Should We Ban The Circus?
Debate Rounds (3)
Circuses force animals in any condition to be thrown into fire or be ridding on for our own entertainment. Circus animals are abused in or not in show and will always be shot in the head if they can't bring on a show. Most animals don't have a long life span either and live in harm fro humans"
So we should ban a show, that is purely for entertainment purposes, because you are scared of a character that is suppose to make you laugh? You then say Circus animals are abused on and off the show and 'thrown into fire' or 'ridden'. Naturally, elephants have been used for manual labour- trained and/or ridden and they are not suffering. Horses, used by many ancient peoples, do not /suffer/ because they are ridden. That is not abuse. As for being 'thrown in the fire'- No. Just, no. They don't starve the animals and put bait on the grill and make the animal jump for it. Where did you get this information, anyways? Confabulate it in your head? If you hate clowns, why would you ever go to a Circus? And if you don't, when would you ever see, using yourself as a primary source, animals being abused during a show? And for that matter, outside of a show?
Here's my case:
Circuses travel 46 hours a week making animals that like to run free in the jungle caged up for about 26 hours.
96% of a circus animals life is spent in cages or chains
there have been over 123 lions attacks since the 90's
The Ringling Brothers have killed over 3O elephants since the 90's also by execution. By 2020 if we keep this up the will go extinct
Circuses are not natural for endangered animals. I've never seen a lion run through fire in the Jungle before.
Most to always circus animals are starved to death.
Starvation is one the the top killers of circus animals
HazelMist forfeited this round.
hope he returns
Have you ever seen a lion at all? Or just in the jungle? Would you not at the zoo? Which is classified as entertainment, where the animals are behind bars. But you do not seem against that.
According to 'Ringling Bros Beats Animals' (obviously a biased source), it doesn't even mention the fact of starvation on their subject of elephants, rather that they were typically euthanized when found they had foot problems or arthritis. Now you can find this site and argue that it was because of their living conditions, but once again- a biased site all for banning circuses is going to tell you that.
Also on the Ringling Bros. Circus, and speaking of their abuse and once again I will mention elephants, they have 200 square acres set off for raising elephants that cost 5 million dollars in the 90's, meaning in today's money it would have cost more for the top quality facility used. And, according to their home page, the animals are "fed, watered, groomed, and cleaned daily" along with the stables and such. They could have said every other day, or even every two days and it would have been believable. But no, if these claims were false, there would be the issue of liability, such as if you go to a restaurant and they boast of a discount and you get your receipt and the discount isn't included.. they have to give you the discount as they advertised it. The actual trainers do not even use drugs or sedatives on the animals, all of that care is left to veterinarians. It is noted that the commands are taught and given verbally with praise and treats for reward.
I would like to also point out that, I'm sorry for the redundant example, but elephants are also often endangered by, by the case you point out, starvation in the /wild/. Though in the Ringling Bros., they are fed up to 200 pounds of food (fruits, bread, and vegetables) each day along with up to 50 gallons of water.
And while the average life expectancy of an elephant is 45 years old, Ringling's has three elephants over 60 years old- obviously not the feat of a circus, famous and well known and of which many circuses below it are regarded to imitate, that mistreats.
In a circus, people learn that animals are not stupid. You can see that, with guidance, any of the animals can be showed how to perform innumerable tricks. While how they are taught is sometimes questionable, the awareness of their intelligence is what encourages many people to stand up and conserve their endangered species.
I could have written more for your number of arguments, but I am running short on time and not sure if I'd get another chance to post before time ran out. So! Thank you for the argument, I enjoyed researching it, honestly, as I hadn't done so before I started this debate. Yes, I know. Foolish.
By the way, "hope he returns" ... *she*. I hope *she* returns. I understand the profile picture portrays otherwise, but my user name is 'Hazel'. :)
bettabreeder forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: both ff 1 round, but con managed to overturn pro at the end
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.