For those who stick swords into bulls until they die exhausted and bleeding, or for those who set fire to them and get their jollies watching and hearing the poor animals wracked with pain, dying a slow, torturous death - I say, give the perpetrators exactly the same treatment. I would gladly cheer and clap as these miserable excuses for life died the most excruciating of deaths.
Animals should not be used to entertain humans. It is not right for the animals. It is degrading and it makes humans look bad when we find happiness in torturing animals. I think that this festival should be stopped and that the abuse of any animal should be a criminal charge.
It is my belief that the burning of the bull is animal abuse. More generally, bullfighting is animal abuse. The people at the festival burned the bull purely for their personal pleasure. It is only because of bullfighting culture that more people are not outraged. If, instead of a bull, a dog or a monkey had been burned, the outrage would have been much greater.
I can not believe people think this is okay animal abuse is any torture to an animal and to those who say its not tell me would you like to be burned to death because i doubt you would. Poor bull this is so sad i dont know what to think...
Setting a bull on fire can kill it. The death will be slow, painful, and completely unnecessary. There is no good reason to burn a living thing. If they needed to kill it(they did not) then a bullet to the head would have been much quicker, and much more humane.
That bull was burned alive!!!OUCH that probably hurt so bad!!! That was very mean. It probably screamed in pain. SO SAD!!! I believe this is animal abuse because it was burned alive. Imagine people in china burning dogs and cats alive. So sad to watch. Sad just like this buffalo. People care more for dogs and cats, but not farm animals or wild animals :( no heart at all for animals.
Yes, this is animal abuse. Live bulls are burned to death while tied up to posts or set loose to run through the streets. They are affixed with balls of flammable tar, which are then set on fire. Bulls, like any other animal, are perfectly capable of feeling pain and experiencing emotions. Their last hours of life during this bull run are spent in immense pain and fear as they are literally burned alive.
It is not our place to diss other cultures for their beliefs. Let them practice their own culture, one singular bull every year will not mean the end of the world. Perhaps, for you PETA snobs, the world may end.
Animals and humans are not on the same level. 'I say let them suffer the same death', one of the 'Pros' claims, if you value an animals life above or equal to a human, to the point you would support the killing of a human, than we instantly know what kind of crooked person you are.
If it's human sacrifice, then yes, it is immoral and unjustice, but it is an animal. When we kill a pig for food, do you go crying? When we kill a cow for meat, do you go crying? Death towards animals is not a new 'immoral' practice of humanity, and to cry out against the death of a damned bull and cry out for the death of other humans is disgusting.
You do not cry out when humans are sacrificed or have their heads cut off, no, you cry out when an animal that is killed almost daily is killed for mere sport. Shame.
It is only sport for humans to hunt animals. Humans grow countless animals every day for human consumption. Then, they kill them and eat them. This is the web of life. It is not inhumane or abuse for humans to do this, even if it is done in a manner in front of people for sport.
This could feed a hoard of men. So I would say that they have discovered a way to mass produce beef. I am now writing this because i need more words to post, though I have concisely stated my point 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
It may be quick to conclude that killing an animal not for sustenance is a form of animal abuse, but what differentiates killing, say, a cow in an abattoir for meat, and killing it just for the sake of killing it is the difference in intention and purpose for killing the cow; the latter qualifying as animal abuse, compared to the former which is the necessary processing of a living animal into affordable food, as the sole intention was to inflict pain and suffering onto the animal. In applying this exposition, the bull that had been immolated for the purposes of festivities is to satisfy an enduring ritual that demands for such a display of seemingly unfair treatment of the animal, hence, while arguably, there may be spots of sadism involved in such rituals, the reason is not to inflict pain on the animal but to fulfil a cultural responsibility.
You may think it is cruel to burn an animal, but unnatural deaths concerning animals are common throughout the world, within and without human communities. And vegans who buy their vegetables online or from grocers, don't for a second think yourselves exonerated from what you most perceive as taboo- yet another product of culture (hypocritical, isn't it; as long as it doesn't offend your senses, it is fine)-, to your liberal senses and narcissistic guilt, because while you are buying vegetables from the grocer or an online wholesaler, you are still operating within the economy where such entities receive monies from you, and likely spend it on a number of things, possibly, including meats. So to truly contribute, in a passive way, to the cause is to go procure the items necessary to cultivate your own vegetable garden for reliable sustenance, is to get it all directly from nature or fellow vegans-gone-all-natural.
Just like how some of you who seemingly revile at all forms animal cruelty, as do/did some at Mainland Chinese who eat dogs and cats, what you perceive to be animal abuse is merely a difference in culture. For instance, is it okay to blow up innocent Pakistanis along with "terrorists"? The Western sphere, and by that I mean Caucasians grown fat and pompous on their liberal sentiments, thinks itself the defender of the free world, when its apparent charitable actions are indication of conquest and laced with ulterior motives, so much so that they are above rebuke from the majority of the world; just because it is okay in Anglo Saxon countries to kill people and animals for reasons you believe to be good and just, for instance, pre-emptive action against a Rottweiler who has a history of attacking people so that it does not attack people anymore, doesn't mean it isn't animal cruelty or just plain cruel in the most objective of context to do so.
Actions considered abusive only qualify as such when the reason for acting so is to inflict pain and suffering, for your own emotional gain, unto the subject.