by the muleta’s color, but by the cape’s movement as the matador whips it around."
The source explicitly states that the bull charges because of the cape's movement. Your objection is baseless.
Bullfighting does not need to be banned. It can be reformed so that the bull is killed painlessly, which would not only make the practice humane, but it would be more entertaining and much less likely to leave mental scars.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.